Overseas Territories Review

TIME TO REVISIT THE WEST INDIAN COMMISSION!

2012-02-12T10:40:00.000-04:00

PEOPLES EMPOWERMENT PARTY

CLEMENT PAYNE CULTURAL CENTRE

DAVID A. COMISSIONG

email:clementpaynechambers@gmail.com

President

A new year provides an opportunity - even if only psychologically - for a new beginning! And so, the Peoples Empowerment Party (PEP) embraces the year 2012 as an opportunity for the Barbadian and Caribbean people to "take a fresh guard" in relation to both their individual island nation building projects and to their collective multi-territory Caribbean Community project.

During the course of this year we will be urging Caribbean governments and populations to acknowledge that they have gone off-track in their nation building journeys and to rectify the gross deficiencies that have now become so glaringly obvious. We will also be urging upon our Caribbean Community (CARICOM) member nations a new effort at revitalising the integration movement, guided by the multiplicity of recommendations contained in the historic Report of the West Indian Commission.

The PEP wishes to draw to the attention of the governments and people of our fifteen CARICOM member nations that the year 2012 is the 20th anniversary of the ground breaking Report issued by the West Indian Commission!

It was on the 25th of May 1992 that Chairman of the West Indian Commission, Sir Shridath Ramphal, and his 14 fellow Commissioners, signed off on the Report entitled "Time For Action", after an extensive three year period of consulting with the Caribbean people and working out a comprehensive blueprint for taking the CARICOM countries forward and deepening their unity.

The West Indian Commission was a product of the historic CARICOM heads of Government Summit that was held in Grenada in July 1989, and that produced the visionary ‘Grand Anse Declaration’, which, amongst other things, decreed the establishment of a CARICOM Single Market And Economy (CSME) and gave birth to a West Indian Commission - a convocation of wise Caribbean men and women - to craft a programme for taking our sub-region forward into the 21st century.

To their credit, the members of the West Indian Commission took their mandate very seriously, and within the space of three years delivered to the heads of Government a Caribbean people’s manifesto for change and action. But, as is so often the case, the CARICOM governments engaged in a minimal implementation of the 500 page report, thereby resulting in a multitude of constructive Caribbean-building proposals lying fallow and un-used for the past 20 years!

It is incumbent on us therefore to use this 20th anniversary year to revisit the ‘Time For Action’ manifesto; to identify those proposals that are still relevant to the challenges that our CARICOM countries face in 2012; and to craft a new developmental initiative based on the native Caribbean wisdom that the Commission’s Report represented.

It is clear to us in the PEP that our CARICOM nations need to confront this era of profound recession with a regional development programme based on the following planks:-

(1) The development of collectively owned, multi-territory regional industries producing food and basic industrial commodities;

(2) The establishment of a regional monetary authority focused on ensuring exchange and convertibility of national currencies; developing a common regional currency; and augmenting the stock of development capital;

(3) The development of a regional transportation network comprising merchant shipping and a regional airline and fast ferry service;

(4) The development of a regional telecommunications, mass media and film - making network;

(5) The establishment and promotion of a multi-territory CARICOM tourism project;

(6) The establishment of a regional science, technology, research and development network, and a regional ‘Energy Authority’.

(7) The downsizing, rationalization and sharing of Foreign Affairs departments and diplomatic missions.

This is the type of developmental initiative that the ideas contained in the West Indian Commission report can help us to flesh out!

Let us therefore use 2012 to pay the greatest tribute that we can to those of the 15 illustrious Caribbean men and women who, since giving birth to the ‘Time For Action’ manifesto, have gone on to the ancestral realm - Dame Nita Barrow, Rex Nettleford, Alister McIntyre, William Demas and Allan Kirton - by giving serious and deserved consideration to their proposals and recommendations!

British MP calls for action on repatriation of Chagossians

2012-02-10T14:37:00.000-04:00

David Snoxell: Ministers recognise the injustice done to the Chagossians. But it's time for action, not words.

David Snoxell is Coordinator of the Chagos Islands (BIOT) All-Party Parliamentary Group and was British High Commissioner to Mauritius, 2000-04, and Deputy Commissioner of BIOT, 1995-97.

In 1965, the UK excised the Chagos Archipelago from Mauritius to create a new colony, the British Indian Ocean Territory (BIOT), so that the largest of the 55 islands, Diego Garcia, could be developed as a US base. In the process the population of 1,500 Ilois were removed from their homeland and dumped in Mauritius and Seychelles. Since the 54 outer islands have never been required for defence purposes what is stopping the Government allowing Chagossians to return for visits or to resettle there?

Since 1999 their case for doing so has trailed through the courts. At each stage the Chagossians won. But at the last hurdle in 2008, the Law Lords gave a qualified 3:2 verdict in favour of the Government. However, the case is now before the European Court of Human Rights. If it decides the case is admissible the Chagossians are likely to win since the UK is manifestly in breach of one or more of the articles of the European Convention on Human Rights.

The case should never have had to go this far. The right to return was restored in November 2000 by Robin Cook, following the High Court judgment in favour of the Chagossians, but this was overturned in June 2004 by Orders in Council. Jack Straw was to admit in 2009 that by not consulting Parliament he had sacrificed legitimacy for speed. It is inconceivable that Parliament would have agreed to deprive the Chagossians of the most fundamental of all human rights – the right to return to one’s homeland. It would be far better if the FCO were to withdraw from the case and settle out of court, as already suggested by Strasbourg. This would avoid fuelling the campaign of those who see its judgments as an attack on the independence of our courts.

Over the past decade there has been a systemic failure – a lack of political will and foresight set against a background of international crises, low level handling of the issues in the FCO, lack of ministerial engagement, buying time, the inevitable face-saving, the defence of past mistakes and mounting legal bills, (about £3 million), exacerbated by the turnover of staff and ministers. This was not a planned strategy, rather a failure to grasp the nettle. Since 2002, Ministers have signed off on keeping the Chagossians in exile, deploying largely disproved arguments, such as the security of the base, "treaty" obligations to the US, feasibility and cost of resettlement, conservation and the recently created Marine Protection Area.

The Chagos Islands (BIOT) All Party Parliamentary Group, whose purpose is "to help bring about a resolution of the issues concerning the future of the Islands and the Chagossians", was established in the wake of the 2008 defeat by the Law Lords and has wrestled with these arguments in the course of 26 meetings over more than three years. The group has currently 41 members. Several of its members are in the Coalition Government and four were FCO Ministers. The Group has had meetings with FCO Ministers on four occasions, with leaders of the Chagossian groups, the US Embassy and Mauritius High Commissioner, conservation groups and the UK Chagos Support Association whose Patrons are Philippa Gregory, Ben Fogle and Benjamin Zephaniah. The FAC has noted: “We conclude that there is a strong moral case for the UK permitting and supporting a return to BIOT for the Chagossians. The FCO has argued that such a return would be unsustainable but we find these arguments less than convincing”.

Before the election both parties expressed strong support for the Chagossians and William Hague promised “to ensure a fair settlement of this long standing dispute”. Nick Clegg’s office said: “Nick and the Lib Dems believe that the Government has a moral responsibility to allow these people to at last return”. Then in a letter to a constituent Vince Cable announced in September 2010 that the Government was withdrawing from the case, opting instead for a friendly settlement. He noted that William Hague was “also committed to a fair settlement and that steps had already been taken to ensure their return”. A week later he was forced to recant, but added that “I am sure that the Chagossian cause will continue to be championed by my colleagues within the Liberal Democrat party.”

Why, then, in the 21 months of this Government has nothing happened? There has been an abject failure of politicians to carry through the commitments they made on several occasions in parliamentary debates. A tiny group of FCO officials and legal advisers have continued to run policy towards Chagos. Whilst being more sympathetic than the previous government, ministerial answers to parliamentary questions, interventions and letters have simply reiterated standard FCO lines. True, Ministers' public and parliamentary stance comes over as positive and anguished but the reality is, so far nothing has changed. In a recent meeting with members of the Chagos APPG, the Foreign Secretary referred to FCO positions and policy rather than his own. The gap between what politicians feel and what officials "recommend" has never been so obvious. Yes, the climate has changed - but not yet the tide.

In a major speech last year, the Foreign Secretary said: “My ambition is a Foreign Office in which ideas thrive and the status quo can be challenged fearlessly...our diplomats excel at finding deft, realistic and workable solutions”. There is not much evidence that Ministers are succeeding in challenging the status quo on Chagos and applying political will and compromise to finding workable solutions - though, unlike the previous government, it is pretty clear that they would like to do so. They give the impression of being unwilling passengers bound and gagged in the backseat of a car driven doggedly by their officials.

The UK remains in violation of several UN human rights instruments and decisions. Our international reputation continues to be badly damaged by accusations of double standards. In the same speech, the Foreign Secretary said: “We cannot ride roughshod over international opinion or neglect to ensure that our actions are seen to be as legitimate as possible in the eyes of the world”. What better year than 2012, when the eyes of the world are on London for the Olympic Games and the Diamond Jubilee, to restore the human rights and the dignity of the Chagossian people? What better way to mark the Queen’s long reign, which has seen the transition of the British Empire to a Commonwealth of Nations, by bringing to an end this tragedy and relic of Empire in the Indian Ocean? Jeremy Corbyn, the Chairman of the APPG, has asked for a debate early in the session. This will be the opportunity for the Foreign Secretary to tell Parliament about the progress that he is making towards a settlement of the issues.

British Empire continues amidst sovereignty, militarisation disputes

2012-02-10T00:58:00.000-04:00

Britain, same insatiable colonialist

Britain's colonialist ambitions seem to remain insatiable as the British government continues to refrain from negotiating over the sovereignty of the lands it has colonized. When the sovereignty of Hong Kong was granted (returned? - OTR) to the People's Republic of China in 1997, the British Empire hoped that it would legitimately hold sovereignty over its remaining colonized territories under the rubric of 'the British Overseas Territories.'

However, of the 16 Non-Self-Governing Territories listed on the United Nations Special Committee on Decolonization waiting to be decolonized, 10 including the Malvinas Islands and Gibraltar remain under the sovereignty of the United Kingdom.

As Argentina and Spain have called for negotiations, the British government continues to take a hostile stance ruling out the possibilities for any negotiation and taking provocative acts.

Earlier this week, the British government sent the Duke of Cambridge Prince Williams clad in the uniform of the 'conqueror' to Malvinas Islands on a six-week-long tour to act as a search and rescue pilot.

Furthermore, Britain's Ministry of Defense (MoD) announced plans for sending its most advanced warship to the islands in order to give Buenos Aires a 'pause' to think about calling for negotiations over the sovereignty of the islands.

This comes as the UN Special Committee on Decolonization's draft on the Malvinas Islands (see text of adopted resolution below - OTR) calls for a 'peaceful, negotiated settlement of the sovereignty dispute between Argentina and the United Kingdom.'

Moreover, as the Spanish government calls for bilateral negotiations over Gibraltar's sovereignty under the Brussels Agreement, the British Secretary of State for Europe, David Lidington categorically announced that Britain would not sit at the table of negotiations.

In 1713, under the Treaty of Utrecht, Spain gave sovereignty over the town and castle of Gibraltar to Britain. However, the isthmus and the airspace were not part of the treaty.

Meanwhile, Lidington made no reference to this issue and maintained that Britain “will never enter into arrangements under which the people of Gibraltar would pass under the sovereignty of another state against their wishes.”

Furthermore, British Foreign Secretary William Hague's comments in the Somali capital of Mogadishu tells of Britain's plots for its oil-rich ex-colony as he described his visit as a 'major diplomatic push to bring stability, and a sign of Britain's commitment to the people and country of Somalia.'

Britain's refusal to get engaged in negotiations over the sovereignty of lands it has colonized takes the lid off its colonialist nature no matter if the lands are called 'the British Overseas Territories.'

ISH/HN/HE

*****

Report of the United Nations Decolonisation Committee

2011

Chapter XI

Falkland Islands (Malvinas)

...135. The Special Committee considered the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) at its 6th and 7th meetings, on 21 June 2011.

136. In its consideration of the item, the Special Committee took into account paragraph 4 (b) of the annex to General Assembly resolution 58/316, as well as other relevant resolutions and decisions.

137. During its consideration of the item, the Special Committee had before it a working paper prepared by the Secretariat containing information on developments concerning the Territory (A/AC.109/2011/14).

138. At the 6th meeting, the Chair informed the Special Committee that the delegations of Argentina, Brazil, El Salvador, Guatemala, Guyana, Paraguay, Peru and Uruguay had requested to participate in the Committee’s consideration of the item. The Committee decided to accede to the requests.

139. At the same meeting, in accordance with a decision taken at the 3rd meeting, statements were made by Roger Edwards and Dick Sawle of the Legislative Assembly of the Falkland Islands, Maria Angélica del Carmen Vernet and Alejandro Betts (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.6).

140. Also at the same meeting, the representative of Chile, also on behalf of Bolivia (Plurinational State of), Cuba, Ecuador, Nicaragua and Venezuela (Bolivarian Republic of), introduced a draft resolution on the item (A/AC.109/2011/L.7).

141. At the same meeting, the Minister for Foreign Affairs, International Trade and Worship of Argentina made a statement (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.6).

142. Also at the same meeting, statements were made by the representatives of Cuba, China, the Syrian Arab Republic, the Russian Federation, Indonesia, the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela, the Plurinational State of Bolivia, Ecuador, Nicaragua, Côte d’Ivoire, Mali, Sierra Leone, Paraguay (on behalf of the Common Market of the South and associated countries), Guyana (on behalf of the Union of South American Nations), Guatemala (on behalf of the Ibero-American countries), Brazil, Uruguay, Peru and El Salvador (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.6).

143. At the same meeting, the Special Committee adopted draft resolution A/AC.109/2011/L.7, without a vote.

144. At the 7th meeting, on 21 June, the representative of Grenada made a statement (see A/AC.109/2011/SR.7).

Resolution Adopted without a vote

21st June 2011

Question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas)

The Special Committee (on Decolonization),

Having considered the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

Aware that the maintenance of colonial situations is incompatible with the United Nations ideal of universal peace,

Recalling General Assembly resolutions 1514 (XV) of 14 December 1960, 2065 (XX) of 16 December 1965, 3160 (XXVIII) of 14 December 1973, 31/49 of 1 December 1976, 37/9 of 4 November 1982, 38/12 of 16 November 1983, 39/6 of 1 November 1984, 40/21 of 27 November 1985, 41/40 of 25

November 1986, 42/19 of 17 November 1987 and 43/25 of 17 November 1988, Special Committee resolutions A/AC.109/756 of 1 September 1983, A/AC.109/793 of 21 August 1984, A/AC.109/842 of 9 August 1985, A/AC.109/885 of 14 August 1986, A/AC.109/930 of 14 August 1987, A/AC.109/972 of 11 August 1988, A/AC.109/1008 of 15 August 1989, A/AC.109/1050 of 14 August 1990, A/AC.109/1087 of 14 August 1991, A/AC.109/1132 of 29 July 1992, A/AC.109/1169 of 14 July 1993, A/AC.109/2003 of 12 July 1994, A/AC.109/2033 of 13 July 1995, A/AC.109/2062 of 22 July 1996, A/AC.109/2096 of 16 June 1997, A/AC.109/2122 of 6 July 1998, A/AC.109/1999/23 of 1 July 1999, A/AC.109/2000/23 of 11 July 2000, A/AC.109/2001/25 of 29 June 2001, A/AC.109/2002/25 of 19 June 2002, A/AC.109/2003/24 of 16 June 2003, the resolution adopted on 18 June 2004, the resolution adopted on 15 June 2005, the resolution adopted on 15 June 2006, the resolution adopted on 21 June 2007, the resolution adopted on 12

June 2008, the resolution adopted on 18 June 2009 and the resolution adopted on 24 June 2010, and Security Council resolutions 502 (1982) of 3 April 1982 and 505 (1982) of 26 May 1982,

Distressed that, notwithstanding the time that has elapsed since the adoption of General Assembly resolution 2065 (XX), this prolonged dispute has not yet been settled,

Aware of the interest of the international community in the resumption by the Governments of the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland of their negotiations in order to find as soon as

possible a peaceful, just and lasting solution to the sovereignty dispute relating to the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

Expressing its preoccupation over the fact that the good level of relations between Argentina and the United Kingdom has not yet led to negotiations on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

Considering that this situation should facilitate the resumption of the negotiations in order to find a peaceful solution to the dispute over sovereignty,

Reaffirming the principles of the Charter of the United Nations on the non-use of force or the threat of force in international relations and the peaceful settlement of international disputes,

Calling attention to the importance of the Secretary-General continuing his efforts to give full effect to the mission entrusted to him by the General Assembly in its resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

Reaffirming the need for the parties to take due account of the interests of the population of the islands in accordance with the provisions of the General Assembly resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas),

1. Reiterates that the way to put an end to the special and particular colonial situation in the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) is the peaceful and negotiated settlement of the dispute over sovereignty between the Governments of the Argentine Republic and the United Kingdom of Great

Britain and Northern Ireland;

2. Takes note of the views expressed by the President of the Argentine Republic on the occasion of the sixty-fifth session of the General Assembly;

3. Regrets that, in spite of the widespread international support for a negotiation between the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom that includes all aspects of the future of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas), the implementation of the General Assembly resolutions on this question has not yet started;

4. Requests the Governments of Argentina and the United Kingdom to consolidate the current process of dialogue and cooperation through the resumption of negotiations in order to find as soon as possible a peaceful solution to the sovereignty dispute relating to the question of the Falkland

Islands (Malvinas), in accordance with the provisions of General Assembly resolutions 2065 (XX), 3160 (XXVIII), 31/49, 37/9, 38/12, 39/6, 40/21, 41/40, 42/19 and 43/25;

5. Reiterates its firm support for the mission of good offices of the Secretary-General in order to assist the parties in complying with the request made by the General Assembly in its resolutions on the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas);

6. Decides to keep under review the question of the Falkland Islands (Malvinas) subject to the directives that the General Assembly has issued and may issue in that regard.

