ANGUILLA HOUSE OF ASSEMBLY

Good afternoon, Honourable Members. I call upon our pastor to open us with a word of prayer, please.

Let us pray. Heavenly Father, we come to you this afternoon. Depending on you, because we know that you're indeed the creator of heaven and earth. We depend on you because we know that you are indeed the King of Kings and the Lord of Lords, the conquering Lion. Of the tribe of Judah, and we come to you, Lord, asking for your special blessing. Upon this House of Assembly. Father, we asked that the deliberations of this House. That they all be directed by you.

That you will prosper the deliberations for the advancement. Of your glory. And for the betterment of the people of Anguilla. Father, I pray that you'll grant wisdom. To discern right from wrong. Grant courage to uphold justice. That you'll give them patience. And give them a spirit of cooperation.

I pray that you'll help them to listen to each other. But not only to listen to each other. But to listen to your voice and by extension, to the needs of the people. Father, I pray that You will cause that there be harmony in this place, even in the midst.

Of robust discussions. I pray that solutions will be found and decisions will be made. For the greater good of the people. So I pray that you will guide the actions of today. Father, even in the midst of. Strenuous debate, even in the midst of lively debate. We ask that private interest will be laid aside. We ask that prejudices will be laid aside.

And we pray that the leaders will keep in mind the responsibility. To serve all citizens with compassion. And in sound judgment, Heavenly Father. We pray that the proceedings of today will show. That we all desire. A nation. That will be prosperous. So that the leaders will indeed. Hold hands with each other. So that the rest of the nation.

Will avoid hate. And in its place will have hope, a hope for a better future. Lord, as we see our world in with great uncertainty. We axe for your direction. We ask that we look to you who is able to do exceeding abundantly above anything we may ask or think. So let the words of our mouth and the meditation of our hearts be acceptable in Thy sight, O Lord, my strength.

And my Redeemer. As we pray, believing that it is done. In the name of Jesus, who taught us to pray by saying. Our Father who art in heaven. Hallowed be thy name. Thy Kingdom come, Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven. Give us this day Our Daily Bread. And forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors, and lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil.

For thine is the Kingdom, and the power and the glory, forever and ever. Amen. So may the Lord bless you and keep you. And may the Lord make his face to shine upon you, and be gracious unto you. May the Lord lift up the light of His countenance upon you, and give you his peace both now and forevermore. Amen and Amen.

You may be seated Members.

Confirmation of minutes. Minutes of proceedings of the fifth meeting of the second session of the thirteenth Anguilla House of Assembly.

Honourable Members, before you are the Minutes of the Fifth meeting of the Second Session of the thirteenth Anguilla House of Assembly dated 22nd May 2026. Do we have any amendments to those minutes that are circulated? Hearing no amendments, I invite a mover to move that the minutes are circulated be approved. Thank you, honourable Member. Do we have a seconder?

Speaker I rise to second.

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded that the minutes circulated due to 22nd May 2026 be confirmed as circulated. Those in favor say aye, those opposed say no. The ayes have it. Minutes are confirmed.

Oath of allegiance to new members.

None. Announcements by the direction of the speaker.

Honourable Members, just by way of a brief announcement, because I recognise we have a long day, I just want to inform the members that the delegates that attended the Commons and overseas because conference in 2026 report back that we've had a productive and successful engagement with other Overseas Territories. The highlight of course of our trip was to have our Miss Hodge with us, who was attached daily to the Cayman Parliament and if I do say so, became a quick.

So we better work to keep her because she had they, we were competing for her and what it was is that Miss Proctor and I attended sessions and bilateral meetings during the daytime while Miss Hodge was in session. But there were some topics that we thought were important for her to accompany us on and in particular the presentation that we made at Session 5. The presentation that we made was titled Managing our own House Governance Reform and the Evolving Role of Parliamentary Commissions within the OT’s. And I had asked the organisers why they had chosen Anguilla for that topic because I considered that we were babies in that step. And the response was that we are moving towards independent parliaments.

