More cracks in UPM revealed: Cayman News Service

(CNS): The ongoing disunity and divisions between the UPM caucus and its inner circle were thrust into the spotlight again this week when MPs and ministers aired their differences on a government-owned radio station. Premier Juliana O’Connor-Connolly made it clear that she does not support Rising costs The proposal was made at the credit union, and McKeeva Bush called to say he did not support the proposed cruise ship berthing referendum.

The government appears to be divided on a range of issues, from disagreements over proposed amendments to the National Protection Act to implementation of the recommended minimum wage. The UPM caucus and the cabinet have struggled to find consensus on almost all issues.

While Premier Wayne Panton’s ouster was allegedly due to his inability to lead the divided PACT government and because he objected to developers influencing his cabinet colleagues to oppose his sustainable development agenda, it appears that the UPM reshuffle led by Juliana O’Connor-Connolly is not going any better.

The premier publicly named her deputy, Andrea Ebanks, when she called into Cayman Radio yesterday to claim she had Credit Union Charges $200,000 in Feeseven though it is Proposed Fee Plan She outlined this in her budget speech last year.

With a general election expected as early as April, cracks in the UPM caucus and cabinet are now evident. McKeeva Bush was the first to call on Wednesday. On recordHe said the proposed credit union fees had not yet been discussed in the caucus. He also said that while he initially supported the group as the best way to form a government, he no longer supports the “current structure of government.”

However, Bush, who formed and led Cayman’s first political party, the United Democratic Party, and remains a supporter of party politics, suggested the UDP coalition was not working because of a lack of organisation, reflecting divisions within the UDP.

“I don’t support this position. You have to have an organization … for you as members to be accountable and work together towards a common goal,” said Bush, who remains a member of the UPM caucus. He added that despite a common goal among UPM coalition MPs, people still go their own way. “Under this government structure, members go wherever they want.”

He said he does not support a referendum on the cruise port, and he is not the only one who does. He said it would be a waste of money to spend $1.2 million on a referendum to tell us we need to build a terminal facility for the cruise tourism industry. Bush has long supported the development of a cruise terminal and he does not think it is necessary to ask the question.

But he said the caucus voted for the expensive referendum even though many in the caucus, including members of the government, did not support it because the money could be spent elsewhere. He said a lot of things that were happening were not benefiting the people.

Bush also stressed that neither he nor other UPM caucus members supported fees for credit unions, which immediately sparked a backlash. He said the minister should have taken the proposal to the caucus first. Bush said he believed it was part of a series of fee increases that had been proposed, but consultation on the white paper should have taken place after UPM members had agreed on what fees should be proposed.

However, after speaking to senior ministry officials, CNS understands that the purpose of the consultation is to gather all the necessary information to be able to present an evidence-based policy proposal to the caucus and cabinet related to these fee increases, based on real data, information and analysis, which is expected to be launched next year.

When the premier called into the same show, she made it clear she would not support the proposal. She said she would not “put her deputy in a difficult position”, but the credit union fee hike was not going to happen.

O’Connor-Connolly said she had determined no one in her caucus supported the proposal. She said because she sets the cabinet agenda as prime minister, the proposal would not go to the government front bench because she had effectively promised not to impose a $200,000 fee on credit unions.

The prime minister said credit unions were very different to commercial banks and she would not support the proposal – demonstrating the wide differences in policy positions and even the way policy is formulated among Cabinet members less than six months before the official election campaign begins.