UK increasing military presence around the Malvinas

2012-02-09T14:08:00.002-04:00

TENSIONS HEIGHTEN

granma.cu

LONDON—The British government has approved a contingency plan to increase its troops in the vicinity of the Malvinas, which will heighten the sovereignty conflict over the Islands, usurped by the UK in 1833.

The UK has a garrison of 1,700 troops
on the Malvinas.

Prime Minister David Cameron assessed the military situation on the Malvinas with military chiefs in the context of the historic dispute over jurisdiction. The UK has plans for the rapid deployment of troops in the area via Ascension Island in the Atlantic.

Cameron has accused Argentina of colonialism for insisting on its sovereign claim to the Islands, which provoked an angry response from Buenos Aires, demanding that London accept the UN resolution on a peaceful negotiated solution to the conflict.

Meanwhile, the UK Premier who, according to The Times, is pushing for military escalation, said that he was determined to ensure that UK defenses and everything else is in order on convening the UN Security Council to address the situation of the Malvinas.

The UK maintains a garrison of 1,700 troops there, almost equal to the local population. Added to this, there is the possibility of nuclear submarines in the area, given the British Defense Minister’s refusal to disclose the location of vessels of this kind.

Antigua and Barbuda signs new agreement with French overseas departments in the Caribbean region

2012-02-08T16:43:00.000-04:00

By CMC

Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer

FORT-DE-FRANCE, Martinique (CMC) – Antigua & Barbuda Friday signed a memorandum of understanding (MOU) with the authorities in the French island of Martinique, as it seeks to strengthen and deepen its relations with the French Overseas Departments (DOMs) in the Caribbean.

“I am a believer of that philosophy, since we share the same Caribbean space; believe in the need for further integration of the Caribbean, and are impacted by the global fiscal and economic crisis,” Prime Minister Baldwin Spencer said soon after signing the “Declaration of Intent of Cooperation” with the Regional Council of Martinique.

“Therefore, it behoves us to collectively confront these challenges together. We must build bridges of economic and social cooperation to confront the challenges of the ever-evolving global architecture in order to safeguard our future,” he added.

Spencer, who is leading a high powered delegation to the French island, said he was looking forward to giving “life to this historic agreement as soon as possible.

“Within this context, I look forward to receiving a technical team from Martinique in St John’s for discussions within the framework of our new partnership,” he said.

Prime Minister Spencer said he had informed his colleague leaders in the sub-regional Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) that Antigua & Barbuda is the forerunner in the process of engagement with the DOMs.

“Evidence of this is the fact that last year we signed a similar agreement with Guadeloupe. While we seek to activate that agreement, it is my view that both countries will benefit from the synergies and engagement of key stakeholders in the jurisdictions.

“It is our expectation that the partnership would lead for example to the strengthening of our Hospitality Training Institute (ABHTI), which is at the heart of the OECS Network of Excellence in Tourism and Hospitality Education,“ he said.

Prime Minister Spencer said that the exchange of students and staff, language training and collaboration on the identification of resources for the expansion at the ABHTI; sports tourism, yachting, renewable energy, agriculture, culture, education and training are among the areas of special interest for Antigua & Barbuda.

“We also welcome the opportunity for engagement with the French Development Agency especially in respect of the ABHTI initiative,” he said,

The Antigua & Barbuda government leader said that his administration would also seek to cooperate with the French islands and the British Overseas Territories (OCTs) to further to integrate them within the Caribbean Forum (CARIFORUM) which includes the 15-member Caribbean Community (CARICOM) grouping and the Dominican Republic.

“The time is right for an initiative at the CARIFORUM regional level to discuss issues of common concern including operational matters surrounding implementation of the Economic Partnership Agreement (EPA),” Prime Minister Spencer said, noting that such a meeting could be held here in Martinique at the technical and political levels.

“The CARIFORUM Directorate must become more proactive and forward thinking especially now when Europe is confronted by so much challenges and our fears that our future relationship may change. Accordingly, engagements with the DOMs and OCTs are crucial as we fashion a proactive response.”

Spencer said that his island has been at the forefront in espousing a “new, forward thinking and focused CARIFORUIM Directorate” through the conduct of an institutional assessment of the present mechanism and that it was now looking “forward to seeing that work commence this year along with the implementation of other decisions of the CARIFORUM Council of Ministers related to governance.

“Given the different challenges, it cannot be business as usual. We are called upon to be agents of change and more dynamic. That is why we have embarked upon this journey of engagement and cooperation with you,” said Prime Minister Spencer, who returns to St John’s today.

Joining him are the NAO for the EDF Programme Dr Clarence Henry, and the executive director of the Antigua & Barbuda Hospitality Training Institute (ABHTI) Calvin Ambrose.

Consumer prices soared in Dutch Caribbean during 2011

2012-02-07T15:31:00.000-04:00

WRITTEN BY LUCIA BECK

BES ISLANDS - Average consumer prices in the Dutch Caribbean rose dramatically in 2011 relative to one year previously.

With 9.9 percent, St Eustatius recorded the highest inflation rate.The inflation rates for Bonaire and Saba were 5.4 and 6.4 percent respectively. For comparison's sake: the Dutch inflation rate over 2011 was 2.3 percent.

Inflation rate Bonaire

Food prices on Bonaire considerably higher in 2011. Prices for food, soft drinks and transport contributed to inflation on Bonaire. Food prices were 7.8 percent up in 2011 from 2010, largely due to meat prices.

Transport was more expensive as a result of higher airline ticket prices. Petrol prices also had an upward effect on inflation.

Petrol prices rose rapidly in the first six months of 2011. Clothes prices increased by 11 percent last year.

Inflation rate St Eustatius

Highest inflation rate recorded on St Eustatius. The most substantial price increase (9.9 percent) was recorded on St Eustatius, mainly as a result of higher transport prices early last year. Airline ticket and motor fuel prices rose dramatically. Higher energy prices and higher prices charged in the hotels and restaurants sector also contributed to inflation.

Electricity prices were higher in the months of May, June and July due to the delayed effect of higher fuel prices on energy prices. Prices charged in the sector hotels and restaurants were nearly one quarter up from one year previously.

In the first quarter of 2011, many businesses in the sector raised their prices in reaction to the introduction of the new tax system in 2011.

Inflation rate Saba

Food and transport prices push up inflation on Saba. Saba recorded an inflation rate of 6.4 percent in 2011. Transport prices contributed most to inflation. Expensive airline tickets were the main cause, just as on the other islands. Motor fuel prices also soared on Saba.

Prices of food products and soft drinks were 9 percent up from one year previously in 2011. Meat, bread and cereal products played an important part in this respect. Higher prices charged in the sector hotels and restaurants were the third important factor.

They were nearly 21 percent higher in 2011 than in the preceding year. The price increase in the sector hotels and restaurants mainly occurred in the first quarter, just as on St Eustatius.

Adjustment

Figures referring to the fourth quarter of 2011 and the annual figure over 2011 are provisional and will become definitive when data over the first quarter of 2012 are released. Various figures referring to the third quarter of 2011 were adjusted relative to the previous publication as a result of information received later. These figures currently have a definitive status.

*****

Partial Integration of ‘Caribbean Netherlands’ brings high inflation rates

Bonaire Reporter

Prices in the Caribbean Netherlands rose dramatically in 2011 over the previous year. St. Eustatius recorded the highest inflation rate- 9.9%. The provisional inflation rate for Bonaire was 5.4%. For comparison’s sake consider that the Dutch inflation rate over the same period was 2.3%.. Prices for food, soft drinks and transport contributed the most to inflation on Bonaire. Food prices were up 7.8% in 2011 from 2010, largely due to meat prices. Transport was more expensive as a result of more expensive airline tickets. Gasoline prices also soared. Prices on clothing increased by 11% last year.

Sen. Burgos calls on Obama to release Puerto Rico political prisoner Oscar López

2012-02-07T01:52:00.000-04:00

Inter News Service

New Progressive Party Sen. Norma Burgos presented on Monday, during the first day of ordinary session, S. Resolution 2538 wherein she requests President Barack Obama the release of Puerto Rican political prisoner Oscar López Rivera.

As expressed by Burgos in the bill, “our president (Obama), in multiple instances, has recognized the right of self-determination of the people of Puerto Rico.”

For the senator, Obama “has reiterated the importance that we agree on issues relevant to our self-determination, thus, by making use of his prerogatives, from the (U.S.) Senate he asked for the liberation of Oscar López, who is in a federal prison after complying with two sentences that sum to 70 years.”

“The people of Puerto Rico have solidarity, we want to remain consistent with the claim that we have made to liberate Oscar López.

We did it in 1999 when we occupied the (Puerto Rico) Secretary of State, when former U.S. Pres. Bill Clinton pardoned most Puerto Rican political prisoners who had spent close to 20 years in prison,” she said.

The legislator remembered that “in an act of solidarity” Oscar López rejected the initiative established by Clinton “because his colleagues Haydée Beltrán and Carlos Torres remained in jail.”

During Obama’s recent visit to Puerto Rico, Burgos requested the liberation of the Puerto Rican prisoner.

The senator qualified as “unfair” that the “boricua” remain in jail “when it is known that his main motive is for supporting independence, and when others are already out of prison.

But as, the federal parole board has denied the possibility of his release, despite the exemplary behavior shown by Oscar López in the past 30 years.”

“It is time for Oscar to have his liberty and return home, to his house with his daughter Clarissa López, to whom I recently expressed my commitment to present this petition in the Senate as it is happening today.

This is an act of solidarity calling on our president (Obama) to order the liberation of this Puerto Rican,” Burgos declared.

Burgos’ initiative complements the one previously made by Resident Commissioner Pedro Pierluisi who addressed the federal parole board during the process of consideration for Oscar’s release.

State of the Territory Address of Guam Governor Eddie Calvo

2012-02-06T15:43:00.001-04:00

It’s been 20 long years since the government started robbing its citizens of their tax refunds. I am thrilled to report that for the first time in 20 years, tax refunds are on time. The payment of tax refunds shapes the state of our island, not just because it sparked the economy, but because we began to renew people’s faith in leadership... that leaders will keep the promises that they make.

But by no stretch of the imagination should this be considered some monumental achievement. Paying the people their money simply was a duty we fulfilled. Nothing any of us could say could rival the relief and joy of Guamanians during Christmas.

It’s the same relief that we hope they can get again this year. If the people’s trust is what we want to build back into the leaders they elect, I hope the legislature will support Series B of the tax refunds bond. As I explained last year, we needed to finance $343 million to pay tax refunds for this year and all the prior years that weren’t paid. You only allowed $198 million to be paid in December, leaving a balance, and another $100 million owed for this year’s refunds. Senators, let’s work together swiftly to give the people the balance of their money.

This enormous debt to the people of Guam is the result of a government diseased by delusions of financial grandeur for decades.

Rather than making the tough decisions that cost votes, the leaders of Guam have been content to simply rob Guamanians of their tax refunds. They’ve disguised this debt by calling it a deficit, never telling taxpayers that it is almost entirely made up of their money. The disguise fed the delusions: ‘Hire this supporter.’ … ‘Keep this contractor.’ … ‘Pay this rent.’ … ‘Increase the revenue projections so we can budget more for this agency closer to the election.’ These are the politics of the past that ate every day into the money that was supposed to be set aside for tax refunds.

Leadership in dire times is about the ability to prioritize, to act with justice, and to serve all. Do government employees deserve the Hay raises? Of course they do. Was there money for it? No. It was an empty promise from politicians in an election year. And what about the size of the government? Is there enough money for payroll, or will we continue raiding tax refunds, vendor payments, utility bills and capital improvements so we can pay personnel costs?

Senators, of the 12,000 government employees, I have control over only 2,973. The rest are employees of the Department of Education, autonomous agencies, the legislature and the judiciary.

You handle your own budget. So does the judiciary. And since the legislature took DOE away from the control of the Governor, I can only affect financial change in less than 50 percent of the General Fund workforce. And I have.

By attrition and by termination, we reduced the line agency workforce by 101 employees between the last pay period in 2010 and the last pay period in 2011. This does not include the positions currently going through the lengthy lay off process.

We increased the number of health professionals at Public Health, tax enforcement staff at Rev & Tax, and doctors at the hospital.

In exchange for these investments, we reduced the staff:

· at the Governor’s Office by 24 percent,
· at the consolidated land agency by 11 percent,
· at the consolidated Chamorro Affairs department by 8 percent,
· at Public Works by 11 percent,
· at Parks and Recreation by 14 percent,
· and the list goes on.

Where did all these savings go? Well, to help pay for the three years of continuous deficits. The cash that wasn’t spent on personnel went to pay overdue bills from tax refunds, to vendors, power bills, court orders and mounting interest.

Senators, I know you share my understanding that the taxpayers of Guam do not have an endless pot of money for government to spend. It is one thing to tell us to pay for all personnel AND all tax refunds AND all the mandates set by law. It is quite another thing to look at the bank account and pay it out. Imagine if every household had the ability to spend the money the way the legislative finance committee wants the government to do. Every Guamanian could then forget that his bills exist, and every Guamanian would be able to buy a beach in Tumon.

But this is not the way people live their lives. They budget their paychecks, and if the money doesn’t come in, they cut their spending. What gives government the license to live above the law when it requires its citizens to play by the rules? To quote Senator Tony Ada: I thought the government was supposed to serve the people and not the other way around. The government’s runaway spending must stop!

We’ve been doing whatever we can to save money. Lt. Governor Tenorio and I voluntarily took a 10 percent pay cut, along with our senior staff. We said we would suffer along with the taxpayers who were due their refunds. Well, the refunds were paid, and we still haven’t restored our pay. When you compare it to the government’s revenues, it’s not a lot of money. But, we felt that leading by example means a lot more to the employees who have been sacrificing as well.

We made millions in cuts that would take the next 12 hours to outline. It would take another 12 hours to explain the service improvements we made as well.

Despite the cuts, we sought to improve services by implementing common sense solutions. We embarked upon the first major reorganization of GovGuam in its 62-year history. We began consolidating agencies. We started identifying programs to outsource. Ambulance billing now is outsourced. DOE has the authority to implement a performance management contract for its ailing maintenance division. I applaud Sen. Yamashita for her forward thinking and I encourage DOE to take advantage of this right away.

We are also on our way to outsourcing billings and collections at the hospital. This follows the decision to stop competing with hemodialysis providers. In the budget I submitted to you today I also propose to reorder the reorganization of animal control and outsource those functions to the mayors. We did the same with the village learning centers. Our next outsourcing project is the DMV.

As a rule, government should never compete with the private sector. We are looking for services that can best be provided by businesses that are more efficient and will hire people and pay taxes.

We found redundant positions and eliminated spending where it wasn’t needed, offering assistance to displaced workers along the way. We’re not done, either. Reorganization and spending cuts will continue until the government is providing excellent service again and living within our means.

It is this concentration on improving services that led to a demand for excellence from all GovGuam employees. You are paying for these services with your taxes and fees, so in essence you are the customer. And from where I come from, the customer is always number one.

So, I ordered a new customer service initiative. We released customer service guidelines to all agencies, and began monitoring the Cabinet to see that all agencies are performing. We’re still a ways from improving customer service to the level I expect, but the work is happening. We even established a Customer Service Hotline at Adelup to receive your complaints and suggestions.

The demand for excellence is a precursor to a total change in how agencies will be funded in the future. My fiscal team is working to transition the government into performance-based budgeting. Right now, agencies are funded according to funding requests. In the future, agencies will be funded based on their performance. Did the agency use its dollars wisely? Did the agency meet its expected service levels? Were customers satisfied? Did service improve? We will be able to hold every agency director, manager and supervisor accountable by changing to this system of budgeting. Taxpayers will literally be able to see, online, where their dollar went and what got better or worse because of that investment.

One of the areas where you will see a marked improvement in the near future is online services. Senators, we hope to invest some of the savings we’ve made into the development of online applications and help centers. We want to take any service, where you now have to walk into a GovGuam office to apply, and put those forms online.

It’s a lot easier said than done, though. The very small IT staff we have will be looking through the hundreds of services the line agencies provide. One by one, they will develop protocols to move applications online. This should reduce traffic, but more importantly, make it so much more convenient for you to get service from GovGuam.

We are also looking into service kiosks at agencies like Rev & Tax. Rather than standing in a long line, you can simply walk up to a machine to make your transaction.

Doing more with less is a mantra of a GovGuam workforce that is racing toward excellence. I’d like to recognize two ambassadors of the new government of Guam: Teresa Blas and ArtemioAguero, Jr. were the two winners of the Merit Cup of Excellence MagPro Awards last year. Teresa and Artemio, please stand.

It’s my great honor to introduce you to the people of Guam tonight and recognize you for your excellence

We’re one year into our administration. We are demanding excellence and changing government so that it serves the people. If I were a politician, I’d chalk up everything I just told you to a series of achievements. But are they really? Or are they just a series of decisions and duties fulfilled that should be done by a governor anyway? To me, these are simply basic duties that a governor and lieutenant governor must fulfill.

These are a few of the basic improvements you expected from government :

· At the start of 2011, your tax refunds were 2-5 years late. Today, if you pass my bond, they will be on time.

· DOE was in jeopardy of losing $60 million in ARRA funds when we came in. Today, DOE is preparing to improve public school facilities using these monies we saved for them.

· On the day we came into office, there were only two working ambulances. Today, there are seven working ambulances and more are coming. And they come with maintenance, too.

· Transparency was a word normally used in political punchlines when we came to office. Today it means a governor and lieutenant governor who hit the streets to answer the people’s questions directly. It means agencies without gag orders. It means weekly addresses, newspaper columns, interviews on talk shows, Facebook interaction, and the expectation that my Cabinet is answering your phone calls and being responsive to your needs.

Things are better, but let’s not kid ourselves. We are far from where we need to be. The benchmark isn’t whether we did better from one year to the next. It is whether services are improving at the expectation of the customer.