And it was actually a good and fruitful engagement wherein we would do the research and we would. engage with other territories that have moved in that direction being Cayman and BVI. So the purpose of the attachment for Miss Hodge is that Miss Hodge as you know deals with a lot of our financial management and controls.

And if it is that our house is going to move towards an independent house separate, I think it was important for our staff at all levels to be fully engaged on that conversation. It also takes me to the next delegate group that will be leaving on the 14th of June to the 20th. Of June. Our delegates will be led by Mr. Merrick Richardson, our deputy on the Public Accounts Committee, and attending with him will be Miss Proctor Clerk of Committees, Mr. Cordell Richardson, who is a Member of the Committee, Mr. Jeison Bryan, a Member of the Committee, and of course, our new attendee, Ms. Kaylah Richardson, who's been sent for the same reason as Miss Hodge.

The House is focusing on succession planning. It's focusing on exposing our staff at all levels. One of the responses that we did get while we were there is how small our staffing is and how much work our staff does for such a small contingent. But we are very, very happy that Miss Richardson will be accompanying them and when they return they're going to update the house on the training as it relates to public accounts and public accountability.

As it relates to upcoming events. Some of you may know, but Anguilla was successful through the work of our staff in making the pitch to host the first UNESCO. AI Parliamentary workshop, It will be held in Anguilla from the 21st to the 26th of June. So closer to that time you will hear more announcements as it relates to that.

At that point, we will go right into our 50th anniversary celebrations. And of course, I will wait on until closer, but just to highlight the dates for everyone's calendar because it will be incumbent on all of the Members to be on island and be as involved as possible. Mr. Merrick Richardson leads the committee that deals with the. Planning and the dates to mark your calendars are the 28th of June to the July 3rd and we'll hear more about that as we progress.

Insofar as it relates to my announcements, I have apologies from the Honorable Evans McNeil Rogers who is going to be a bit late today, but on route to the House. I think those are my announcements.

Questions. None.

Government statements and recent developments? None.

Papers None.

Reports from Committees, none.

Petitions, none.

Government notices, none.

Private members notices, none. Motions, none. Personal explanations, none.

Other business Government business.

A Bill for allowances (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act 2026, first reading.

Honourable Members, you would have seen that we made a slight adjustment to the order paper for matters of internal housekeeping. We are moving ahead with the second Bill, which is the Allowances for (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act, 2026. Because of the long day ahead of us, I do think it incumbent on me to establish time limits as it relates to the debate and contributions to this Bill. I don't anticipate that it will be as substantive as the other Bill which I have circulated time limits.

I'm proposing for this bill that the presentations by the leaders be about 30 minutes. For the responses by our other members, 15 minutes, the right of reply 15 minutes. As it relates to this bill, I'm going to ask my able clerk to keep track of time in the same way that we would have done the original budget last year. He will give you indication when you have one minute remaining.

As it relates to the contributions to this bill, I call upon the mover of the bill.

Good morning or good afternoon to you, Madam Speaker, to the honourable Members of this House, persons business here in the gallery and those persons listening and viewing. Madam Speaker, let me first request. Pursuant to section 44 of the House of Assembly Procedure rules that. The first, second and third readings. Rule 44 be suspended. And for the general public information, Section 44 says every bill shall be read three times prior to being passed, and no bill shall pass through more than two readings at any one sitting unless this rule shall have been formally suspended for the purposes.

And if I could take the opportunity and ask that this rule be applicable to both the Allowances Temporary Reduction Repeal Act, 2026, as well as the Supplementary Appropriation 2020.

Honourable Members, leave is granted. Honourable Members, it has been moved and is there a seconder that the rules be suspended to allow three readings of both bills that are on the order paper today is your seconder.

Rise to second, Madam Speaker.

Thank you. It has been moved and seconded that pursuant to Rule 44 of the Standing Orders that said rules be suspended so that the Allowances (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act, 2026 and a Bill for Supplementary Appropriation, 2026 Act, 2026 Amendment Act proceed. Today all three readings. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed say no. The ayes have it.

