So now we know the question that will go on the Referendum Ballot paper on 18^th July, “Do you support an electoral system of single member constituencies with each elector being entitled to cast only one vote?”

I am not convinced. Our premier has a habit of changing his mind and I would not be surprised to see it changed at the last minute with a “valid” reason given by way of explanation.

He certainly came up with some “valid” reasons why the voting system shouldn’t be changed, albeit confusing. Well to me they were, but maybe I’m easily confused.

He says “multi-member constituencies are to be found around the world” and cites the UK system “used for elections to all local councils”. Of course it is. It wouldn’t work any other way because you need a number of people to run the LOCAL COUNCILS. Why didn’t he say that this does NOT apply when voting for a member of parliament? It’s like comparing apples with oranges! His argument is defeated immediately. I actually gave him credit for coming up with a better analogy. As for “if something is not broke don’t fix it” we would be forever living in the Stone Age. He also doesn’t say the principle of ‘One Man, One Vote’ is almost universally used in every major country of the world!

Then we have his totally implausible example of tactical MASSIVE abuse that “could end up with an assembly representing the 18 largest families in Cayman.” Has he actually counted the number of families represented in the Legislative Assembly now under the present system? As for the first part with each constituency being under one thousand voters and persuading “another half dozen people to put themselves forward as a candidate” and aiming to split votes up by attractive but differing issues, “the manipulating candidate can then be assured of victory with perhaps just a couple of hundred votes”, I almost fell on the floor laughing. How many voters are now registered in East End and North Side? We must indeed thank the premier for giving away this “political advantage.”

And now for his last claim. A ‘One Man, One Vote’’ system could affect “business” and “tourism”. Has anyone ever said in the history of tourism, “I’m not going to visit [that] country because they have a ‘One Man, One Vote’ system in place now. It was such a nice place to visit before they changed. Just look at it now?” Has our Tourism Board issued ever any advertising statement saying, “Come to the lovely Cayman Islands where we don’t have a ‘One Man, One Vote’ political system”? Is he really trying to make us believe that someone coming here from say the USA or the UK (that operate under a ‘One Man, One Vote’ system now and for years and years) will walk way with horror because we have now adopted THEIR SAME system?

Is our premier saying that all the key government projects are now going to be delayed because of all this “uncertainty?” Is Dart going to pull out along with China Harbor Engineering because this country might change its current voting system that has been established elsewhere for centuries?

If this is the best Mr Bush can come up with he has already lost but then he hasn’t “educated” us yet has he?

And I loved the inclusion of the word “ONLY” in his question. Shudders and much horror. We will ONLY have One vote. We are in terrible danger of having something that has been our right taken away from us. But hasn’t East End and North Side had only one vote for ever?

Last but not least the premier announced he will be seeking 50% of the entire electorate rather than a simple majority of the turnout, despite the fact that this is now a government and not a people initiated vote. He has selected the question, is ‘educating us’, and announced the date. Expect us to hear that this is still a people initiated vote.

Perhaps we should have a march?