It is not achievement until the people feel it and say it is. The state of the government is better, but the state of our island still is vulnerable. We’re here not so much to hear about the improvements of the government as to report on how government is affecting the state of the island… an island of people who are dealing with a culture that very rapidly changed since the 1980s.

Not too long ago, poverty was a term used to describe people in Africa, or on the streets of New York. Anywhere but Guam. Something about our society changed, and poverty became endemic; worse, a cruel cycle.

Today the condition of our people has so eroded from the central values of the Chamorro that built Guam, that 30 percent of our people have no choice but to accept public assistance. Yes, senators, in 2011, there were 50,000 Guamanians on Medicaid or MIP, and 40,000 on food stamps.

And, the saddest statistic of them all - 67 percent of public school children come from families struggling so much in life that these children have to take reduced or free lunch assistance. At three schools alone, 90 percent of students are part of the free lunch program. Senators, the very soul of this island is not in the ideas that can be conjured on this floor. It’s not found in the confines of our air-conditioned offices, or the comfort of our titles.

The soul of Guam is in the poor boy I met at Sagan Linahyan. He did not have a shirt or slippers as he walked in his grandmother’s mud-soaked yard. The boy and his family were outside because they have no power. There was also a hose running from the neighbor’s house into one of the windows. They didn’t have running water, either. It seemed such an irony that right across the street was a beautiful school. That’s because its test scores, like that of most public schools, gives little hope that the poor boy will be prepared to leave poverty when he graduates, if he graduates.

The soul of Guam is also in the teenage girl, so beaten by life that she replaced the dream she once had as a little girl to become the President of the United States… with a compromise to instead quit school and work at the nearby store to support her family.

It is also in the single mother of four children, who are hoping the best for her. You see, they’re scared because she’s lost a lot of weight, she doesn’t have any more hair, and she’s always weak, so she lost her job. They had to go on public assistance to survive. Her children don’t know how the thought that the cancer will make them orphans keeps her awake at night more than the chemotherapy does.

For all these people, and tens of thousands of others with similar stories, Guam is not the paradise we once knew. It is a place of suffering. An island without opportunity or hope. A society led by a government that doesn’t care about their poverty.

It has been our mission since taking office to address poverty head on, and to send the message to the suffering that we do care.

We opened up the lines for public housing and we started building affordable homes. We have a goal to build 3,000 homes that you can afford by 2017. I’m very proud that our housing team, with the support of Sen. Muna-Barnes, set the stage for more than 600 affordable homes already.

We also saw movement this month to add properties and abandoned homes to the affordable housing inventory. We’re working with private partners to build even more. As of today, 611 affordable homes are either ready to break ground or are in the planning stage. Another 1,562 are in the conceptual development stage. Then there’s the potential for another 1,690 after that.

Imagine it. If you’re someone who’s gone to the bank only to have your dreams crushed by a mortgage rejection, the next few years will be so exciting for you. You will finally have your chance with the construction and renovation of these homes for low rent or low mortgage.

Alicia Pinaula had this chance. She is a Chamorro Land Trust recipient, who waited for years for the government to approve her grant. Well, we approved it and her home is now under construction. This affordable housing initiative is real, and Alicia Pinaula joins us tonight as one of my guests. Alicia, please stand so the people can see that dreams do come true.

The long-term goal is for the economic vibrancy that naturally allows Guamanians to buy homes with their income. Unfortunately, we’ve been facing an uphill battle against poverty since the 1990s. An entire generation has been living without opportunity. Our affordable housing initiative builds a bridge for the present generation to achieve the Guamanian Dream of homeownership in this decade. Yes, for all of you scraping by to pay the rent, we are working tirelessly to build homes you can afford for your family. The dream you have is a dream we share with you. You keep working hard, and so will we. That home will soon be yours.

Guamanians also are looking for work. It is no wonder children are living in third world conditions when their parents have to deal with thirteen percent unemployment. To address this for the adults who’ve been failed by government’s failure in education, we’ve maximized workforce training programs. Guamanians who want to work can visit AHRD right here in Hagatna at the GCIC building. On the first floor is an office of GovGuam professionals eager to help you. They have a program that can assess your skills and then see if you’re ready to go looking for a job, or if you need some training. If you need training, they’ll help you with that, too.

I’d also like to recognize the diligent efforts of Sen. Sam Mabini. No one has called me more about career technical education and the need to address workforce development in the classrooms than she has. She truly cares about your children’s future.

By far, though, the greatest contributors to workforce development on this island are the Guam Community College and University of Guam. I’m smiling right now because Christine and I are the proud parents of two UOG and GCC alumni. It makes me so proud as a governor to know that in the middle of the western Pacific, on a tiny island so often forgotten by the rest of the nation, are the two best institutions of higher learning any citizen could ask for. Indeed, Dr. Underwood and Dr. Okada, it is the natural choice for any person wanting to compete against anyone in the global economy.

My fellow Guamanians… have you been to your community college recently? Mary Okada, her staff and her faculty turned that once-barren campus into the breeding ground for the nurses that care for you, the IT professionals who are bringing Guam into the Twenty-first century, the public safety officers who keep us safe, and the skilled workers who make this island go ‘round.

Cross the George Washington campus and you’ll find a new community that is giving rise to Guam’s place as the regional leader in economic development.

Our University is preparing future professionals to create positive outcomes in the community.

Your University has seen continued increases in enrollment and a record $35 million in federal grants and contracts. UOG is an engaged institution committed to academic quality, research, and outreach projects that benefit the community. It provides information and solutions in response to community needs for everything from cancer research, invasive species control, and developmental disabilities research and service.

UOG plans to break ground this year on the Student Services Center followed by the Engineering School. These facilities will enable us to meet future challenges as an educated, engaged society. UOG has come so far in their 60 year history. I am committed to maintaining an affordable and accessible pathway to higher education so our people can prosper.

Dr. Okada and Dr. Underwood, you have my unwavering support for the zoning of the Mangilao Education and Economic Zone and for the development of the research and development parks in your backyard. Keep graduating those students so that more Guamanians have higher prospects for well-paying careers.

To support you, I have included a provision in the budget I submitted that unties your hands on scholarship funding – so that more young Guamanians can afford tuition now.

We also turned to the staple of our economy, tourism. I want to see every qualified person who filled out an application at a hotel or restaurant get a job. The only way that will happen is if we get more tourists spending more money.

That’s why it was critical to succeed with Russian visa waiver parole authority. It’s not China, but it is a market we’ve been trying for years to enter. We want those Russian Rubles flowing into our economy, creating new jobs and new business opportunity.

I want that boy from Sagan Linahyan to know that if he works hard in school, despite his poverty, he will have a future.

But we don’t just want Rubles from Russia. We want more Japanese Yen, Chinese Yuan, Philippine Pesos, Taiwan Dollars and Korean Won. We went on trade missions last year and met with hundreds of businessmen who want to bring their money to Guam. What does that money mean? More capital for the jobs you’re waiting for. More services for our people. More competition to drive down prices.Short-term economic development is a critical issue, and I am so grateful to Senator Chris Duenas for all of his support and his ideas.

But what about the rest of us? It will take some time for our young economic initiatives to produce the hundreds and thousands of career opportunities for Guamanians. In the meantime, there are thousands of Guamanians who, right now, need a job. We need even more opportunity for Guamanians who’ve been distanced by a government in recession from their real needs… a government out of touch with the people it is supposed to serve. A government that was supposed to do something meaningful when 6,226 young Guamanians walked out of public high school without a diploma over the past five years. Yes, 42.7 percent of the 14,533 students who entered the ninth grade between 2002 and 2006 have hardly any hope of getting a meaningful job that will pay the bills. And of the 8,327 who did graduate, only 2 percent of them have the math skills to succeed in a career, and no more than 14 percent in reading. These former students are now the 18 to 22 year-old Guamanians of today.

That means, my dear people, the majority of the youngest parenting generation of Guamanians, do not have the education and skills to compete in the job market.

Senators, we can implement change now, but the positive results will be for the children of this generation, not for the young parents who are struggling today. The reason we need an affordable housing program is because this generation needs help. The reason we need to infuse the economy with training and entry-level work is that the current generation was failed by a government that didn’t prioritize their education. I will discuss my long-term plan in a few minutes, but we cannot forget the generation of today.

We also need the military buildup. It is clear as day to me that the buildup brings with it the greatest hope for the current jobless, and those looking to increase their wages and income. In the fight against poverty, my dear people, there is no greater short-term solution than the buildup. No other industry offers to pump billions of dollars into our economy. No other economic stimulus proffers the chance for a regular citizen to open a small business. The buildup offers that option. Imagine the potential of young entrepreneurs who can sell their farmed produce…or open an advertising company… or work on the IT needs of the Marines. The possibilities go on and on.

The island’s leadership has been so embroiled in speculation and mistrust, that it has missed what really matters to the Guamanian people. Senators, I ask you, what are we preserving when thousands of families are drowning in debt and unhappiness?

When families are forced to house three generations under one roof? When drug addiction and violence are on the rise? When cancer patients can’t get the care they need?

The last time I checked, the Chamorro culture was one of innovation and imagination. It held at its core the happiness and prosperity of the people…people who help each other and welcome guests into their homes. It is precisely why, when the Marines say they want to come back to the island they liberated in 1944, I say, “Welcome, and hafa adai!”

Unfortunately, despite the signing of the Programmatic Agreement, the governor’s voice wasn’t the only one that went to Washington. No. The Marines have received some mixed signals from the very people in this room. The result? We now have a buildup that’s been stalled by a federal budget predator who preyed on the perceived division within the government of Guam.

Senators, how do you expect the Defense Department to react when some alluded to Marines as rapists? Or when another told the descendants of our liberators to take their buildup somewhere else? You wanted me to empanel the Guam First Commission so this island could speak with one voice, yet fringe elements of this very body are the ones sending mixed signals to Washington.

The rest of us are setting politics aside to welcome the Marines here. Senator Guthertz, Congresswoman Bordallo, and members of the Chamber of Commerce, I want to thank you for advocating for the buildup.

A few days ago, Senator Guthertz offered a compromise to the inorganic Guam First Commission law. Senator, after much thought, I will be issuing an executive order impaneling the Guam First Commission advisory body so that all communications with Washington are made with one voice.

Secretary Panetta and President Obama: We absolutely and without pause want the buildup and we welcome America’s heroes to our shores. We will care for them in a Chamorro culture of respect and hospitality. And in keeping with our culture of reciprocity, I fully expect that the investments and promises made to Guam will yield the end of poverty for thousands of Guamanians looking for opportunity today.

But let’s look deeper at how entwined this island is in the cycle of poverty. Many Guamanians who once looked for opportunity instead turned to a way out. The economic troubles of some mothers and fathers who lost so much is evident in the drug problem we have on this island. Let’s not pretend it doesn’t exist. There are Guamanians at this very hour who are intoxicated by the vapors of a drug that offers them a quick relief from their problems.

Whether it’s ice, ecstasy, cocaine, spice or violent alcohol abuse, the soul of this island is being wasted in pipes and bottles that drive us deeper into poverty. And who gets hurt? Beaten spouses.Neglected children.Victims of assault, theft, burglary, car crashes, and murder.

As we work to provide opportunity for all, we are doing our part to help addicted Guamanians know that opportunity is for them, too…that their financial or spiritual poverty is not so great that they should allow the drug addiction to control their destiny. So, we got to work right away. Lt. Governor Tenorio ordered Customs to ratchet up their searches, and the Police Department to increase their investigations. The result, thanks also to our partnership with the U.S. Attorney and our federal partners, is a:

· 170 percent increase in ice confiscations,
· 48,800 percent increase in ecstasy confiscations,
· And an overall 500 percent increase in drugs kept from entering the island.

Customs kept 1,151 grams of ice off the streets and away from families and children. Imagine if that million dollars in crystal evil was injected into our neighborhoods. This island would have seen even greater poverty and crime.

We’ve also dealt with the effects of drugs and alcohol abuse. Guam police officers took 824 drunk and drugged drivers off our streets. They arrested 711 spouse beaters and child abusers and threw them in jail. Together with the Attorney General’s Office, they apprehended 128 rapists and molesters, and they threw the book at them. Rightfully so.

I want to make special mention here of the island’s public safety officers. First, to the man who has been the chief advocate for our heroes in uniform, Lt. Governor Ray Tenorio. The Lieutenant Governor is in my office almost every morning, and charging down the doors of the fiscal team every day, trying to improve the conditions for the men and women of GPD, Guam Fire, DOC, Customs and DYA. Many of you don’t know what these men and women endure each day for all of us. True, we have a sense of gratitude that they leave their families each day never knowing if duty will summon them to their last stand. But what many of you don’t know is that even after risking their lives, police officers have to personally buy tires for their police cars and change the tires themselves. They’ve been volunteering their time to provide those extra neighborhood patrols you’ve been seeing. The DUI and seatbelt checks? That wasn’t overtime. That was a labor of love.

Over at Customs, those men and women didn’t get to hire more people. Yet, they increased their productivity to record levels. The officers there don’t complain when the supplies get low. They get creative and innovative.

At the fire department, the problem used to be that there weren’t enough ambulances. Now that we have more, the problem is that there aren’t enough medics. The situation is the same at the Department of Corrections and DYA. We just don’t have enough public safety officers, and they certainly don’t have the equipment and supplies they need to do their jobs. The ones we do have, though, they’ve exhibited what it truly means to do more with less. That is the Calvo Tenorio way.

It is also the Adolpho Palacios way. I’d like to recognize my good friend and colleague here for everything he does to improve public safety. Senator, I ask you to work closely with Lt. Governor Tenorio on the public safety master plan he is putting together. The Lieutenant Governor, along with the chiefs of the safety agencies, are identifying cost-cutting measures, where the savings can be reinvested into a larger, more-prepared, and more-equipped force.

Where we have nearly no effect on crime prevention is in the immigration of adults who choose crime over opportunity. Let’s not talk in circles about this problem. 26 percent of our prison is filled with inmates and detainees from the freely associated states. This is a major problem because FAS nationals account for only 11 percent of our population. What is driving this section of that population to criminal activity?

This is where I turn to the federal government for some long-awaited answers. In 2011, it cost the taxpayers of Guam $6 million just to feed the FAS inmates and detainees at the Department of Corrections. In case you’re wondering, that’s the amount of Compact Impact funding used to finance the construction of the four new schools.

If I could, I would take up U.S. Senator Rick Santorum’s offer. I will wholeheartedly welcome the judges of the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals if he will take all our foreign criminals to the Pennsylvania Department of Corrections. Even if we bought all those judges a half-a-million-dollar home at Pago Bay, it would still cost less than feeding the criminals. That’s a deal.

But the effects of the Compact on poverty in Guam does not stop with our justice system. Ladies and gentlemen, your senators and I prioritized $8 million to the Guam Memorial Hospital last year, thanks to the advocacy of Sen. Dennis Rodriguez. We also prioritized $13 million of your tax dollars to the Medically Indigent Program, and another $731,000 to fund the community health centers at Public Health. Beyond the cash investments at the hospital, we brought the facility up to code standards, we brought in more doctors, and we set the stage for hospital expansion. We even cut expenses at GMH as we made those extra improvements. I will tell you, that for every step forward we take with GMH, the federal compacts take us back a step and a half.

Earlier this month, my son had a serious health emergency. He could hardly move and his condition worsened by the minute. I took him to the emergency room. We got there around 11 p.m. He wasn’t seen until 1 a.m. and he wasn’t released until 5:30. It took that long to treat him because the emergency room was packed. He was treated on a gurney in the hallway. And that was a slow night, according to the nurse.

Before going any further, I want to personally thank the doctors and nurses who helped my son. They made a worried father feel better after caring for his sick son. God bless you and all the men and women of GMH for doing what you can to help the sick.

I’ve ordered the hospital to quickly move forward with severe cost reductions at GMH that are not critical to the core mission of the hospital. I’ve been assured the austerity plan will be implemented by the end of this quarter so GMH can hire the nurses and doctors they need.

I've directed GMH, the Fire Department, and Public Health to develop a tiered urgent to emergent medical care system. This will allow Public Health facilities in Dededo, Mangilao and Inarajan to establish Urgent Care Centers and receive non-emergency patients transported by ambulance. When an ambulance responds, our EMTs can determine the level of care needed and transport to a closer facility that can provide that care. This may result in a greater number of patients being taken to public health centers for treatment, potentially decreasing the case load of the Emergency Room at GMH.

I’ve also instructed the Director of Public Health to start working toward extending the hours at the community health centers. These are small steps toward more accessible health care. But as we all know, it’s the little things that really make the big difference.

As for mental healthcare and serving people living with disabilities, I could not be more disappointed with the federal government.

Many Guamanians struggle through emotional disturbances, psychological issues, physical disability and addiction. But the most interesting part of this story is that, unlike the problems at the hospital or public health, mental health has a lot of money. Yes, over the past two years, as people with disabilities have been struggling to get by, you taxpayers have given $9 million to help solve the problems. Where has that money gone?

While the FMT is failing, students with learning disorders like ADHD are not getting the attention they deserve. Adults with disabilities are still fighting for civil rights and accessibility. And Guam’s sons and daughters are coming back from war to face Post-traumatic Stress Disorder on their own. Some, sadly, took their lives, unable to cope.

Yet, it is the people of Guam who have done their part to pay for the improvements needed to help others in need. We were forced to pay this by a federal government that was upset with us for not meeting their mandates. The same federal government that loaded Mental Health and DISID with immigrant clients. The same federal government that sent Guam’s sons and daughters to Iraq and Afghanistan, only to come home to a mental healthcare system in distress… pushed to the limit by the federal government’s own actions. Perhaps Senator McCain can explain why Guam doesn’t need a mental healthcare facility to help treat the very veterans whom Senator McCain sent to war over the last decade.

But the irony doesn’t end there. The federal government has been burdening us for years, then taking us to court to fix the messes they started.

The federal compacts led to an unnatural demand on our services. We didn’t have the funding to keep up with the demand. The U.S. government wasn’t remitting its obligations to Guam so we could keep up with the population increase they caused. Instead, our services and infrastructure began stretching, and our capacity was breached. One by one, our systems began breaking under the weight of the compacts. School crowding in the north.Prison funding and conditions. Wastewater treatment.Capacity at the Ordot Dump. MIP funding that was no longer enough.