You may proceed on remember.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the bill shortly entitled Allowances Temporary Reduction Repeal Act 2026 be read the first time.

A Seconder?

I rise to second, Madam Speaker.

It has been moved and seconded that a bill shortly entitled Allowances (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act 2026 be read of first time. Those in favor say aye, those opposed say no. The ayes have it. I call upon the Clerk to read the bill of first time.

An Act to provide for the Repeal of the (Temporary Reduction) Act, 2023. A bill for Allowances (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act 2026, second reading.

I invite the mover of the bill.

Madam Speaker, I move that the bill shortly entitled A Bill for Allowances (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act, 2026 be read a second time.

Madam Speaker, rise a second.

Thank you. I invite the mover to present the objects and reasons.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, the objects and reasons of this Act states that this Act repeals the Allowances Temporary Reduction Act, 2023. And by way of background, Madam Speaker, the Public Service Salaries Temporary Reduction Act, 2013 was enacted to validate and give statutory effect to temporary reductions in salaries and allowances following the fiscal measures introduced in the aftermath of the 2009 global economic recession.

The policy objective at that time was to contain public expenditure and manage the growing liability associated with deferred salary and allowance payments. In 2023, the Government advanced legislation to restore public service salaries to their pre June 2009 levels. As part of that legislative transition, the Reduction of Allowances Temporary Act 2023 preserved the temporary reduction and suspension of allowances payable to the Premier, Ministers of Government, the Speaker, Parliamentary Secretary, elected Members of the House of Assembly and related Parliamentary office holders. The 2023 Act therefore served a limited transitional purpose.

It allowed government to repeal the broader Public Service Salaries Temporary Reduction Act 2013, while retaining the reduced allowance arrangements for parliamentary office holders pending a fuller review of remuneration under the broader compensation reform framework. The government has now completed a comprehensive public sector compensation review. Supported by private Waterhouse Coopers job reclassification report. The associated job architecture framework and the revised salary structure for the Anguilla Public Service.

That review also considered the consequential treatment of remuneration arrangements for parliamentary office holders whose compensation sits alongside the wider public sector remuneration framework. As part of that reform, a revised 5 level remuneration scale for parliamentary office holders have been developed and the scale is intended to preserve appropriate relativities across offices, provide a clearer and more transparent structure and avoid anomalies arising from the implementation of the revised Public Service Compensation Framework. The continued operation of the Reduction of Allowances Temporary Act 2023 is no longer consistent with the proposed remuneration approach. The act preserves a temporary reduction regime that was designed for a different fiscal and policy context.

Once parliamentary remuneration is adjusted under the compensation review, the temporary allowance reduction legislation should be repealed to avoid statutory inconsistency. Administrative confusion and duplication of remuneration authority. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, honourable Member. Does any Member wish to contribute to the Bill that is on the floor? Does anyone Member wish to speak to the Allowances (Temporary Reduction) Repeal Act? Does the honourable Member have has anything further or you wish to put the question?

Speaker, I want to thank the Members for their acquiescence to this bill.

It has been moved and seconded that the allowance is Temporary Reduction Repeal Act 2026 be read a second time. Those in favour, those opposed say no. The ayes have it will read us a concern.

An Act to provide for the Repeal of the Allowances Temporary Reduction Act 2023.

Pursuant to Rule 45. That Bill now stands committed to a committee of the whole Assembly to consider it clause by clause. The House is now in committee.

Clauses one through two.

I put the question that clauses one through two do stand part of the bill. Those in favor say aye. Those opposed say no. The ayes have it. Clauses one to two stands part of the bill.

The title and enacting clause.

I put the question that the title and the enacting clause stands part of the bill. Those in favor say aye, those opposed say no. The ayes have it. Honourable Members, the Committee has now considered its consideration, has concluded its consideration of this Bill and it has passed through the report stage without any amendments.

I call upon the Clerk. I actually reported on behalf of the mover. There were no changes. We can proceed.

A bill for allowances, Temporary Reduction Repeal Act 2026, third reading.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the bill shortly entitled. Allowances Temporary Reduction Repeal Act 2026 period third time and passed.

