Tomorrow is the 50th anniversary of the 1967 general election, which heralded the launch of the ministerial system of government in the Virgin Islands.
This milestone is an opportune time to reflect on the past and to renew discussions about the future.
The year 1967 — when H. Lavity Stoutt’s became the VI’s first chief minister — was certainly a turning point: It has been described as the year when the territory implemented direct democratic rule.
Since then, the VI has steadily gained more autonomy from the United Kingdom with the passage of each new Constitution.
In recent years, however, a question has frequently arisen: Will the current Constitution, which was passed in 2007, be the end of the line, with the UK refusing to grant any more autonomy short of full independence?
This is a good question. In recent years, the UK has pressed for measures that allow it to assert more control in its overseas territories, such as the Protocols for Effective Financial Management here and similar agreements in other OTs. Such moves are hardly surprising given recent developments in some territories — not least the allegations of systemic corruption that led the UK to assume direct rule in the Turks and Caicos Islands between 2009 and 2012.
Though the VI thankfully has fared much better, such dramatic episodes will doubtlessly affect the outcome of the territory’s next constitutional review, which is due soon: As legislators from both sides of the aisle have recently noted, the VI traditionally reviews its Constitution every decade or so.
Though the UK may be unlikely to focus on the OTs during the Brexit negotiations over the next two years, we hope public discussions here will begin straightaway. Meanwhile, however, the territory needs to start getting its house in order.
Many residents, including Governor John Duncan, have argued that the UK will be reluctant to grant more autonomy before the VI implements certain long-promised measures designed to further a culture of good governance, such as freedom-of-information legislation, whistleblower protections, a human rights commission, and a public register of interests.
All of these steps should have come long ago, and we agree that they are crucial as the territory moves toward independence. In spite of the ruling National Democratic Party’s promises of “government in the sunshine,” transparency is lacking here to a degree that we suspect would discourage many residents from supporting any step that would remove the checks and balances provided by UK oversight.
As soon as possible, then, the government should start implementing systems designed to further good governance.
The territory should also redouble efforts to strengthen international alliances with groups such as the Caribbean Community, the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States, and possibly the African, Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, which leaders have said they may attempt to join in light of the UK’s pending Brexit.
Such considerations are not merely academic. Though elected leaders generally make the bulk of the territory’s governing decisions today, the UK still has the final say in the VI’s affairs, as was highlighted by the governor’s recent controversial decision to appropriate funds from central government.
His surprise move came a time when a rapidly shifting geopolitical landscape in the West has lent new urgency to the question of VI independence.
The territory should tackle that question in earnest, starting now.
{fcomment}