Then the consent decrees, the stipulated orders, the permanent injunctions, and the fines began. The federal government maxed our water and wastewater capacity through their compact, then sued us to make nearly $500 million in improvements to accommodate their failures. The feds maxed our dumping capacity at an Ordot Dump that they built, then sued us to close the place down and pay for a new site. They filled our prisons to the brim, then they told us to pay for the improvements.

Enough is enough.

How is it right that we are made to pay for more than three-quarters of a billion dollars in federal mandates when the federal government still owes us nearly the same amount in reimbursements for its obligation to us?

I have been anxious to announce that my team is exploring more aggressive avenues to hold the federal government accountable for the money it owes to Guam, based on the federal government’s own written obligations. I look forward to working with Sen. Frank Blas, Congresswoman Bordallo, and the Attorney General on this agenda, which I will reveal in the months ahead. The poor of this island can no longer shoulder the burden of a federal system that seems not to care about the conditions they’ve left for Guamanians.

The extra irony in our dependent relationship is that we wouldn’t need any of this assistance if the federal government stopped throwing its bureaucracy and mandates at us. I’m not just talking about the unfunded compacts. Our economy is so severely restricted at this moment by federal regulations that hinder growth.

Imagine how many more jobs Guamanians could have in tourism if airlines from Asia could stop on Guam before going to Los Angeles or New York. The Jones Act restricts this cabotage. Almost everything we buy, including gas, would be worlds cheaper if shipping lines weren’t restricted either.

Imagine how much more income each of you would have if the federal government finally granted our visa waiver program with China.

It is insane for the federal government to levy the most liberal immigration policy in U.S. history on Guam… then throw peanuts to offset its impact… then strangle us with penalties and takeovers when our capacity is breached by the population increase… and in the very same breath prohibit us from building jobs and growing our economy with onerous regulations that keep paying-visitors out.

My message to the federal government has less to do with the financial assistance Guam has requested in the past. Rather, it is this: we can be more self-sufficient if the U.S. government allows us to grow.

My dear people, our Micronesian brothers and sisters did not cause poverty. For most of them, poverty was already upon them. And in their darkness, they saw a shining light to the west. As Guamanians, it is within us, despite our own poverty and struggles, to share our warmth, no matter what the federal government does to Guam.

You see, the Guamanian Dream is powerful. It is no wonder we are an island of immigrants. People from across the globe saw from their borders the bright and shining promise that is the Guamanian Dream. In Guam, you can work hard and earn a living. You can own a home. You can be your own boss. You can compete against the best, and win. We, Guamanians from all walks of life, go about our business trying to make ends meet and build something great for our families.

And so the answer to poverty on Guam, beyond any other solution we proffered on affordable housing or job creation, beyond the redress of our grievances to a federal government that has acted without justice toward our people, is still within us. It is, my fellow Guamanians, within your children. They are the answer to our future. And they will find their destiny in the classrooms we provide them.

There is a glimmer of hope that two decades of stagnation in public education is now at a turning point. The board of education and DOE management have taken up our call to ramp up maintenance of the disrepaired schools. We forged a partnership that moved JFK out of the temporary campus in Tiyan and moved Untalan Middle in. I have asked for an updated capital improvements plan so the administration can begin developing creative finance strategies to build schools that parents can be proud to send their kids to. We’ve also asked for a district-wide assessment of student desks and other equipment and supplies the kids need to work and learn.

To this end I am announcing the creation of an executive-level task force that brings together the Governor’s Office, GEDA and DOE to explore how we can finance the renovation and rebuilding of existing schools, and the construction of new ones. My chief education advisor will lead the group, soliciting from DOE their long-term capital improvement and equipment needs. I’d like this task force to work in concert with the board of education on every issue that affects the facilities and equipment needs of public schools. This is everything from the types of buildings and sports facilities… to the replacement of textbooks with laptops or iPads… even to the possibility of opening school campuses to the community after school hours and on the weekends.

One of the financial solutions we will be pursuing is the EB5 visa program, which I will explain further down. I don’t want public schools to simply be dumping grounds for children who will either learn or fall by the wayside. They must be centers of excellence, places of community engagement, and the foundations for a new economy.

To achieve excellence, it’s also critical that Guam join the country’s push to regain the competitive edge over students of other countries. In 2010, the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development ranked U.S. students 14 out of 34 in reading skills, 17th in science, and 25th in math. Some of the nation’s top experts, teachers and administrators designed a set of education standards for student achievement. States and territories began adopting these standards as uniform benchmarks of success so that we could all share best practices and know that students were being competitive to their global counterparts. This is not a federalized curriculum, but an international race to the top. The propensity for higher student achievement is so great, the top superintendents and school boards and the National Governors Association are encouraging every American community to join in this Common Core State Standards. I encourage the board of education to join suit, adopt the Common Core, and enter Guamanian students into the race to the head of the class.

The most basic principle I carry with me about public education is this: that every child can learn. That every child can succeed. If we do not believe this, then we may as well discard the future of our community to greater poverty and lawlessness.

I’ve seen this belief in the hard work, determination and passion of board members, DOE management, the principals, the teachers, and the parent-teacher organizations. They have tried desperately to change public education… to move and prioritize and maximize resources… to remove bad teachers from the classroom, and keep bad principals from governing a school… to really give students the education they deserve.

I want to recognize my remaining guests in tonight’s report to you. I’ve invited the principals of your children’s public schools to hear the education solutions I am providing. I’d like to ask them to stand and be recognized, for these men and women lead the schools that have been searching for answers from the government for decades.

They, my fellow Guamanians, like you and me, have in their hearts the foremost consideration for students. When they look at the $209 million you’ve invested and budgeted for public schools, they look at every way that money can be used for your child. They even personally buy paper, chalk, notebooks and coloring pencils so that your child can learn and have a chance in this tough world.

My fellow Guamanians, fortunately, the people who care most about your children are the people who spend time with them from Monday to Friday every week in the classroom. Unfortunately, the people who care the most are not the ones in charge of public education decisions.

Senators, we have toyed with the governance of DOE for years. First the governor was supposedly in charge of it. Then the school board.Then the governor. Then back to the school board. Nothing’s changed about who is really in charge of education, though. And it’s not the school board or the superintendent, either. All the major decisions governing the budget, staffing and even the curriculum of public schools is vested in the union by virtue of the contract the government entered with the GFT five years ago.

Teachers, I have a real financial solution to increase your pay. The union has been talking about increasing your pay for years, but they want to do that by increasing the taxes you pay. Money out and money in. That is not a solution for your struggling families.

The solution I offer is real, but can only occur without the constraints of the union contract, which thankfully has expired. Because of that contract, DOE is paying millions of dollars a year for cleaning and supervision services. Why? Because the contract forbids you from performing common-sense work that teachers across the country perform. Think about this. Over $200 million in local funds go to DOE. There are 2,000 locally-funded teachers. If even 75 percent of that money went to pay teachers… and you do the math, that means the average teacher would be paid about $75,000 a year. But they’re not. The average teacher only gets a little more than half of that. The rest of that money is going to pay for union contract mandates. It is the union contract itself that has sapped millions from the budget that should have gone to your pay increases.

Now that the contract is out of the way, I’d like to make a deal directly with principals and teachers. If you take on the duties of cleaning your own classrooms with your students… supervise children in the hallways on a rotational basis… and make sure kids are safe in the cafeteria, the playground and on their arrival and departure from school… in return, your pay will increase collectively by the amount saved within your budget. It will be funded by the reduction of expenses for janitorial and supervisory services that will no longer be needed.

But there’s more to these solutions. We can put more teachers in the classrooms by eliminating unnecessary preparation periods for non-teacher duties, like being a department chair. This currently requires additional teacher hiring to fill the periods of a teacher who is given time off for non-teacher duties. The board of education should do away with this practice and, in exchange, pay teachers more to perform those duties. This will result in a net savings and reduce teacher recruitment needs.

Our students are smart and we have great faculty and administrators. However, we cannot ignore the fact that our overall achievement scores are low and unacceptable. How can we expect students, who are significantly behind the rest of the nation, to catch up if we’re doing the same thing over and over each year? It is time we seriously consider increasing the hours of instruction in a school day, and the number of instructional days in the year. I will support the board in their efforts to challenge the low rankings at the core of the learning problem. We need only look at our Asian neighbors to know that their students, who score higher than U.S. students, are in school longer hours in the day, and more days in the week.

My fellow Guamanians, none of these are new ideas. Parents, teachers, principals and senators have been espousing these solutions for years. Dust off any of DOE’s community-driven planning documents. You’ll see how the people who care most about students were the ones most ready to change the system. But I go back to my original point: the people who care the most are the ones with the least power. The GFT contract left parents, teachers, principals, the superintendent and the board powerless.

I don’t understand why teachers are forbidden from cleaning their own classrooms. Or why teachers can’t keep an eye out on their students in the hallways. Or why a union contract tells the taxpayers of Guam how big a classroom should be.

I want to share with you, my dear people, a little secret that was conveniently kept from you by the union. The board of education took a lot of heat for the closure of F.Q. Sanchez. Sen. Rodriguez and I even publicly advocated for the school to remain open. What wasn’t told to the public was that the ultimate decision to close the school hinged on the union. You see, F.Q. Sanchez, a school of 54 students, had a nurse making $90,000, and four teachers who made a total of $300,000 a year. The board said that if that high-paid nurse could be moved to an overcrowded school, and the teachers were switched out, then the school could remain open. The union never agreed, so it couldn’t happen. Imagine that. The real decision makers on the closure of a public school were not the people you elected to public office, but a handful of power brokers.

Members of the board of education, it is my understanding that you are already being proactive and looking to implement a better contract. Change it and I will support you 100 percent of the way. Make it a contract that gives teachers the benefits they earned, and students the education they deserve. Make the cuts necessary and reinvest the savings into higher pay for public school teachers and more school supplies for students. We can stay within the $200 million funding level and improve education by moving the funding into the classrooms. We can make a real difference by finally having a teacher evaluation policy that is tied to new standards adopted by the board and linked to student performance. Get rid of the current contract that only vests power in a select few union bosses who care little to nothing for the future of Guam’s children. Give the power over education back to those who care most about the students: the parents, the teachers, the principals, and the Department of Education.

Education is the single-greatest weapon against poverty. If we empower educators and parents once again, we can fix the soul of this island at its very depths. We can look at that boy at Sagan Linahyan with hope for his future, rather than despair for his life. We can turn to the teenage girl who lost her dream years ago and tell her there is no dream too big for her.

Indeed, repairing the confidence in her dreams is a lesson for all Guamanians to ponder. At the very heart of these crossroads from which we must chart our course is a decision to walk meekly into the abyss, or to charge forward boldly and with confidence.

Beyond the improvement of services and the fight against poverty is a vision we must imagine together. It is a look through the dark corners, the empty buildings, the ramshackle homes, and the destitution of our present condition… and into the bright lights of bustling streets, the teeming parade of busy Guamanians, and into the prosperity of a people who triumphed over poverty.

What is your vision of the future? What kind of Guam will your children and grandchildren be living in? What does Guam look like in your heart, the Guam you’ve always dreamed about?

Don’t limit yourself, either. Worry not about the improvement of government services that are already on the horizon. Think beyond the present condition and the poverty… even beyond the military buildup and the federal government.

As I looked through the plans for the development of Hagatna, our capital, I began to wonder ‘what happened to our pride in Guam?’ What happened to the greatness we all felt in our hearts for the home of the greatest people on the earth?

We are a great people, yet our capital is no reflection of your greatness. The library is just a concrete box. The streets are dark. The river is dingy and hardly any water runs through it. There is no reason for people to come to our capital, except to go to work and do a little shopping or dining. Hagatna offers no present-day reason for Guamanians to feel proud of their capital. All that is left is nostalgia and a memory of what once was.

The Hagatna of our past was the center of commerce, culture, and the proud seat of government. Naval officers, bishops and governors walked streets lined with homes and businesses. The Chamorro people traded with each other. Historic documents were received at Apra Harbor and taken straight to the Palacio. The night was teeming with dance and song, art and the humanities. The Cathedral was illuminated by candle light deepening our faith. This was once a proud city.

I am happy to report tonight that work has begun to make it a proud city once more… a citadel of providence, built in tribute to our heritage and for the fortune of Guamanians not yet born.

Senators, as I promised you last year, the restoration of the historic legislative hall is scheduled to begin very shortly. An RFP was just yesterday issued to begin the rebuilding of the Plaza de Espana. And with your permission, it is my plan to raze the Department of Administration building and the Hagatna lockup facility across the street, close that road, and rebuild the Palacio.

The plans are more extensive than just that. According to the Hagatna Master Plan, we will be seeking a new land use zoning. This will reconfigure the capital to be a real city that flows from north to south, east to west with Spanish-style architecture… roads, walkways, trails and bikepaths that encourage exercise and the appreciation for scenic vistas… fountains and gardens for students to study, lawyers to work, government officials to meet, visitors to lavish… a library and museum we can be proud of, and a river walk that takes Guamanians through the most historic sites of our island.

The Plaza de Espana will be returned to its former glory, and the Governor’s Office will move back to its centuries-old home, now 68 years since it was destroyed. Skinner Plaza will be lined by cafes and shops, with lofts above for Guamanians who want to live in Hagatna. Vice Speaker Cruz, I very much like your idea of moving the museum to the heart of Hagatna, where it belongs. I have ordered the program managers to reconfigure the plans. Thank you for your partnership in rebuilding Hagatna.

Monuments to our culture will stand where your children and grandchildren will sing, dance, and listen to our culture… and where they will read and write about the arts and humanities. The suffering sounds of our lives today will be but a whisper drowned by the excitement of a new Guam, built by the hands of proud Guamanians.

I also want to thank Sen. Mana Silva Taijeron for pushing this development and for her strong commitment to reviving the heritage of our island.

The next phase of this vision is for the rezoning of the city. After that, the major construction will start. We intend to build the capital, just as we intend to build new schools, using funding we can entice through the EB-5 visa program, among other finance strategies. The concept is simple and proven… and Guam is in the perfect position to use it.

Foreign nationals have incentives from the State Department to enter a U.S. city and invest their capital. My Council of Economic Advisors already is pursuing this avenue. We are the closest U.S. community to the one region of the world with capital to invest: Asia. Ladies and gentlemen, what once was a lofty dream is now an attainable reality.

But this is just one part of our vision. I’ve asked you to imagine Hagatna, now I ask you to imagine Guam.

Two years ago I proposed to the legislature a new concept for Guam. I had some help from an educator and a visionary who believes so deeply in the future of Guam – Senator Aline Yamashita. We called it, “Classrooms to Careers.” Put simply, it is the building of a long-term economic development strategy that has, at its heart, an education system that produces the career workforce and entrepreneurs to build the economy. What we proposed to do was bring the community together to create a vision for Guam that would build a new economy, and prepare our children to build it. What they would build is an island we have never seen before… one we can only imagine.

Now, our government has existed for 62 years. In this time, we’ve been growing, maturing… building foundations and developing this community. What has been missing throughout this time was a strategy that envisioned the Guam of the future and implemented an education system to get us there.

As I thought about this, I remembered the days when my father had spirited debates with Governor Bordallo. The two visionary men sat across from each other to discuss a Guam they each imagined. Four decades ago, my father envisioned a community we are fighting to build today. He said, “The people in Washington have to be made to realize that they should either expect us to continue asking for handouts or allow us to do the things that will help make us self-sufficient.” And two decades before the pullout at Subic, and nearly four decades before Washington and Japan announced the military buildup, like an oracle he said, “It’s costing the U.S. $500 million a year to maintain its bases in the Philippines. Why should the military be where it isn’t wanted when it can be on U.S. soil in Guam for free?”

Four decades ago, who could have imagined the prospects of a military buildup? Or, through those spectacles, who saw the Guam that Governor Bordallo imagined? Beyond the roads, the schools and the affordable homes, who saw the vision of prosperous Guamanians the way Ricky Bordallo saw them?

The critics, of course, they scoffed. They said Carlos Camacho was out of his mind for thinking that Japanese tourists would vacation on Guam. They said Ricky Bordallo wanted to build all these roads that no one would drive on, and all these schools that we couldn’t afford. And the critics said the military would never pull out of Subic, much less build up on Guam. Dreamers. The critics laughed at these men and called them dreamers. Thankfully, they kept dreaming and they went to work to see those dreams come true.

On this night, thousands of years after the ancient Chamorros built it, where does our proa sail? In the dark waters that connect continents in turmoil and pain, under the lunar light and the stars, what path do we give the flying proa?

It is not enough to repair what is broken. It is insufficient to improve services, or to simply win the fight against poverty and crime. We have to give our children and grandchildren much more than that.

For some reason, we have questioned our strength and our place in this world. We’ve looked to others to help us build a future they can make for us. We’ve lacked confidence in what we can do. So we set the proa to roam without any coordinates. We allowed it to chart the oceans for pirates and carpetbaggers to navigate.

From what I know of the Guamanian people, we are not drifters, nor are we afraid to shine. It is time for this government to see the spark beneath the hearts of every Guamanian. It is time for us to chart our own course with courage and confidence.

After decades of searching elsewhere for the answers, it is time we realize that the answers are within us. Tonight, the proa comes back home.

Last December I began a partnership with Dr. Robert Underwood, and we formed a small steering committee of my advisors, academic professionals, young entrepreneurs and senators. We gave them a charge. We took the Classrooms to Careers program and more appropriately named it, IMAGINE Guam.

It’s all about planning. It’s about knowing what we want in the future, and building it through homegrown talent… Guamanians, your children, who want to work and who want to own their jobs. This is about a future that they can build for themselves, but that can only happen if we set the vision now and give them the education to get there.