Seconder.

I rise to second, Madam Speaker.

I put the question, honourable Members, that the Bill shortly entitled Allowances, Temporary Reduction Repeal Act 2026 be read a third time in past. I call upon the clerk to read the bill a third time. I apologise. My clerk has reminded me I did not put it to a vote.

I put the question that the bill shortly entitled allowance is Temporary Reduction Repeal Act 2026 be passed, read third time and passed those in favor those opposed the ayes have it bill read third time. Honourable Members, it is declared that the Bill has passed and the Allowances Temporary Reduction Repeal Act has been read a third time and passed.

At this point, I am going to propose that we take a short adjournment. I suggest about 30 minutes. We do have some housekeeping as it relates to the next bill that is on the order Paper that I would wish for Members to take care of. So this House will rise for 30 minutes.

Thank you for your patience.

Good afternoon, the honourable Members. Again, you may take your seat. This honourable House resumes its sitting and I welcome those that have joined us in the gallery. While we were on break, we were dealing with some housekeeping matters. As a House of the whole. I call upon the clerk to proceed with the Order Paper.

A Bill for supplementary appropriation. 2026 Act 2026. First reading.

I Call upon the mover of the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the bill shortly entitled the Bill for Supplementary Appropriation 2026 Act 2026. Be ready the first time.

Is there a seconder?

Madam Speaker, I rise to second.

It has been moved and seconded that the Bill shortly entitled Supplementary Appropriation 2026 Act 2026 Beretta. First time those in favour say aye. Those opposed say no. The ayes have it. I crave your indulgence. The clerk is just dealing with a quick housekeeping matter. Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Proctor, I call upon the clock to read the bill of first time.

An Act to revise the Total Appropriation from the Consolidated Fund of Anguilla for the services of the Government of Anguilla for the 2026 financial year.

We may proceed.

A Bill for Supplementary appropriation Act 2026. A Bill for supplementary appropriation 2026 Act 2026. Second reading.

I call upon the mover.

Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the bill shortly entitled A Bill for the Supplementary Appropriation 2026 Act 2026 be read a second time.

I call upon a seconder.

Madam Speaker, rise a second.

MasterCard Restaurant. I invite the mover to proceed with the objects and reasons of the bill.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise today to present to this honorable House the Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2026. This supplementary budget is an important and necessary instrument in the proper management of the public finances. It allows the government to make responsible in-year adjustments to the approved 2026 estimates of recurrent and capital expenditure. And to ensure that expenditure is properly authorised, properly classified, and properly aligned with the ministries and departments where it will be incurred. Madam Speaker, the approved 2026 budget stood at EC $631.149 million through Supplementary budget number one.

Total expenditure is increased by EC 26.483 million. Bringing the revised 2026 budget to EC $657.631 million. Of this amount, 29.436 million relates to recurrent expenditure and offset by a reduction in EC 2.554 million of capital expenditure. Following these adjustments, revised recurrent expenditure will stand at 426.825 million, while revised capital expenditure will stand at $230.806 million.

Mom Speaker. These figures are substantial, but they must be properly understood. This supplementary budget is not a departure from the government's fiscal strategy. It is not a broad new spending program. The central purpose of this supplementary budget is therefore to move funds from the central provision to the relevant ministries and departments to meet the salary differential and associated employment costs arising from the public sector compensation review.

Madam Speaker, some may ask if provision for compensation reform was already contemplated in the 2026 budget, why is a supplementary budget necessary? The answer is that a central provision is not the same as an allocation to every ministry and department. The compensation funding was held under the Ministry of Finance Restricted Expenditure Account while the detailed post by post calculations. And implementation schedules were being finalised. That was a control measure.

It ensured that funds were not distributed before the salary differentials, payroll implications and departmental allocations were properly validated. Now that the work has advanced, the funding must be moved from that central holding provision to the Heads and Departments where the expenditure will actually be incurred. Madam Speaker, that movement is substantial.

