Premier slams ‘One Man, One Vote’. Present system “works well as it is”.

In a Government Information Services produced speech aired on CITN-Cayman27 and Radio Cayman on Thursday (12, Premier, Hon McKeeva Bush announced the question to be asked in the 18^th July referendum on changing the Cayman Islands’ voting system. The question seems to be simple: “Do you support an electoral system of single member constituencies with each elector being entitled to cast only one vote?”

His address was mainly a big launch against the change with hardly a mention about the basic principle of ‘One Man, One Vote.’

He explained his reasons why the present voting system should not be changed:

(i) it works well as it is;

(ii) the alternative proposed is open to manipulation;

(iii) Cayman cannot afford to add political uncertainty to its current list of challenges.

To his first point he claimed the ‘if it’s not broke why fix it’ principle with a castigation of the Opposition’s reasons for wanting change.

“So first of all, let me say, the proponents of this change have not made their case that the current system is broken. You may think, well he would say that wouldn’t he, he’s won seven times in a row and he’s the premier.  But if you think that, then you must also say to yourself, it’s no wonder the Opposition favour change, because they’ve found they can’t win under the current system. There is no high-minded, academic principle behind their arguments for changing the voting system. It is political opportunism, pure and simple,” he said. “Indeed, multi-member constituencies are to be found around the world.  In the UK, the system used for elections to all local councils in London and many others across the country is just like our own, with several Members elected for each constituency, or ‘ward’ as they are known, and voters having multiple votes.”

To his second point to ‘massive abuse’ he ‘gave away’ a ‘political advantage’ by disclosing a tactic that could be used for this massive abuse:

“The average size of each constituency will be under one thousand voters.  The easiest way for someone to win with such a small electorate is for them to persuade another half dozen people to put themselves forward as a candidate. Each would run on particular issues the main opponent’s supporters find attractive. One might favour luxury healthcare for civil servants; another might promise to build a new retirement centre.  The aim would be split the votes of those who would otherwise vote for the main opponent  six different ways; the manipulating candidate can then be assured  of victory with perhaps just a couple of hundred votes.  Indeed, in some of our constituencies, you might get enough votes from your own relatives alone.  We could end up with an assembly representing the 18 largest families in Cayman.”

Finally to his third point he made the claim that business and tourists “come here not only because of the traditional warm Caymanian welcome and hospitality, but because we have a stable political and legal system. No one can predict the outcome of future elections under a changed system, so outsiders have to take this into account. In some cases, that one extra risk which does not arise in our competitors’ locations could easily be enough to put them off coming here.”

We then had a piece focusing on making Cayman successful and wealthy, citing “an attractive port”, “expanded airport”, “creating jobs”, and “coping with hurricanes”.

Because of all this “uncertainty” he has had to delay his “new found focus on” on driving “our future prosperity, pushing forward key government projects and supporting the critically important private sector projects that contribute to this success.”

Finally, we got the question and this proviso:

“The result of the referendum will be binding if agreed by more than 50% of registered electors”.

See also today’s Editorial