We will be bringing the most innovative thinkers from every corner of our economy and community together over the next few months. Joining us will be experts in government, business development and technology from the region and the world. Together, limited only by the steadfast values of our culture, we will build aneconomic and community forecast of Guam that takes us into the middle of this century. Our success in tourism and the certainty of Armed Forces buildup in Guam and the Pacific will give us a clearer picture of the possibilities. While these are anchoring components of our economy, I want us to think well beyond that. It is not enough for us to have tourism and the military buildup control our economy. We must be the ones guiding how this growth can simply provide forward momentum on a fly wheel we can steer together… because, my dear people, the possibilities are so much greater. Imagine it.

What do you see when you think of Guam 20, 40, 50 years from now? Is it the same place, or have we overcome our poverty? Will you be paying your power bill to GPA, or will your home harness electricity from the sun through solar panels on your roof? Will there be more cars on the road, or will we have mass transit freeways? Will we build more concrete boxes and invade more green space, or will we live and work in towers surrounded by parks and fountains? What industries will drive our economy, and who will drive these industries?

Each of you has an idea, something to contribute. Collectively, we can imagine Guam far into the future, and then start building our way toward that vision. That is exactly what I will be asking of you in the months ahead.

To start this process, in the coming days, I will be bringing together the program managers of every master plan currently in place in the government. It makes no sense that these plans move forward without any connection to the other. Every plan from the GPA and GWA master plans to Port Modernization to Transportation 2030 will be overlaid. From here, we can determine where certain projects stymie the progress of others, and where there are duplications. We can also see where there are gaps.

This activity will give us an illustration of what our island will look like once all these projects are done. We’ll know where all the potential for infrastructure is. We’ll be able to see the chokepoints and sense the investment opportunities.

Once that is done, we will have an honest assessment of the Guam we’ve envisioned already for the next 10 to 15 years. But that’s just a physical assessment.

I want to know from you what you’ve always imagined Guam to be. The IMAGINE Guam project is premised upon the collective imagination of Guamanians. What are the values that we hold dear? Entitlement is a new phenomenon in our society, but will we allow it to continue? What will tourism look like? What can we get out of this military buildup? How strong can our other industries be? What new industries can Guamanians build? What kind of health system will we have, and how do we keep crime low? What new infrastructure, beyond all the plans we have now, do we need to sustain the new economy?

As these questions are answered and the vision becomes more clear, the elected leadership will need to take a good look at all the laws on the books. Based on the community’s vision, we will throw away old mandates and restructure government so that it works for this vision.

At the end of this first part of IMAGINE Guam will be the strategy for a Guam we have never seen before. The illustration will be inspiring. As I imagine it, Guam will be the commercial treasure between east and west. She will be the economic capital of this region. Her economy will be teeming with new industries, fueled by green energy and more technology made right here at home. Within her shores will be storefront and corporate signs that bare the names of your children. But, that’s just what’s in my imagination. It could be much stronger with yours as well.

The single most important question that will be answered by this process is this: How will we build the Guam of our collective imagination?

It is a simple answer that takes a very large investment. It is an investment I am willing to make, and that I am sure Guamanians are willing to make as well. The Japanese did it. So did the Koreans, the Singaporeans, and the Taiwanese.

They took their economic visions and poured their investments into the development of human capital. Our Asian neighbors mapped out their economy, then they invested into education systems that produced workers and entrepreneurs who would build these communities.

Education is the answer.

This is what we need at this very point in our development. Parents throughout this island need hope that there is a future for their children. They want doors to open for their kids… and on the other side of those doors, there has to be opportunity that they are prepared to seize. We need the children in today’s classrooms to drive the economy and community of the future.

Through the IMAGINE Guam plan, we will develop a vision of Guam as a community, then develop and sustain an education system that will implement the vision. Education is the key to the success of this vision. Our entire focus should be on the output of classrooms. The goal for every child in both public and private schools must be that every child leaves high school prepared for college and prepared for work. Collectively, that is a strong workforce that will build the new industries and strengthen the existing ones. It is a bold concept, but one that has worked for the only region of the world that is growing at this moment. It will take a true investment in education, not the year-to-year increase in education budgets we have now... but, a real investment into classrooms and curricula that will make the difference for the next generation of Guamanians in classrooms right now.

Some of you may find it hard to believe that I am now, through all of our present troubles, challenging Guam to dream this big… to compete against the biggest economies and the smartest children of the globe. I ask you, do you honestly believe the low test scores of today’s Guamanian students is the result of their inability to achieve, or of our failure to guide them? Answer honestly. At the heart of that answer is your personal belief that either young Guamanians are stupid or that our generation has been failing them. I happen to believe that the children of Guam are smart, and they are yearning to burst into the world brighter and more prepared than anyone else to lead the future. From the poor boy at Sagan Linahyan to the teenager living with disabilities… from the daughter of impoverished farmers to the son of immigrants to the orphan who has not known love in years… every child on this island is destined to break free from what has been holding us back. What they need is our guiding hand and our confidence. They need our vision and our commitment to educate them into that future.

When I think about the future and I imagine what Guam will be, I am always tempted to think of the children I’ve met on my tours of schools like J.Q. San Miguel, Merizo Martyrs and Machanaonao Elementary. Twenty years from now, I see their faces at the head of board rooms at the top floor of scenic Hagatna towers they built. I see them competing with banks in Tokyo and with investors on Wall Street. Thirty years from now they are producing technology that the folks in Silicon Valley purchase. Fifty years from now, their children’s names are on the patents of inventions millions of people around the world use. They will be healthy and safe. They will be immersed so deeply in the arts and humanities, so that in every corner of every village of Guam is the song of the great and prosperous Guamanian, ever so confident to charge into whatever future they can imagine.

It starts with us. It’s about having that courage and confidence in ourselves again.

Last year I went to Beijing to bring money and job opportunities back to Guam. The National Governors Association had me stay at the Shangri-la, which is the tallest and most prestigious building in China’s capital. In the hotel, a young man came up to me and introduced himself.

He was the chef de cuisine, the executive chef of the most prestigious hotel in all of China. And he said his name is Ryan Sablan Dadufalza, familian Chode, a proud Guamanian of Chamorro and Filipino ancestry.

I thought, ‘wow,’ of the billions of Chinese and the millions of Americans, here was a Guamanian in charge of the restaurant staff of the fanciest plaza in the largest country of the world. He didn’t think he’d ever make it this far in life, but he tried. He had a dream, and the confidence to see that dream come true.

I also have a personal story about confidence and courage.

About 26 years ago, I walked into the record department at Town House, and I saw the most beautiful woman I’ve ever seen. I didn’t think I stood a chance. Our eyes met and I wondered for the next two months whether she saw anything in me.

After those two months I was with my friend, Tony, at the Captain’s Table… and there she was, singing in the band. I asked Tony, “Who’s that beautiful girl with the thick black hair and the big brown eyes?” and he said he knew her. I said, “Dude, introduce me!”

I didn’t think he’d actually do it. He brought me up to her after the set and I didn’t know what to do. My palms started sweating, and I was shaking, and I really didn’t want to be rejected.

At the final seconds of our encounter, I gathered up all my courage and confidence, and I asked her for a dance. She said yes, and 26 years later, we just welcomed our first grandchild into this world.

If I didn’t muster up the courage, and have that confidence 26 years ago… then my great love would have slipped away… and I’d be a shadow of the man I am today.

All of us have our own personal stories of confidence when fate met love. All together, as Guamanians, our great love is Guam. We must all be confident and courageous… take her hand and build a future together. There will be some pitfalls along the way, but it will be a journey filled with strength and prosperity… pride and hard work to give our children something greater than we ever had. Have confidence and imagine the possibilities.

Why not? Who said we are so defined by our present troubles that we have no right to imagine the Guam we all see in our minds and in our hearts? Who among us is not filled with an unexplainable pride when we put our hands to our hearts to sing out loud, “Fanhogge Chamorro!” “Stand ye Guamanians!” Who among us does not capture in her mind the beauty of Guam we imagine for our children? Who among us does not ignite the light in his beating heart for an island that shines with possibilities we never had? Join me. Stand up with courage and confidence and fight for that future for all of our children! Let us be that generation that gave them everything from nothing! Join me to build the Guam, where every sunrise is more golden than the one before. If we allow that light to shine, then this island will glow brighter than any star in the sky, sparkling with the confidence of the great and proud Guamanian people.

Thank you, Si Yu’us Ma’ase, Maraming Salamat Po, and good night.

Frente Polisario holds UN responsible for the human rights abuses in occupied Western Sahara

2012-02-03T14:13:00.001-04:00

Sahara Press Service

Shaheed Al Hafed (refugee camps),- The Frente Polisario held Saturday the United Nations Organization the responsibility of the flagrant violations of human rights committed by Morocco against the Saharawi citizens in the occupied territories of Western Sahara, following the bloody events that accompanied the military trail of Gdeim Izik political detainees, which was scheduled for Jan 13, 2012.

Office of the Polisario National Secretariat expressed, in a communiqué issued Saturday, its strong condemnation and denunciation to the operations of brutal repression perpetuated by the Moroccan occupation authorities against the defenseless Saharawi citizens, who are peacefully protesting the farce of taking civilians and human rights activists to military trail.

The Office called on the UN to immediately intervene to protect the Saharawi civilians, establish a UN-mechanism to protect human rights and report about it, reveal the fate of more than 651 Saharawi missing, end the Moroccan looting to the Saharawi natural resources and eradicate the military wall that divided Western Sahara Territories, land and people.

It also called for the release of all the Saharawi political prisoners, without conditions, and to stop the unfair and arbitrary delays that exceeded more than 14 months without trial.

It is noteworthy that the Saharawi masses in occupied El Aaiun has subjected to violent interventions by the Moroccan occupation forces leaving dozens Saharawi injured, after they organized Friday a sit-in to demand that the charges fabricated against Gdeim Izik political detainees being dropped, according to a source of the Ministry of Occupied Territories and Communities Abroad. (SPS)

090/089/TRA

U.S. territories, Hawaii seek exemption to U.S. Maritime Laws

2012-02-01T13:03:00.000-04:00

U.S. Virgin Islands only dependency exempt from onerous shipping restrictions

Shippers seeking exemption from Jones Act requirement

BY THERESE HART

Marianas Variety

Guam, Hawaii, Alaska and Puerto Rico are facing a dilemma of aging deep draft ships that are on average more than 28 years old, because federal maritime laws require vessels engaged in the noncontiguous trades to be built in the United States, where costs are very high, Michael N. Hansen, president of the Hawaii Shippers Council, stated in a position paper obtained by Variety.

Because of this U.S. mandate, “the prohibitively high cost of construction at the major shipbuilding yards on the United States mainland nearly precludes all new ship orders,” he wrote.

This situation has resulted in an aging non-contiguous trade fleet of oceangoing deep draft ships, making ship replacement a critical economic issue for the noncontiguous jurisdictions.

The Variety contacted Guam Delegate Madeleine Z. Bordallo for a comment. She said: “There is a broad coalition of interests that support an American Maritime fleet that is American-flagged and American-crewed. This coalition includes labor unions, such as the seafarers and longshoremen, as well as national security groups who argue that an American merchant fleet is important to national security. This is the environment that we must consider in any effort to repeal the Jones Act, or more realistically, to carve out an exception for Guam. We are always watching for an opportunity to raise this issue in legislation. Further, many of our friends in Congress who share our interest in promoting a strong defense posture in the Pacific would oppose our efforts to exempt Guam from the Jones Act. The dynamic has not been conducive to a Jones Act exemption, as there is a greater emphasis in this current economic climate on protecting American jobs, as opposed to outsourcing jobs to foreigners. We are always mindful of efforts by stakeholders or the other territories that may give us an opening for changes to current law.”

Jones Act

The navigation laws of the U.S., popularly known as the Jones Act, require that vessels transporting cargo and passengers between domestic points must be U.S.-flagged, U.S.-crewed, U.S.-owned, and U.S.-built. These requirements pertain to all the domestic noncontiguous jurisdictions with the single exception of the application of the U.S.-build requirement to Guam, Hansen said.

Although exempt from the U.S.-build requirement, Guam obtains very little advantage from this more liberal provision of the law. This is primarily because the westbound domestic container trade to Guam depends on its linkage with Hawaii, which requires U.S.-built ships.

The Jones Act requirements most acutely affect the domestic noncontiguous jurisdictions because they have no surface transportation alternatives to ocean shipping, Hansen wrote.

In comparison, on the contiguous United States, railroad, inland barge, pipeline and road truck carriages are readily available. The high cost of domestic ship construction coupled with the availability of these alternatives has resulted in a limited number of oceangoing ships (as opposed to tugs and barges) engaged in the domestic coastal and inter-coastal trades.

“The ability to access new ships at a reasonable cost profoundly affects the capacity of ship operators to provide shipping services. Clearly, the acquisition cost of a ship is a key component of any shipping company’s capital structure. However, it is also essential for operators to regularly replace their fleets at realistic intervals with technically modern ships at internationally competitive prices,” Hansen argued.

In the future, if it becomes necessary to substantially replace the oceangoing noncontiguous fleet within the current restrictions of the Jones Act, much higher freight rates would be required to justify constructing the ships in the U.S., Hansen warned.

The Independence option being seriously weighed for Scotland

2012-01-31T13:39:00.000-04:00

Hugo Young Lecture

First Minister Alex Salmond

Hugo Young Lecture

'Scotland’s Place in the World'

Guardian’s Kings Cross office, London

January 24, 2012

________________________

It is a privilege to give a lecture in honour of Hugo Young. At Hugo’s memorial service, Chris, now Lord, Patten said “the quality of what Hugo wrote, and the standards he set for himself and others, brought distinction to a profession too often demeaned by tawdry unreason."

One of the reasons for Hugo’s excellence became evident five years after his death, when The Hugo Young Papers were first published. They revealed the sheer diligence and accuracy of his working methods over the course of his career.

As any self-respecting politician would do, the first thing I did when I saw a copy of the papers was to look up my own name in the index. In more than 800 pages it only features once! But the context in which it appears is fascinating, and now seems very prescient. It is during a discussion with Donald Dewar in May 1996, in which Hugo reports Donald as saying “People should not underestimate how fragile the Union now is in Scotland. He was surprisingly emphatic about that, when I pushed him to correct his sepulchral language. The SNP regularly got 25% in the polls. That was about their standard support across the country. But it could grow.”

Donald went on to predict that Labour would do well in 1997, but suggested that I was waiting for the 2001 election, when there could well be a significant increase in SNP support.

Well, although that statement was partly wrong about timings, support for the SNP has indeed advanced, both in 2007 and 2011.

My view is that the election result in 2011, in particular, reflected a recognition of the achievements of the first SNP administration; a vote of confidence in its optimistic view of Scotland’s potential; and a desire among people in Scotland for their Parliament to have significantly greater powers than at present.

That desire for greater powers is, of course, a key part of the context to this lecture. The future of Scotland is for Scotland alone to determine, but I recognise that it is of great interest – and potentially concern - to all of you. I therefore welcome the opportunity to speak about it here in London.

I count myself as a staunch Anglophile. It was my Labour predecessor, bafflingly, who seemed to spend an entire World Cup supporting teams playing against England. I am sure Trinidad and Tobago welcomed his support!

The views of people here have understandably not played much of a part so far in the debate on Scotland’s future. I am reminded of Chesterton’s reference to “the people of England who never have spoken yet”. Of course the people of Scotland haven’t spoken yet, at least not conclusively!

England does not have any veto in the debate on independence, and I suspect that the vast bulk of the people of England freely recognise Scotland’s right to determine its own future. This week’s research from the Institute for Public Policy Research certainly suggests that people in England are waking up to the unsustainability of current constitutional arrangements. They are not sustainable because they are not fair. Not fair to Scotland, and not fair to England. Most importantly, these relationships will be more positive and stronger when our nations are clear and equal partners.

Scottish government’s right to hold a referendum

Given the events of the last two weeks, I want to start this evening by reaffirming the Scottish Parliament’s right to decide the terms of a referendum on Scotland’s constitutional future. But I also want to move beyond that question, to say more about why I believe that independence is the most natural state of affairs for a nation like Scotland. And I will close by making it clear that the social union which binds the people of these islands will endure long after the political union has been ended. My contention is that independence is good for Scotland, but also that it is good for England.

First, though, I want to reflect on the astonishing, and increasing, pace of change in Scotland. Devolution took a century to be delivered. The last decade embedded the Scottish Parliament as the focal point of public life and Scottish democracy. We now have a Scotland Bill changing by the day and overtaken by events before it even reaches the statute book. The momentum and direction of the people of Scotland is unmistakable.

It is therefore right that in 2014, people in Scotland should have the opportunity to vote on whether to become independent.

During the 2011 Holyrood election campaign I made two key commitments in relation to the constitution. I promised that in the first half of any new SNP administration, we would work with the UK Government to strengthen the Scotland Bill to give it economic teeth and powers.

My second commitment was that we would legislate for a referendum having made constructive proposals, and hopefully secured additional powers, during the Scotland Bill process, we would then stage a referendum on independence in the second half of the Scottish Parliament’s five year term.

These commitments were endorsed overwhelmingly by the Scottish people, and I consider them binding.

The argument currently being adopted by some people –people who have always opposed a referendum full stop - that because independence is such an important issue, a referendum should be rushed, simply does not stand up to scrutiny. It is precisely because independence is important that we intend all stages of the process leading up to a referendum - from the consultation on its enabling legislation to the referendum campaign itself - to take place over a timescale which allows the Scottish people to reach an informed decision.

The further argument that Scotland’s economy is being damaged by a supposed delay does not resonate with voters in Scotland who in the last year have seen Amazon, Michelin, Dell, Gamesa, and Aveloq, among others, announce major investments.

As the Financial Times said two weeks ago Westminster’s “pretext for accelerating the poll – that uncertainty is damaging the economy – looks disingenuous at best. As threats go, the risks posed by separatism are as a fleabite compared with the all-devouring Eurozone crisis.”

This has been endorsed by the great arbiter of accuracy in current UK politics - the Channel 4 fact check - which pointed out that international inward investment is now more successful in Scotland than any other parts of these islands, including London.