Under the Financial Administration and Audit Act, there is a mechanism for reallocations, but that mechanism is subject to important limits. In particular, reallocations made in anticipation of House approval between recurrent expenditure votes are limited to 2.5% of the main recurrent estimates for the financial year. The Act also makes clear that reallocations cannot occur.

Between recurrent and capital. Expenditure, in this case the movement required from the Ministry of Finance. To the relevant ministries and departments is beyond what should properly be treated as a routine. Internal reallocation. Is therefore appropriate that the matter be brought squarely before this honourable House. This supplementary budget allows the House to see clearly what is being moved, what is being increased, where expenditure will be charged and how the revised estimates will align with actual implementation. It is also important to note that this supplementary budget does more than redistribute compensation funded. It also addresses urgent and essential expenditure needs. Including health, energy policing.

And capital reallocation. So this is not duplication. It is the proper legal and budgetary process for moving from a centrally held provision to clear authorised and accountable expenditure under the relevant votes. That is how transparency is protected and that is how fiscal discipline is maintained. And that is why this supplementary budget is before the House today. Madam Speaker, the largest and most sensitive element of this supplementary Budget relates to the implementation of the revised compensation framework for the Anguilla Public Service, and

I want to address this matter carefully and directly. For many years, public officers in Anguilla have carried the weight of salary restraint. They carried reductions in earlier fiscal periods. They carried suspended increments. They carried limited movement and pay, while the cost of living continued to rise and while the work of government became more complex.

The first salary reduction took place in 2009, when the government implemented an average reduction in public service salaries of approximately 7%. The reductions were described as temporary salary suspensions or deferred earnings rather than permanent cuts. In 2010 there was a further salary reduction and wage freeze. Following continued fiscal challenges, the then government introduced additional austerity measures.

Public service salaries were reduced by a further average 3.5%. And annual salary increments were frozen. These measures were part of the. The broader efforts to stabilise public finances. Then in 2011, 2012, the government and governor's office sought legal advice regarding the deferred salary arrangements and whether temporary reductions could become permanent. Annual increments remained suspended for an extended period while successive governments grappled with fiscal constraints. There were no general public service salary increases after 2008.

While the 2009 and 2010 reductions remained a long standing issue. Many public officers continue to serve through those years with professionalism and commitment. They kept schools open. They cared for patients. They protected our borders. They maintained our public finances. They supported our courts. They kept essential services running. They served this island even when the compensation system did not fully keep pace with the responsibilities placed upon them. And all those steps were later taken to restore salaries. The public service continued for many years with limited normal movement, suspended increments, and a compensation structure that had not been comprehensively modernised. In 2022, as Anguilla began to see improved fiscal performance and as the cost of living placed additional pressure on households, government began the process of addressing some of those long standing issues, including the reintroduction of.

Increments and the movement of officers to the main scale. But that process also revealed the deeper problem. The system itself had become too inconsistent, too fragmented, and too difficult to manage fairly through piece meal adjustments. And that is why a broader compensation review became necessary. Madam Speaker, this reform must therefore be understood in context.

It is not sudden or casual increase. It is part of a longer journey to correct 18 years of restraint, salary compression, limited progression and structural inconsistency within the Anguilla Public Service. Madam Speaker, this government recognises that. Compensation is deeply personal. For every public officer, salary is not just a number in the estimates. It affects households, mortgages, rent, school fees, groceries, transportation, savings and the ability of families to plan their lives with some measure of certainty. This reform is therefore an important step in recognising the service, patience and contribution of public officers.

But it is also important to say clearly that this reform did not begin with this supplementary budget and the funding for it was not discovered until after the 2026 budget was passed. The compensation reform was already contemplated in the 2026 budget and in the government's medium term fiscal planning. Madam Speaker, I know that persons will look at the figure of 41.41 million and ask a reasonable question.

Can Anguilla afford this? The answer is that government would not be proceeding if this reform had not been tested against the fiscal framework. But I also want to be clear. Sustainable does not mean insignificant. This is a major reform, It carries a major cost and that is precisely why it must be implemented with discipline. The 41.41 million represents the estimated full year public sector wide fiscal impact of the reform.