In addition to dictating on timescales, the UK Government also appears to want to close off discussion about other key elements of the referendum. As someone who strongly believes that independence would be preferable to enhanced devolution, I believe that the argument for independence could and would be won on a yes/no basis.

However I recognise that there is a significant strand of opinion in the country which might want to consider an alternative for Scotland which lies between the status quo and outright independence.

To consider an additional referendum question which takes account of popular opinion is simply being democratic. The fact that such an option might be popular isn’t a good reason for denying people the right to choose it.

The Scottish Government’s consultation paper on a referendum, which will be published tomorrow, will encourage a wide debate on this issue - involving all of Scotland’s political parties, but crucially also civic Scotland, that is the organisations and communities which make up the fabric of the community of the realm of Scotland.

The paper will also make clear that we intend the referendum to be overseen, impartially and independently, in a way which leaves no possible room for doubt about the integrity of the result.

But our starting point in all of this is that the Scottish Parliament ultimately has the mandate to determine the referendum process. Westminster legislation which dictates rather than enables would not just be unacceptable to the Scottish government. It would be contrary to the rights of the people of Scotland.

Why independence is the best option for Scotland

The Scottish National Party will campaign confidently for independence not just as an end in itself, but as the means by which the Scottish economy can grow more strongly and sustainably; by which Scotland can take its rightful place as a responsible member of the world community; and by which the Scottish people can best fulfil their potential and realise their aspirations.

For much of the postwar period, people in Scotland largely embraced the great social reforms which were implemented by Clement Atlee’s government and sustained through much of the 1950s, 60s and 70s. National insurance, housing for all and the establishment of a national health service commanded a consensus which spanned political boundaries and national borders.

There is a view that some of these postwar institutions – perhaps the NHS above all - fostered a sense of cohesion and common purpose among the people of these islands. Professor Tom Devine, for example, has expressed the view that in the postwar period the welfare state became “the real anchor of the union state”.

I am not sure that the welfare state was, in truth, ever a direct consequence of the union. As the Nordic countries show very clearly, common aims in social policy do not require a common state. But it probably is the case that Scotland subscribed particularly strongly to the values of the post-war consensus.

There is a revealing account in The Hugo Young Papers of a discussion with John Smith in which Smith “volunteered with pride that Scotland had always been consensual… that there was this sense of community unriven by so much class segregation, without seeming to see that this made his English task possibly harder.”

I don’t want to press this argument too far. The disparities in life expectancy between different parts of Scotland, for example, are just one piece of evidence demonstrating that Scotland still needs to do far more to reduce inequality.

But John Smith’s basic point, that egalitarianism, is a strong driving force in public life in Scotland, is undoubtedly true.

It is why we recognise that some forms of social protection work very well, and that the constant urge to ‘reform’ can be, in the wrong hands, code for attack.

It is why policies which exacerbate inequality and remove basic safety nets are always likely to encounter fierce opposition in Scotland.

And it is why anyone who accepted the union partly because of the compassionate values and inclusive vision of the post-war welfare state, may now be less keen on being part of a union whose government is in many respects eroding those values and destroying that vision.

When I was in Liverpool last year for an appearance on “Question Time”, I got an extraordinary, warm response from the studio. Perhaps the strongest support I got was when I made a plea to the audience not to let the three biggest Westminster parties destroy England’s National Health Service – just one of many issues where the Westminster class are out of touch with the people of England.

And looking at the problems of health reform now, I thank the heavens that Westminster’s writ no longer runs in Scotland on health issues. But the looming issues of welfare reform exemplify why Scotland needs the powers to make our own policies to meet our own needs and values.

The Scottish Government’s policies attempt to protect many values which would be dear to any post-war social democrat in these isles. For example, we have promoted what we call a living wage - £7.20 an hour.

And we have made a conscious decision to provide certain core universal services, rights or benefits, some of which are no longer prioritised by political leaders elsewhere – such as free university tuition, free prescriptions, free personal care for the elderly and a guarantee of no compulsory redundancies across the public sector.

We do this because we believe that such services benefit the common weal. They provide a sense of security, well-being and equity within communities. Such a sense of security is essential to a sense of confidence – and as we have seen over the last three years, confidence is essential to economic growth.

And the social wage also sets out our offer for people who want to live in Scotland, regardless of their background. We will provide a secure, stable and inclusive society. And by doing so we will encourage their talent and ambition. Scotland will be a place where people want to visit, invest, work and live.

Achieving this has required some difficult decisions – for example major departmental efficiency savings – far more rigorous than those in Whitehall - and an effective freeze in public sector pay. But those are easier to implement if your policies clearly have fairness at their heart.

The social wage exemplifies one reason why people in Scotland want additional powers for their Parliament – the fact that they largely like what we have done with the powers that we already have.

An obvious example would be Scotland’s introduction of the smoking ban. The smoking ban was suggested by an SNP MSP, initially resisted by the Labour/Liberal administration, then adopted.

It didn’t take a generation, a decade or even a year for the people to see they had made the right decision – it took a month or two. Everyone abided by the new law, people adapted, and now nobody would choose to go back.

There are other examples of how even the constrained ability of Scotland to make independent decisions has had a beneficial effect on wider policy debates. We are currently championing minimum pricing for alcohol, a policy which may be copied elsewhere. And we have established the Scottish Futures Trust, as a way of promoting long-term infrastructure investment without resorting to the wastefulness of PFI. The UK Government’s current call for evidence on infrastructure investment options suggests that it is interested in aspects of the Scottish Future Trust’s approach.

This innovation benefits Scotland – which can respond to specific Scottish problems and circumstances. But it also benefits the rest of the UK, and potentially the wider world, by providing a precedent for policies which other countries can then either adopt or not.

An independent Scotland could be a beacon for progressive opinion south of the border and further afield – addressing policy challenges in ways which reflect the universal values of fairness – and are capable of being considered, adapted and implemented according to the specific circumstances and wishes within the other jurisdictions of these islands and beyond.

That, I believe, is a far more positive and practical Scottish contribution to progressive policy than sending a tribute of Labour MPs to Westminster to have the occasional turn at the Westminster tiller – particularly in the circumstances of the Labour opposition’s policy increasingly converging with that of the coalition on the key issues of the economy and public spending.

In passing, can I reflect that Labour might be doing better with English opinion if they were to consider offering an alternative rather than a substitute for current policies.

The problem with Scotland’s current constitutional settlement is that we cannot innovate as much as we would like. Policy choices made in Westminster, by parties whose democratic mandate in Scotland is negligible, are constraining the policy choices made in Scotland, for which there is an unequivocal mandate.

It is worth remembering that in 1999 comparatively few additional powers were granted to the parliament in Scotland that had not previously been devolved to the Secretary of State for Scotland.

The shift from administrative to legislative devolution was, of course, momentous in itself. But it still left Scotland with fewer powers than the German Lander, most American states, parts of Spain such as the Basque Country or Catalonia, or, within these islands, the Isle of Man.

The economy is currently where this is felt most deeply. In Scotland, my party’s manifesto for last year’s election made it clear that the economy would be a top priority for us. We are still deeply aware, as are many places in England and Wales, of the lasting damage done by the mass unemployment of the 1980s, which left a legacy of alienation, ill-health and hopelessness which endured long after economic recovery had taken hold.

For that reason, the Scottish Government has given a guarantee to all 16-19 year olds of a training opportunity or education place for those not in a job.

We are also doing everything we can to safeguard capital investment in Scotland, while the UK Government is slashing public investment in real terms by about a third between 2010-11 and 2014-15.

This “Plan MacB”, as I call it, is endorsed by our Council of Economic Advisers. The Scottish Government knows that it does not have a monopoly of wisdom on economic policy, so we have appointed a council of advisers including Professor Joseph Stiglitz, Professor Frances Ruane and Professor Sir James Mirrleas to advise on our economic strategy.

But however careful we are at directing spending towards areas which protect welfare and promote economic growth, we cannot escape the consequences of the UK Government’s macro-economic policies.

Nobody denies that the UK Government’s budget deficit needs to be tackled. However the sheer scale of the austerity measures decided upon by the UK Government is proving counter-productive - particularly in the cuts to capital spending.

It doesn’t require a Nobel laureate in economics to understand that it is difficult to sustain an economic recovery on export-led growth when your major export market is enduring significant problems.

If there is a double dip recession, and that is at best a risk it will not only be the fault of the Eurozone – it will be something which Westminster has helped to manufacture by not adjusting policy quick enough to meet changing circumstances.

But we still see regular assertions that Scotland would be weaker or more impoverished if it were independent. Many of these statements are straightforward scare stories. For example, sources close to the Chancellor of the Exchequer warned that an independent Scotland would not be allowed to use the pound.

Of course the interesting thing about these suggestions is not just that they are economically illiterate – since sterling is a fully tradeable currency, the UK Government has absolutely no power to stop an independent Scotland from using it. But more importantly, why would any sensible person wish to stop England and Scotland sharing a currency.

Sunday’s Scottish Daily Mail reported William Hague as threatening that if Scotland became independent, British embassies would no longer promote Scotch whisky. That I think was scraping the bottom of the cask.

Incidentally, for the Foreign Secretary’s benefit, he should know that receptions to promote Scotch whisky or any other goods at British embassies are charged by the foreign office! But I rather suspect that the whisky industry would in any case get by without the promotional efforts of the British foreign service. If I could adapt an old Scots ditty –

“how nice it would be

if the whisky was free

and the embassies full up to the brim.”

And the Daily Mirror tried to argue that if Scotland voted for independence, the Edinburgh Zoo pandas might somehow be seized by the UK Government. I can tell you that I have decided to grant Tian Tian and Yang Guang political asylum, while reflecting of course that the UK government did not contribute a single RMB to the cost of the pandas’ arrival in our capital city.

I hear occasionally from the Prime Minister how he is just about to make a positive case for the union. On the evidence of the last two weeks, I think it is still on the drawing board.

Fearmongering about constitutional change is nothing new. But it is disappointing to see such an approach being adopted – therefore, as an antidote and a counterpoint, may I attempt to present independence for Scotland in a way which is positive about Scotland and positive about England.

Firstly, I question the credibility of the current set of UK leaders as far as the people of the country are concerned. I have here the leadership ratings of messrs Cameron, Clegg and Miliband according to the Sunday Times Yougov poll. According to this, their popularity stands at minus 22%, minus 59% and minus 70% respectively in Scotland. That minus 70% for Miliband included 81% who thought he was doing well and 11 % who thought he was doing badly. These are all dismal assessments of UK political leaders in Scotland and it is true that in each case they are worse than the UK figure.

However it is also true that the UK figure for the leaders of the Conservative, Liberal and Labour parties are also all in negative territory. I am told that today, given the ICM poll, that the Guardian was bought by more Tory MPs than at any time in the paper’s history. But they should reflect on the fact that this does not mean that the Prime Minister is popular, merely that he is less unpopular than the others.

The unpopularity of Westminster leaders in Scotland is largely based on their hamfisted interventions in the debate on Scotland’s future. Their unpopularity in England is based on their inability, in these tough times, to present a positive vision for the future of England.

Talking down to a country is never a good idea, and failure to present a positive vision to a country is always a bad idea.

In truth, it is absurd to suggest that an independent Scotland would struggle to make its own way economically. On current figures, we would have the 6^th highest per capita GDP in the OECD as an independent nation - the UK currently ranks 15^th, and, incidentally, would still rank 15^th without Scotland.

As Norway, Sweden and New Zealand demonstrate, many small nations are coping better with the financial crisis than many larger ones, such as the UK, Italy or Spain. But all Western nations, large and small, have been affected.

What independence would do is to give us the tools– corporation tax, for example, or alcohol excise duty - which we could use to get on with the job of promoting recovery and improving people’s lives.

In international relations, too, Scotland would benefit from a voice of its own. In Europe, perhaps the defining theme of Hugo Young’s journalism, the recent veto used by David Cameron has significantly weakened the UK’s reputation and influence, for few evident benefits.

When Jose Manuel Barroso delivered this lecture in 2006, he posed the question of whether the United Kingdom in Europe wanted to “shape a positive agenda... or return to sulking from the periphery?” The recent answer provided by UK Government actions is probably not the one that he had in mind.

Scotland as an independent nation would play an active and responsible role in the international community – contributing on issues where it could, such as climate change, but without delusions of grandeur. Climate change provides an interesting example. The Scottish Parliament achieved legislative competence for climate change by accident. Part of Donald Dewar’s genius in devising the Scotland Bill was to specify what was reserved rather than what was devolved. Climate change was not seen as an issue worthy of being reserved in 1997 and so it ended up devolved. But the Scottish Parliament’s world-leading climate change Act - passed unanimously in the last parliament - has shown that a parliament trusted with the big issues can rise spectacularly to the occasion.

I don’t agree with the counsel of despair that some on the English left have of their prospects for mobilising support on an English basis. As already said, the effect of privatisation of the health service is just as unpopular in England as it would be in Scotland, while the illegal war in Iraq was resisted by English opinion just as it was by Scottish opinion. Indeed, as people will know and understand, I have never had much time for the former prime minister, Tony Blair, largely because of the war in Iraq. However before he got carried away into believing that Britain’s role in the world was to ride shotgun on the Deadwood Stage, he did, in 1997, sweep a commanding majority in England on the hope of progressive reform and mobilised opinion in this country in a way which neither Neil Kinnock or John Smith ever truly managed.

Endurance of the “social union” between Scotland and the rest of the UK

Much of what I have spoken about relates to differences between Scotland and the rest of the United Kingdom. That is, perhaps, inevitable in making the case for independence. But I want to stress also the areas of common interest which will endure after independence.

Current constitutional arrangements mean that policy differences sometimes inevitably become squabbles – especially if they involve money or constitutional issues. In fact, we have seen quite a lot of evidence of that in the last two weeks!

Andrew Fletcher of Saltoun addressed the Scottish Parliament in 1706, before it was adjourned- for some three hundred years.

He observed that: "All nations are dependent; the one upon the many. This much we know.”

But he also warned that if "the greater must always swallow the lesser," we are all diminished. The argument would be that incorporation can foster resentment and grievance. Independence encourages mutual respect.

Independence for Scotland would still leave us free to work together in the many areas where we do share common values and interests.

The most meaningful bonds between the countries of these islands have rarely, in truth, been about the 650 MPs at Westminster. Indeed, it has always seemed to me to be deeply ironic that right of centre parties base so much of their unionism on the taxing and spending powers of the Westminster parliament.

If Scotland becomes independent, it will continue to share close ties with its neighbouring countries. Some will be institutional. Scotland will continue to share a monarchy with England, Wales and Northern Ireland. Some will be cultural – Scots will still discuss Eastenders, watch the X-Factor and enjoy the Grand National and Wimbledon- particularly once Andy Murray gets round to winning it.

Some will be economic. We will continue to trade freely within the European Union, and people will still move job from Manchester to Glasgow and back again. And some will be practical. At the height of last year’s riots, for example, Scottish police sent officers to help the police forces down here in England. During last year’s water crisis in Northern Ireland, Scotland sent hundreds of thousands of litres to Northern Ireland. That level of co-operation would continue, because it’s the sort of thing that good neighbours do.

The British Irish Council already provides a model of how all of the people of these islands can work together on issues of shared interest. Earlier this month, in Dublin, we discussed youth employment. The British Irish Council currently includes two independent states, three devolved governments and three island groups. Does anyone here believe that the Council would look massively different with three independent states rather than two?

The Nordic Council provides another, similar model of a forum where neighbouring countries gather to co-operate with each other. And in the European Union, on the many occasions when Scotland agrees with the rest of the UK, we will have greater collective influence, and more votes, operating as two nations rather than one.

On areas from energy grids to emergency policing requirements; from fisheries policy to defence co-operation; from telecommunications to transport links; Scotland will work with its neighbours for a common good.

But most of all, in addition to these institutional, cultural, economic and practical links, Scotland shares ties of family and friendship with its neighbours on these islands which never can be obsolete, and which I expect will continue and flourish after Scottish independence.

And when you consider our shared economic interests, our cultural ties, our many friendships and family relationships, one thing becomes clear. After Scotland becomes independent, we will share more than a monarchy and a currency. We will share a social union. It just won’t be the same as a restrictive state, which no longer serves the interests of either Scotland or England.

When the Her Majesty the Queen visited Ireland last year, she spoke warmly of the ties between the United Kingdom and Ireland and stated that these “make us so much more than just neighbours, (they make us firm friends and equal partners.”

I like the phrase “firm friend and equal partner”. It will be true of Scotland too.

My ambition is for Scotland to enter the global community of nations – and to participate in that community on a basis of equality, responsibility and friendship. We won’t have a nuclear deterrent. But that is not the sort of power we seek – we seek only the power to make a positive contribution to the world, and to improve the wellbeing of our people.

When the United Nations was founded, it had just 51 member countries. Now there are almost 200. As recently as 1990, Europe had 35 countries – now it has 50. Of the 27 countries which currently make up the EU, six of them did not exist as independent states before 1990. The current United Kingdom, as an incorporating union, where one nation will always prevail simply by virtue of its size, seems increasingly like an anachronism in the modern age. And independence – with the right to participate as an equal on the international stage – appears more and more like Scotland’s normal and natural state of being.

I quoted GK Chesterton, a quintessentially English writer, earlier. I hope you will understand – especially given the date – that I want to close by quoting Scotland’s bard, Robert Burns - nationalist and internationalist.

I thought of a number of possibilities – for example his timeless description of the multi-party UK government of his day –

“yon mixtie-maxtie queer hotch-potch,

The Coalition"!

Another of his songs, “Ae fond kiss, and then we sever” also has a certain resonance – although I may not sing it to the Prime Minister any time soon! But ultimately, it is a line from one of Burns’s great egalitarian poems that best sums up the likelihood of independence.

For a’ that and a’ that, it’s coming yet, for a’ that.