It includes established employees, wage workers, parliamentary skills, subvention adjustments for statutory bodies and related revenue effects. The largest component relates to established employees. Where total employment cost is estimated to move from approximately. 143.2 million to 180 million. That is an annual increase of approximately $36.81 million, or about 25.7%. These are significant numbers, Madam Speaker, and government does not minimise them.

But they have not been approached casually. The established worker component is closely aligned with the compensation growth already contemplated in the medium term fiscal framework. The estimated variance against the MTF is approximately 2.39 million. Under the proposed model, the increase represents approximately 5.7% of recurrent revenue and 8.6% of recurrent expenditure. In other words, the reform is substantial, but it has been planned for.

The updated medium term fiscal framework has incorporated the compensation reform and its fiscal implications. That updated framework is expected to come before this honorable House in early July, and it will provide the broader fiscal context for how government intends to manage the wage bill revenue performance. Expenditure priorities and sustainability. Over the medium term.

Madam Speaker, this is also why government did not select the most expensive option. A higher benchmark would have carried a much larger fiscal impact and was not considered sustainable at this stage. The approach selected seeks to balance fairness, competitiveness and affordability. That balance must now be protected. This reform cannot become the starting point for uncontrolled or unmanaged expansion of the wage bill.

The framework must be implemented carefully, monitored closely, and protected from drift. That is how we keep faith with public officers, and that is how we keep faith with the public finances. Madam Speaker, it is also important that this process remains grounded in the approved framework and managed through the appropriate public service channels.

Individual classifications, salary placements and implementation matters must be handled carefully, consistently and through the technical process established for that purpose. That is how fairness is protected. That is how officers can have confidence that decisions are not being made on an ad hoc basis. Government's role is to set the policy direction, provide the necessary funding.

Ensure that the reform remains affordable and require that implementation is carried out with fairness, transparency and discipline. I understand that concerns will arise where officers see different outcomes. Questions will naturally be asked. Those questions must be heard and handled respectfully. But government must also remain committed to the approved framework. If we abandoned the structure whenever there is pressure, we risk returning to the very system. We are trying to fix a system of ad hoc adjustments, special cases, inconsistent treatment and limited transparency that would not serve public officers well in the long term. Mom Speaker.

This supplementary budget provides an additional 19.705 million under personal emoluments together with related adjustments on the wages, pensions and employer Social Security contributions. These allocations reflect the part-year financial impact of the revised compensation framework. That is the balance we're seeking to preserve recognition of the long years of rest.

Carried by public officers, commitment to the approved framework and discipline to ensure that the reform remains affordable over time. Madam Speaker, I also want to address the position of pensioners. Those who have already retired from the public service must not feel forgotten in this discussion. Many of our pensioners served Anguilla faithfully through difficult years. They too carried the effects of restraint and many now live on fixed incomes while facing the same cost of living pressures as households across the country. I'm therefore pleased to advise this Honorable House that pensioners are being addressed as part of the wider compensation reform process.

The Public Service Pension Fund Board has considered the matter and has made a proposal for an increase for pensioners. That proposal is now being advanced through the board and government for the necessary approvals and implementation steps. Madam Speaker, this is an important step. The present supplementary budget is focused primarily on the implementation of the revised compensation framework for serving public officers, but government recognises that the position of pensioners is closely connected to that wider discussion. And that those who have already given their service to Anguilla must also be treated with fairness and with respect. At the same time, this matter must be handled properly. Pensioners are not all paid through one identical mechanism.

Some pensions are paid directly by the Government of Anguilla, while others are paid through the Public Service Pension Fund. Any increased must therefore take account of the different payment arrangements. The legal framework. The administrative requirements and the long-term sustainability of pension obligations. Madam Speaker. Government is committed to advancing this matter responsibly. Further information will be provided as the approval and implementation process. Is completed. Madam Speaker, this supplementary budget provides $10 million under claims against government.

In relation to Anglec related obligations and energy investment, this provision is intended to support anticipated payments to Anglec in respect of the outstanding balance on the former Water Corporation judgment and other related matters in relation to an anticipated consent arrangement which will be subject to necessary subsequent approval. Madam Speaker, the government has already been making payments in respect of these obligations.

The question now is whether we continue to stretch repayment over many years or whether we act more decisively to bring certainty to both government and Anglec. This government believes that where there is an urgent need to strengthen Anguilla’s energy future, we should not unnecessarily extend legacy repayment arrangements in a way that limits the utilities ability to invest. Anglec is central to the Anguilla's economic stability. It powers our homes, schools, hospital, businesses, tourism sector, airport, ports and the daily functioning of government.

If Anguilla is to move more meaningfully toward renewable energy, reduce dependence on imported fossil fuels, improve grid resilience, and create the conditions for lower and more stable electricity costs over time, then the national utility must be in a stronger position to plan and invest. That requires certainty. It requires cash flow. It requires the ability to move forward with investments in renewable generation, battery storage, grid resilience and modern infrastructure.

Madam Speaker. Stretching repayment over many years may appear easier in the short term, but it can carry a larger national cost if it delays the investments required to transform Anguilla’s energy sector. The people of Anguilla are already feeling the pressure of electricity costs. Businesses are already feeling the pressure of high operating costs. Every dollar spent on imported fuel is a dollar that leaves the economy.

This provision is therefore not only about settling a legacy matter, it is about supporting the financial conditions necessary for Anglec to invest in a cleaner, more resilient and more sustainable energy future. Madam Speaker. Fiscal credibility is not only about controlling new spending, is also about dealing responsibly with obligations that have accumulated over time. This government is not content to push the problem further. We are taking the responsible course so that Anguilla can move forward with greater confidence.

Madam Speaker, The supplementary budget also includes contingency provisioning to support the continuation of the government’s fuel surcharge relief program and the application of credits to eligible customer accounts. The cost of electricity remains one of the most immediate pressures felt by households and businesses. When fuel prices rise, electricity bills rise. When electricity bills rise. Families feel it, businesses feel it, and the cost-of-living increases across the economy.

This government has acted to shield consumers from the full impact of these pressures, but we must also be honest with the people of Anguilla. This support is expensive and the cost is rising. Madam Speaker. The actual billing support applied in May of 2026 in respect of April 2026 usage was approximately 3.349 million across almost 8000 customer accounts. That was when fuel surcharge rate was at $0.88 per kWh.

The surcharge has now risen to approximately $1.04 per kWh. At the same time, usage is not moderating. In fact, as we move into the hotter months, electricity consumption is likely to increase, particularly as households and businesses rely more heavily on cooling. That means the fiscal exposure is not static. It grows with the surcharge, it grows with consumption, and it grows further when associated taxes and charges must be taken into account. Madam Speaker.

This is real relief. It reaches people directly through their electricity bills. It helps families manage monthly expenses. It helps businesses contain operating costs. It supports economic stability. But they cannot be treated as a permanent subsidy at this level. Every dollar government spends cushioning imported fuel costs is a dollar that cannot be used elsewhere. And every dollar spent on imported fuel is, in a real sense, a dollar leaving the Anguillian economy.

That is why the long-term answer cannot simply be to keep subsidising fuel. The long-term answer must be to reduce our dependence on imported fuel altogether. Madam. Speaker. This support must therefore remain temporary, targeted and subject to review. Any continuation must be assessed against actual costs, prevailing fuel prices, Anglec surcharge decisions, consumption levels, and available fiscal space. It also requires all of us households, businesses and government itself. To use electricity prudently. Conservation is not only an environmental issue, it is a fiscal issue.

The more electricity we consume at high fuel surcharge rates, the more expensive the intervention becomes. Madam Speaker, we support our people now, but we must also invest in the future that reduces the need for this level of support over time. The supplementary budget therefore provides for fuel surcharge relief in a responsible and controlled manner, while recognising that the sustainable solution is energy transition, prudent consumption, and reduced dependence on imported fuel, not permanent subsidy.