Process And Substance In Turks & Caicos Islands Politics

2012-01-30T12:28:00.001-04:00

by Washington Misick

Washington Misick is a former chief minister of the Turks and Caicos Islands

The concept of a government having a legitimate mandate to govern via the fair winning of a democratic election is a central idea of democracy. Any other form of government, whether by means of coup d’état, appointment, electoral fraud, conquest, right of inheritance or other means, does not qualify as a democratic government.

Colonial governments earn their authority to govern by means of conquest. Can government by conquest be legitimate, and can an unelected government have a mandate? Absurdly, yes.

In politics, a mandate is consent granted by a constituency to act as its representative. In my view a constituency gives consent expressly or implicitly. “Consent of the governed” embodies the concept that a government’s legitimacy and moral right to use state power is only justified and legal when derived from the people or society over which that political power is exercised.

Article 21 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights states: “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government.” To the extent that we the people of the Turks and Caicos Islands have not chosen to join the nations of the world, our implied will is to be governed by Britain. Until we opt for self-determination, any local government — corrupt or honest — serves at the pleasure of politicians in Britain.

It is for precisely that reason that Britain should take full responsibility (financial and otherwise) for the alleged wrongs of successive past Turks and Caicos governments. Its knee-jerk tendency to react in overly passive or excessively controlling ways — currently demonstrated by excessive compliance and control — is largely responsible for the continuing economic stagnation.

The interim government enjoys a de facto mandate similar to that of an oligarchy. This political oligarchy headed by the governor acts as game keeper and poacher at the same time: An oligarchy is not responsible to the governed, and is not obliged to make its agenda public.

While one may question the process or even-handedness of the last elected administration political agenda of Belonger Empowerment — “Turks and Caicos Islanders First” — the agenda was made public. Is the achievement of the milestones the only agenda of the interim government? The British coalition government has as its agenda many of the people empowering objective of the previous Turks and Caicos administration, which are ignored by the interim administration. These include:

* Targeting educational resources on pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds

* Ensuring that lower earners do not have to avoid the brunt of taxation

* Tax system reformed to create the “most competitive corporate tax regime in the G20”

* Further decentralisation of government

* Main burden of deficit reduction to be tackled by spending cuts, rather than tax rises

* Established fixed-term, five-year parliaments.

* Bring in referendum on voting reform

* Give voters power of recall, forcing by-election where ministers are found to have done wrong

* Speed up voter registration

* Stop ministers accused of serious wrongdoing from using parliamentary privilege as a defense

* Fund 200 all-postal primaries for parliamentary seats which have not changed hands in many years

Britain should come clean and admit that it is responsible for the accountability lapse which took place at an accelerating pace over a long period of overly passive engagement with the islands. It is therefore disingenuous for it to absolve itself from blame and punish the innocent people of the Turks and Caicos Islands for its failures.

We at the same time must share the responsibility for the breakdown in good governance because of lack of our own passive engagement and the low standards of expectation demanded from our leaders.

Unfortunately, under the interim government transparency is also in question if, for example, members of the consultative forum are not informed of government’s position, including who pays the Special Investigation and Prosecution Team.

Since the message from Britain is that public accountability is the most important plank of democracy, the country must now demand accountability from Waterloo. After two years and six months, it is time that the interim administration take ownership of the economy and government expenditure.

How deep are the desk drawers in government that they continue to find new unpaid bills from the last administration every quarter? That excuse is now tired. The serial backtracking on government financial position does not instill confidence; neither does the continued moving of the goal post for elections. Britain’s contingent liability for securing the TCI loan should not be the main financial objective of government, and should not ignore the need to stimulate economic growth.

So far the main accomplishment of the wholesale takeover of the island by the U.K. has been its success in persuading us to turn on each other. It is time for all who call these islands home — regardless of how we come to claim that right — to recognize that all our hopes and dreams are inextricable bound together. Whether one supported the wholesale take over by Britain or not, one has to agree that the results have been disappointing.

Recognizing our common destiny, the New Year is a good time to engage in collective soul-searching so that together we may tap into the core traditional decency that makes these islands special. We need a new sense of neighborhood, one that is not defined by physical boundary, but by the actions of the Good Samaritan as we prepare to face the challenges of 2012 and beyond.

In that regard, justice requires even-handedness in arriving at impartial verdicts for those who are accused of crimes associated with the usurpation of representative government. Imposing outcomes from above or manipulating legislation and the justice system to achieved desired outcomes is not a solution, but part of the problem of political tyranny.

Ironically, Britain has become involved in regime change in several places recently for precisely these reasons. In the end, fairness dictates that large businesses, however important to the economy, as well as wealthy individuals, go through the same due process as the politicians they are accused of corrupting.

It is unjust that approximately 10 percent of the local gross domestic product should go towards the payment of criminal investigation of corruption in a government constitutionally headed by Britain as the administering power of these islands.

“If democracy does not promote justice, it cannot be defended to the people who become victims of injustice.” True democracy values both process and substance. Britain in my view has failed on the issue of process. Let’s demand that they get the substance right.

Let us vow in 2012 to no longer behave like victims, for if we do we will continue to be victimised and marginalised. Political patronage by any name, practiced by any individual or group, is still political patronage, and our own people should be careful not to be used as agents of deceit by the interim administration.

To that end, I am happy that some members of the Consultative Forum are at last finding their voices. Maybe for the first time at last we can all put aside our parochial politics and find our collective voice, or become an endangered species in our own home. Let’s make it our Christian duty to objectively condemn wrong in government and in society in general, without the subjective hate of individuals or groups of individuals.

There is no reason we should allow Britain or any other group to impose collective guilt on the entire Belonger population. The accused among us should be given the opportunity to face their accusers with dispatch, and let the business of the country, including the return to representative government, proceed without delay. Justice demands no less.

Guam seeks release from onerous application of U.S. regulations

2012-01-29T10:20:00.000-04:00

GUAM SEEKS EXEMPTION FROM SHIPPING, AIR REGULATIONS

Gov. Calvo wants competition to reduce costs for residents

By Gaynor Dumat-ol Daleno

Pacific Daily News

www.guampdn.com

HAGATNA, Guam – With the goal of trying to keep the cost of consumer goods on Guam more affordable, and for island residents to have more options for air travel, the governor yesterday said he gave his economic advisers a crucial task.

Gov. Eddie Calvo's Council of Economic Advisers must review how to approach the possibility of seeking exemptions from federal laws regulating ocean shipping and air transportation.

The governor mentioned the U.S. cabotage law for air transportation and the Jones Act as it applies to ocean transport. Foreign airlines are forbidden from transporting passengers and cargo between U.S. ports under U.S. cabotage law, unless the Transportation Department gives specific exemption.

Guam sought an exemption from cabotage law in 2006, to expand Guam residents' options for air travel, but certain U.S. airlines and their workers' unions protested the move. Under the Jones Act, all sea shipping between U.S. domestic ports must be handled by U.S.-flagged vessels.

Two recent developments prompted the governor to give his economic advisers the task of reviewing what steps, if any, to take. One reason was the merger of Continental Airlines with United Airlines -- creating the largest airline in the world, said the governor.

The second development was Horizon Lines' financial troubles, which led to its pullout from the Guam market, leaving Matson the only U.S.-flagged ocean carrier to serve Guam, Calvo said.

Calvo said he has nothing against United or Matson, in fact they're valued contributors to the island economy. But the bottom line, the governor said, is he wants the cost of living on Guam to improve and residents' options for air travel and shipping goods to broaden.

Allowing more airlines and more ocean carriers access to the Guam market will promote competition that will benefit island residents and Guam businesses, he said. "Because of the two major events that just occurred, because Guam is a U.S. territory thousands of miles from the U.S. West Coast, I believe it is important to look into the issue of cabotage and the Jones Act," Calvo said in an interview.

"The reason I requested my council of economic advisers to look into this is because of recent events on Guam, how impactful those events are to the quality of life of our residents and our economy," the governor said.

The council includes Henry Taitano, the governor's special assistant on social and economic affairs. Banker Phil Flores, economist Joseph Bradley and Alfred Lam are part of the council also, according to the Governor's Office.

St. Eustatius Coalition Government Dissolves

2012-01-26T23:03:00.001-04:00

Statia’s Coalition of Hope Govt collapses

Daily Herald

Sint Maarten

ST. EUSTATIUS--The Coalition of Hope Government collapsed Wednesday after coalition member United People's Coalition (UPC) headed by Reginald Zaandam withdrew its support.

There were no indications up to press time of any attempts being made to form a new government.

UPC informed its coalition partners Progressive Labour Party (PLP) and St. Eustatius Empowerment Party (STEP) of its decision in a tersely worded letter Wednesday.

UPC said in its letter sent to Franklin Brown of STEP: "Through this letter, we would like to inform you that effected [sic] today, we of the United People's Coalition are withdrawing our support from the present coalition. This decision is based upon the fact that our organisation is convinced that the people's business is no longer the first priority anymore of this coalition; therefore, we do not feel comfortable anymore in being part of the coalition of hope."

The letter was signed by UPC President D. Simmons, Acting Secretary E. Henriquez and party leader R. Zaandam.

PLP leader Clyde van Putten could not be reached for comment Wednesday. According to STEP's Brown, the UPC decision caught him by surprise.

News about the fall of government broke and spread like wildfire through the island of St. Eustatius around 2:30pm on Wednesday.

Initially Zaandam declined to comment on early reports that the government had fallen, but he confirmed later that UPC had withdrawn its support. He said he had written letters to Commissioner and PLP leader Clyde van Putten, Councilman Franklin Brown of STEP and Governor Gerald Berkel.

Zaandam said it was a very emotional time, but it was something he had to do. He promised to release a detailed statement at a later time.

The Coalition Government started unravelling around the time of the ousting of Glennville Schmidt as Finance Commissioner – a development that drew a negative reaction from the community with persons suggesting that Coalition of Hope heads should pack their bags and go home.

Relations within the coalition worsened around mid-January after Commissioner van Putten's executive assistant Laurens Duiveman tendered his resignation for reasons still not very clear.

Around that time, Zaandam opened negotiations with the Democratic Party about forming a new government, but those talks collapsed, the UPC patched up its differences with its coalition partners and the Coalition of Hope survived.

The DP holds two seats in the Island Council, with UPC, PLP and STEP holding one seat each.

The news of the coalition's demise was greeted with the honking of horns and cheers in the streets by some residents, and with disbelief by others who sought confirmation.

However, generally, residents seemed to have been caught by surprise, especially as Commissioner van Putten had scheduled an important session with farmers that was expected to be held in Vincent Astor Lopes Legislative Hall on Wednesday evening

Some of Zaandam's loyal supporters were at his side after he had submitted the letters.

Some groups were upset about what had transpired during the last Island Council meeting. In particular, there was criticism of Commissioner van Putten for "name-calling"

DP leader Rueben Merkman said the coalition's collapse came as a huge surprise to him and to other DP members.

STEP leader Franklin Brown said UPC's withdrawal of support from the Coalition of Hope was a surprise to him. He said he had been in a board meeting discussing what STEP's next move should be when he had received the news.

Brown also said that based on what had transpired earlier Wednesday, he didn't see enough grounds to throw down a government. Questioned about what exactly had transpired, Brown suggested that that question be put to UPC.

2012-01-26T01:36:00.000-04:00

‘Decolonization Justice’

BY MICHAEL BEVAQUA

Justice in the best sense is not the punishing of someone who has violated or broken a law. It is instead a process to provide some reparation or compensation for something of which there can be no certain equivalence. How does one compensate those who were enslaved for centuries? How does one compensate people who were colonized and their cultures brutalized for centuries? How does one compensate those who were the victims of discrimination, genocide and legalized abuse?

IF WE lived in a world where truth and justice mattered, then the issue of whether a self-determination plebiscite for Guam violates the U.S. Constitution would be irrelevant. As a decolonization plebiscite, it should obviously not be bound by the rules of the colonizer, since that would be a blatantly colonial act. So if someone brought this up, we should ideally stare blankly at that person’s silly question.

But, we don't live in such a world. We live in a world where power dominates and truth and justice generally only come into play when it matches the interests of those with great power. As such, we must have the absurd discussion about whether taking an act of self-determination would violate the U.S. Constitution. On its merits, this is ridiculous; imagine America in their struggle for decolonization accepting The Crown’s framework for how to do it.

It is a tricky conversation and one which is only “fair and balanced” in the Fox News sense. U.S. law is not built around the interests of justice in any way which might challenge the rights of the U.S. itself, today or in the past. Even when things are recognized to have been unjust or wrong, the U.S., like most countries, does not allow for much restitution to take place.

In most societies, the answer is simple. At some point, when it no longer becomes possible or profitable to oppress a people, you let them go and you relax the rules that held them down. Once you do that, you try to do close to nothing to mention what happened before or compensate them for the terrifyingly inhumane ways they might have been treated for long periods of time. In fact, when the issue comes up – which might eventually turn into some claim that those who have been wronged should receive some sort of justice – you have to limit the ways in which they can receive it. You have to use the law to minimize it and to take away any reasonable avenues they might have to demand that something be done about the way they were treated before.

A case in point is the very famous Apology Resolution that the Native Hawaiians received from the U.S. government under President Clinton. Whether the U.S. assisted in overthrowing the Hawaiian Kingdom is not under dispute. It has been proven beyond a doubt that the U.S. assisted in stealing Hawai'i; the U.S. Congress investigated this issue itself and found U.S. private citizens and government employees overthrew a sovereign nation. And rather than working to restore the Hawaiian Kingdom and work for justice, the U.S. conveniently looked the other way and later annexed Hawai’i.

The Apology was a carefully worded "despensa yu'." The U.S. basically came forward and admitted it had done something terrible, unjust, immoral and illegal. You would think that given this revelation of something so obvious and so odious, it might become the basis for Native Hawaiians getting some restitution or justice for what happened to them a little over a century ago.

You would be wrong. In 2009, the Supreme Court decided that the meat of the Apology Resolution – meaning the preamble where the U.S. government admits to doing bad things – has no legal effect and does not provide the basis for anything. The Supreme Court decided this admission of terrible guilt amounted to only a conciliatory gesture, one meant to make someone feel better, but not actually do anything.

This is why justice, for it to mean anything, requires more than what the person who commits the offense or benefits from the offense is willing to give. It has to take more, or else it does nothing. If you don't give more than you are willing, you risk continuing the cycle of abuse and oppression. You enjoy the privileges of the former oppression, and give those who were oppressed no closure or way of getting some reparations for how they were treated. Rather than deal with and attempt to fix the disgusting history of what has taken place in Guam, Hawai’i or elsewhere, it merely buries it deeper and deeper, hoping that at one point, no one will remember the trauma of what was lost beneath the layers of lies.

Northern Marianas Sues U.S. over unilateral application of taxes

2012-01-23T13:29:00.001-04:00

Saipan Tribune

CNMI sues to stop FICA taxes

OAG: FICA translates to $24M in annual illegal taxes

By Ferdie de la Torre

The CNMI (Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands) government is suing the U.S. Department of Treasury and U.S. Internal Revenue Service to stop the imposition of the Federal Insurance Contribution Act on Filipino and Korean workers with Commonwealth-only status.

The CNMI asserts that the extension of FICA taxes on Filipino and Korean nonresident workers could result in the imposition of $24 million annually in illegal taxes on the Commonwealth economy.

“Imposition of the unlawful FICA tax on businesses struggling in the contracting economy will certainly cause a large percentage of businesses to close,” according to assistant attorney general James R. Stump. The CNMI's economy will be further devastated and the government's budget will be further reduced, he added.

FICA covers Social Security and Medicare taxes. Both employers and employees share the cost of paying these taxes.

Stump filed the CNMI government's lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the NMI yesterday afternoon. Also named as co-defendants are Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner and Internal Revenue Commissioner Douglas Shulman.

The CNMI is suing for breach of the Covenant and violation of the Consolidated Natural Resources Act. It wants the district court to declare that the imposition of FICA taxes on Filipino and Korean workers in the Commonwealth with CW-I status (Commonwealth-only transitional worker) violates the Covenant and the CNRA.

Stump stated in the lawsuit that U.S. law provides an exemption from employer and employee FICA taxation for employment associated with “service performed in Guam by a resident of the Philippines and by a resident of the Republic of Korea while in Guam on a temporary basis as a nonimmigrant alien admitted to Guam.”

Stump said the purpose of such exemptions was to avoid imposing FICA taxation on alien individuals who, due to the limited nature of their visa status, would be unlikely to receive benefits.

Nonimmigrant Philippine and Korean nationals working in the CNMI have never been required to participate in the U.S. Social Security System.

On Oct. 5, 2011, IRS issued a memorandum stating that the adoption of the CNRA eliminates the exemption of Philippine and Korean workers in the Commonwealth from FICA taxation and that these individuals are now subject to this tax.

The current minimum wage in the CNMI is $5.05 per hour. An employee who works 40 hours per week for 52 weeks in a year would have 2,080 hours or $10,504 in gross income.

Stump said a Commonwealth employee earning $10,504 per year who is subject to a FICA tax rate of 7.65 percent would incur an annual liability of $803.

He said an employer paying an employee $10,504 per year who is subject to FICA liability of 7.65 percent would incur $803 in annual tax liability for the wages paid to that employee.

“If 75 percent of the 22,416 CW-1 classification visas that are authorized to be issued in 2012 are provided to Philippine and Korean workers working full-time and earning the minimum wage, the total annual FICA tax liability (employee and employer) would be $27,018,766,” Stump said.

The government lawyer pointed out that the ability of the CNMI to supplement local labor with short-term nonimmigrant aliens provides flexibility to the Commonwealth and avoids imposition of a 15.3-percent tax for which there is little likelihood of benefits and no opportunity for refund.

Stump said the avoidance of an inequitable, inappropriate, and detrimental tax structure was the specific intent of Congress in both the Covenant the CNRA, and the FICA tax liability exemption provided to nonresident aliens.

Stump asserted that the CNRA makes no changes to the Covenant sections authorizing the exemption of Philippine and Korean nonresident workers in the CNMI from FICA tax liability.

“It is unlikely that alien nationals present in the Commonwealth under a CW-I classification paying FICA taxes will quality for any associated benefits and the law does not provide a refund to either the employee or employer,” he pointed out.

This imposition of illegal taxation, Stump added, will cause significant unnecessary harm to the Commonwealth economy and is contrary to the stated intent of Congress that the CNRA be implemented in a manner as to minimize its impact.

Northern Marianas Pension System endangered if measures not taken

2012-01-21T22:04:00.000-04:00

Retirement Fund may be depleted in 2.9 years

by Alexis Villegas Zotomayor

Marianas Variety

If no efforts are made to stanch the Retirement Fund’s financial bleeding, the pension agency would be insolvent in 2.9 years, an official said. In his Dec. 22 letter to Rep. Sylvestre Iguel, Fund Administrator Richard S. Villagomez provided the lawmaker a projection of the Fund’s demise.

He wrote, “If no significant additional contributions are made to support current benefit payouts, the Fund will no longer be able to pay benefits in less than three years.”

Villagomez was commenting on Iguel’s H.B. 17-204 which would continue to allow Class I members of the Fund the option to pay in the difference between Class I and Class II to retire with Class II benefits.

Villagomez pointed out that the Fund had repeatedly alerted the lawmakers on the fiscal condition of the Fund.

He provided Iguel, Covenant-Saipan, with a graph that showed employee contributions for all active member employees, which cannot be paid out as benefits amount to approximately $113 million.Villagomez said, “If the Fund continues to withdraw $53 million per year as it did in fiscal year 2011 to fund benefit payouts, the Fund assets will be completely depleted in approximately 2.9 years.”

He told Iguel that if the Fund was put in a situation where it could no longer pay benefits, the Legislature would need to appropriate $80 million from the annual budget to pay current benefit obligations. He also told Iguel that the amount would balloon to $100 million by 2025 before it would start to decrease.

However, for Villagomez there’s still hope.

If the Fund would withdraw less than $53 million, it would be able to continue paying the benefits longer into the future with all other factors held constant. But if the drawdowns exceed $53 million, Villagomez predicted the Fund would be gone in less than 2.9 years — “with all factors held constant.”

For Villagomez, Iguel’s bill would accelerate the growth of future payouts and the Fund’s demise as the pension agency would be forced to make larger drawdowns to cover for increased benefit payouts.He reminded Iguel of the key factor in a reform measure in 1989 was the closing of the more generous Class II membership which he said was unsustainable.

P.L. 6-17, he said, reduced benefits for each year that the retiree would not be able to meet the retirement age of 62 years old to receive retirement annuity. Another law, P.L. 15-70 mandated that Class I members could still opt for early retirement with no corresponding deduction if they retired under 62.

Iguel’s bill proposes to make this permanent.

Although the bill questions the fairness of the early retirement option under P.L. 15-70 in the same way that H.B. 17-226 also raised concern with fairness that active members continue to contribute to a retirement system that will be dead in less than three years.

“We reason that it is ‘not fair’ to all members — active employees and retirees — that the heart of the matter has not been addressed: how are we going to fund the benefits of current retirees and new retirees (even those who retire under H.B. 17-204 if it becomes law) after the Fund runs out of money in less than three years,” Villagomez said.

Given the precarious condition of the Fund being in dire straits, he asked the suspension of early retirement in its entirety until the pension program has sufficient funding to support reactivation.

Major oil refinery to close in St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands

2012-01-20T16:36:00.000-04:00

Joint venture between U.S. and Venezuelan companies was operating at a loss.

Press Release
HOVENSA Announces Closure of St. Croix Petroleum Refinery

Company to Work Closely with the U.S. Virgin Islands Government to Ease Transition

ST. CROIX, U.S. Virgin Islands Jan. 18, 2012 — HOVENSA L.L.C. announced today that it will commence shutdown of its refinery on St. Croix, U.S. Virgin Islands. Following the shutdown, the complex will operate as an oil storage terminal.

Losses at the HOVENSA refinery have totaled $1.3 billion in the past three years alone and were projected to continue. These losses have been caused primarily by weakness in demand for refined petroleum products due to the global economic slowdown and the addition of new refining capacity in emerging markets. In the past three years, these factors have caused the closure of approximately 18 refineries in the United States and Europe with capacity totaling more than 2 million barrels of oil per day. In addition, the low price of natural gas in the United States has put HOVENSA, an oil-fueled refinery, at a competitive disadvantage.

“We deeply regret the closure of the HOVENSA refinery and the impact on our dedicated people,” said Brian K. Lever, President and Chief Operating Officer of HOVENSA. “We explored all available options to avoid this outcome, but severe financial losses left us with no other choice. We will provide significantly enhanced benefits for those union and salaried employees who are impacted and will work closely with the government of the U.S. Virgin Islands to ease the transition for the rest of the community.”

After formal shutdown of the refinery, which will occur by the middle of February, most of those employed at HOVENSA will continue working through a transition period. Thereafter, approximately 100 people will remain to work at the oil storage terminal.

*********************

Major oil refinery to close in U.S. Virgin Islands

By DANICA COTO

Associated Press

(Ian James contributed to this report from Caracas, Venezuela. )

ST. CROIX, U.S. Virgin Islands (AP) — One of the world's largest oil refineries will close next month, the company announced Wednesday, stunning nearly 2,000 workers and threatening to upend the reeling economy of the U.S. Virgin Islands.

Industry analysts said the closure is unlikely to have a major effect on the global oil market, but Gov. John de Jongh described the loss of the territory's largest private employer as "a complete body blow" for the U.S. territory of about 108,000 people.

He said Hovensa generated a minimum of $60 million a year in revenue for the government, which recently laid of hundreds of public workers due to a budget crisis.

"Given what we're going through right now, this is the last bit of news that I wanted to hear," he said in a teleconference with reporters.

Losses at Hovensa, a joint venture of U.S.-based Hess Corp. and Venezuela's state-owned oil company, have totaled $1.3 billion over the past three years and were projected to continue due to reduced demand caused by the global economic slowdown and increased refining capacity in emerging markets, said Brian K. Lever, president and chief operating officer of Hovensa LLC.

"We deeply regret the closure of the Hovensa refinery and the impact on our dedicated people," Lever said in a statement. "We explored all available options to avoid this outcome, but severe financial losses left us with no other choice."

Hess announced in New York that it will take a $525 million after-tax charge against its fourth-quarter 2011 earnings due to the shutdown.

The refinery employs about 1,200 people in St. Croix in addition to approximately 950 contractors, according to Hovensa spokesman David Roznowski. About 100 people, including contractors, will work at the oil storage terminal, the company said.

The refinery, founded in the 1960s, has been producing about 350,000 barrels per day during the rough economic climate. It relies on oil for fuel while competitors on the U.S. mainland use less expensive natural gas.

Hovensa was the third largest U.S. refinery before it cuts its capacity of 500,000 barrels by 30 percent last year. It is now the eighth largest, according to the U.S. Energy Information Administration.

The refinery dominates the southern coast of St. Croix, where hundreds of workers live in company-built neighborhoods.

Speaking in hushed tones during a shift change at Hovensa on Wednesday, dozens of workers wondered where they would go after the refinery is converted to an oil storage terminal.

"This is all I know," said a worker who had been with the plant for more than 30 years. "I don't know what I am going to do now."

Like others, he declined to be identified for fear of angering managers who will allocate the few remaining jobs.

The company's website says it is still one of the 10 largest oil refineries in the world, but the closure is not expected to have a major effect on the oil industry because it had not been operating at full capacity, said Fadel Gheit, senior energy analyst for Oppenheimer & Co.

Hess benefits because it had been hemorrhaging money through the refinery, he said.

The closure reflects a three-year trend across the U.S. of refineries closing because of the global financial crisis, a drop in gasoline consumption and a shift in growth elsewhere, Gheit said.

"They cannot compete with the modern refineries being built in India, China and the Middle East," he said.

Despite the closure, the U.S. remains Venezuela's largest customer, and Venezuela is still among the top four suppliers of crude oil to the U.S., he said.

Alejandra Leon, a Latin America oil analyst for Cambridge, Massachusetts-based IHS CERA, said that in 2010, PDVSA reported the Hovensa refinery processed 389,000 barrels a day, of which 227,000 barrels a day were supplied by Venezuela. She said it wasn't clear where the remainder came from.

She said there is an excess of refining capacity globally, so Hovensa's closure "is helping to rebalance the market."

Hovensa spokesman Alex Moorehead said the refinery equipment will shut down by mid-February, but that the company will continue to provide fuel oil to the island's Water and Power Authority through end of June.

Local Sen. Terrence Nelson said the announcement "is a blow in the gut," and suggested the territory might need assistance from the federal government.

Nelson accused Hovensa of violating a long-term agreement with the government to continue refinery operations on the island. Nelson said it is unclear what Hovensa will need to do to compensate the government for breaching the agreement.

"It's devastating," Senator Sammuel Sanes said. "It was something I suspected was going to happen, but of course it took me by surprise. On a personal level it affects many people in my family. I have many in my family working for Hovensa."

De Jongh said he called an emergency meeting to talk about ways to offset the economic damage.

He warned that local fuel prices will likely rise while the government looks for other suppliers and said officials are asking the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to ease sulfur content restrictions so they can quickly contract a new supplier. The Energy Information Administration reported last year that the refinery accounted for 85 percent of the territory's petroleum products.

De Jongh said he will also ask Hovensa officials if they are interested in selling the facility.

"I cannot afford to have an asset of that size sitting there," he said.

In January, Hovensa entered into a consent decree with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Justice Department in which the company agreed to invest $700 million on pollution controls after a series of chemical releases affected people living downwind from the refinery. Hovensa also agreed to pay a $5.4 million penalty for violating the Clean Air Act.

It is unclear how the agreement will be affected by the closure.

EPA spokeswoman Mary Mears said the agency and the U.S. Department of Justice are still talking with Hovensa officials about how the closure will affect the consent decree. She said the company already paid the penalty.

US Report Focuses on Migration from Pacific Freely Associated States

2012-01-19T15:42:00.001-04:00

"Compacts of Free Association: Improvements Needed to Assess and Address Growing Migration" - US General Accountability Office

Summary

U.S. compacts with the freely associated states (FAS)--the Federated States of Micronesia (FSM), the Marshall Islands, and Palau--permit FAS citizens to migrate to the United States and its territories (U.S. areas) without regard to visa and labor certification requirements.

Thousands of FAS citizens have migrated to U.S. areas (compact migrants)--particularly to the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands (CNMI), Guam, and Hawaii, which are defined as affected jurisdictions. In fiscal year 2004, Congress appropriated $30 million annually for 20 years to help defray affected jurisdictions' costs for migrant services (compact impact). Though not required, affected jurisdictions can report these costs to the Department of the Interior (Interior), which allocates the $30 million as impact grants in proportion to compact migrant enumerations required every 5 years.

This report (1) describes compact migration, (2) reviews enumeration approaches, (3) evaluates impact reporting, and (4) reviews Interior grants related to compact impact. GAO reviewed U.S. agency data, recent enumerations, impact reports, and grants and it also interviewed officials, employers, and migrants in the affected jurisdictions.

Combined data from the U.S. Census Bureau's (Census) 2005-2009 American Community Survey (ACS) and the required enumeration in 2008 estimate that a total of roughly 56,000 compact migrants from the FSM, the Marshall Islands, and Palau--nearly a quarter of all FAS citizens--were living in U.S. areas. Compact migrants resided throughout U.S. areas, with approximately 58 percent of all compact migrants living in the affected jurisdictions.

According to the 2008 required enumeration, compact migrant populations continued to grow in Guam and Hawaii and were roughly 12 percent of the population of Guam and 1 percent of the population of Hawaii. Working under agreements with Interior, Census used a different approach for the most recent enumeration than for prior enumerations, employing two methods in 2008: (1) a one-time survey in Guam and the CNMI and (2) a tabulation of existing multiyear ACS data for Hawaii.

The affected jurisdictions opposed the change in approach. The 2008 approach allowed for determining the precision of the estimates but did not yield comparable results across jurisdictions or detailed information on compact migrants. Interior and Census officials have a preliminary plan for the required 2013 enumeration but Interior has not determined its cost or assessed its strengths and limitations.

The methods used by affected jurisdictions to collect and report on compact impact have weaknesses that reduce their accuracy. For fiscal years 2004 through 2010, Hawaii, Guam and the CNMI reported more than $1 billion in costs associated with providing education, health, and social services to compact migrants. However, some jurisdictions did not accurately define compact migrants, account for federal funding that supplemented local expenditures, or include revenue received from compact migrants.

Although Interior is required to report to Congress any compact impacts that the affected jurisdictions report to Interior, it has not provided the affected jurisdictions with adequate guidance on estimating compact impact. Compact migrants participate in local economies through employment, taxation and consumption, but data on these effects are limited.

From fiscal years 2004 to 2010, Interior awarded approximately $210 million in compact impact grants to the affected jurisdictions, which used the funds primarily for budget support, projects, and purchases in the areas of education, health, and public safety. In Guam and Hawaii, government officials, service providers, and compact migrants discussed approaches to more directly address challenges related to migration by bridging language barriers, providing job training, and increasing access to services.

The amended compacts also made available $808 million in sector grants for the FSM and the Marshall Islands from fiscal years 2004 to 2010. Sector grants are jointly allocated by the joint U.S.-FSM and U.S.-Marshall Islands management committees and have been used primarily in the FAS for health and education.

Few sector grants directly address issues that concern compact migrants or the affected jurisdictions. The committees had not formally placed compact impact on their annual meeting agendas until 2011 and have not yet allocated any 2012 sector grant funds to directly address compact impact. GAO recommends that Interior assess the 2013 enumeration approach, disseminate adequate guidance on estimating compact impact, and encourage uses of grants that better address compact migrants' impact and needs. Interior generally agreed with the report but did not support the recommendation on grant uses.

Read the full report here.

American Samoa Governor delivers final State of Territory Address

2012-01-19T10:25:00.000-04:00

Governor Togiola Tualfono

before the

Thirty-second Legislature

Third Regular Session

Fono Guest Fale

Fagatogo, American Samoa

January 9, 2012

FOREWORD

Today is a bittersweet day for me. In this brand new year, I am honored to stand before you to discharge my duty in addressing this Legislature on the State of our Territory. It is also the ninth and final time that I shall do so as the Territory's sixth popularly elected Governor of American Samoa.

When I first took the oath as Governor, the Twenty-Eighth Legislature was serving in these hallowed halls. And here we sit now, in the Thirty-Second Legislature, with the eyes of the Territory upon us as we continue to carry out the people's work.

Before I begin, let us take a moment to honor the memories of our leaders who we have lost in this past year, including the late Secretary of Samoan Affairs Tufele Li’amatua, Senator Amituana’i Eteuati, HC Tau’ili’ili Pat Tervola and the and other loved ones who served this Territory with their hard work, service and leadership. We also honor the memories of our loved ones who have fallen in battle, serving our Territory and our country all over this world. May the Good Lord grant their souls eternal peace.

Please pause with me in a moment of silence in remembrance of our fallen leaders and our sons and daughters of our police force and the armed services without whose sacrifice, we would not enjoy the spirit and liberty of today.

It has been a long road that we have walked in order to get here today. Though the road was long and sometimes winding, we have taken that journey together and we have accomplished many things along the way. It remains my sole intent to continue to work together with this Legislature on our journey to a better tomorrow for our future and the future of our children who will inherit our good work.

Read the full text of the Governor's State of the Territory Address here.

Chagossian human rights defender joins the ancestors

2012-01-18T21:56:00.000-04:00

Lisette Aurélie Talate - the departure of a freedom fighter

Chagos International Support

When in the 70's, Talate was dumped in Mauritius along with her children and other Chagossians, she immediately embarked on a relentless struggle to go back home to Diego Garcia. During her lifetime she undertook several hunger strikes to draw attention to the legitimacy of her cause and, in the process, became an icon of the Chagossian diaspora.

She was a frail woman in physical appearance but, like an iron fist in a velvet glove, she constantly told the authorities concerned that her land has been robbed. When finally she was “allowed” to visit Diego Garcia, everyone still cherishes the vivid image of how she kneeled down to kiss the soil and screamed “Diego, my land!” while the military who "occupy" the island, witnessed the scene unfazed. It was, sure, only a short visit, like being on transit -- not to say a humiliating way to be asked to come and look at your home from far and then politely be invited to sleep outdoors !

At the funeral service, Olivier Bancoult paid tribute to Talate in very emotional terms. He recalled how one day he was with Talate in London fighting for their case when she found herself with some British MP who sympathised with her cause, at the Cafetaria of the House of Commons. When invited by the MPs to have a coffee and eat a bite with them, she flatly refused. She would later tell Olivier how could she be eating and drinking in the very institution that had decided to deport her from her island home. For her, the Houses of Parliament represented a dramatic symbol. She was a woman of conviction, who always got her message across forcefully in the creole language.

Read the full article here.

Aboriginal activists speak on Tent Embassy 40-year milestone

2012-01-18T12:57:00.001-04:00

greenleft.org

Aboriginal activists launched the embassy in 1972 in response to then-prime minister Billy McMahon’s refusal to grant Aboriginal land rights.

Few Australian political protests can claim to have made an impact as great or as lasting as the Aboriginal Tent Embassy in Canberra. First set up on the lawns of Old Parliament House in January 1972, the embassy has been a focal point for the struggle for Aboriginal rights.

Four Aboriginal men, Michael Anderson, Billie Craigie, Tony Koorie and Bertie Williams, launched the embassy in response to then-prime minister Billy McMahon’s refusal to grant Aboriginal land rights. Instead, McMahon had offered to lease stolen land back to Aboriginal people.

The protest swelled, capturing the imagination of Aboriginal activists and their supporters around the country. The Aboriginal Tent Embassy received wide media coverage in Australia and internationally. It threw the spotlight on the appalling conditions Aboriginal people faced and the refusal of the Australian government to respond to Aboriginal demands for justice.

The activists decided to make the tent embassy a permanent protest, while the government pursued legal avenues to evict the protesters.

Read full article here.