Madam Speaker. This supplementary budget provides an additional $3,000,000 for medical treatment overseas. And this is one of the most sensitive areas of public expenditure. Behind every medical treatment overseas case is a person, a family and often a difficult and urgent medical circumstance. The costs are high, but the need is real.

The demand for overseas medical care continues to place pressure on the budget. In many cases, the required treatment cannot be provided locally and government must ensure. That there's adequate provision to support eligible persons who require. Care overseas. Madam Speaker is important to be clear about how this support works.

Medical treatment overseas is not open-ended assistance or free money. In appropriate cases, government may pay certain costs upfront or provide financial assistance at the point when the medical need is urgent. However, those payments are still subject to proper assessment, documentation, approval, follow up. And reconciliation. In other words, support is provided to help persons access necessary overseas medical care. But it must still be accounted for. Where repayment, recovery or other adjustment is required under government's procedures, that process must also be followed.

The purpose of this provision is to ensure that urgent medical needs can be addressed while maintaining proper financial control. The government will continue to manage this program carefully. We must continue to strengthen local health services, improve oversight, verify costs and ensure that assistance is provided in a manner that is fair. accountable and sustainable.

But where overseas care is necessary and where the matter is properly assessed and approved, government must ensure that the program is adequately funded and this additional 3,000,000 provides necessary support at this stage of the financial year. Ma'am Speaker, the supplementary budget also provides $1.36 million in additional funding for the Royal Anguilla Police Force and the extension of the contract which provides specialist UK armed officers support. Public safety is a core responsibility of government.

It affects the confidence of all communities, our visitors, our businesses and our investors. Government must therefore ensure that the Royal Anguilla Police Force has the operational support required to respond to the security environment now before us. Madam, Speaker, this provision is being made because there remains a need for specialist armed officer support during this transitional period. However,

I want to be clear that this administration does not view continued reliance on external armed officers as a permanent solution. The extension of the engagement must be understood as a bridging arrangement. It is intended to preserve the necessary security capability while the local recruitment and the training pathway is advanced. The Government has received assurance that the Royal Anguilla Police Force has developed a local recruitment and training strategy. That strategy provides for the recruitment of local officers from Anguilla, training overseas return to Anguilla local orientation and the subsequent identification and development of suitable officers for firearm duties.

Mom Speaker. My administration is keen to liaise closely with the Royal Anguilla Police Force and the Governor's Office to ensure that this plan is advanced with urgency and discipline. We must build local capacity. We must ensure that Anguillian officers are recruited, trained, supported and given a clear pathway to assume these responsibilities over time.

That is how we reduce dependence on external support and that is how we strengthen the Royal Anguilla Police Force and that is how we build a more sustainable national security model for Anguilla. Madam Speaker, we cannot responsibly remove a critical security capability. Before that local capacity is in place. But neither should we accept open-ended reliance on external officers without a clear transition plan. And that is the balance this provision seeks to strike. Madam Speaker, the supplementary budget also includes authority only provisioning to address urgent personnel needs within health services development.

This is funded through projected personal emoluments savings and therefore does not represent a broad new cash pressure for this fiscal year. It allows urgent staffing needs to be addressed while maintaining discipline within the personal expenditure framework. Madam, speaker health services depend not only on buildings and equipment, but on people. Where urgent personal needs arise and where savings can be responsibly applied, government must have the flexibility to respond. The supplementary budget, Madam Speaker, also reallocates 2.54 million from the Ministry of Infrastructure, Communications, Utilities, Housing, IT and E Government Services Office accommodation capital budget to grants and contributions to support payments to the Anguilla Tourist Board in respect of air travel and marketing arrangements.

This is a reallocation of existing provision. Air travel is a strategic economic priority for Anguilla. It affects our tourism sector, our hotels, villas, restaurants, taxi operators, retailers, service providers, employment and government revenue. Where targeted marketing support is required to strengthen air service arrangements and support and Anguilla’s visibility in key markets, government must be prepared to act.

And Madam Speaker, this is not expenditure for its own sake, It is a reprioritization of existing resources to support economic activity, visitor arrivals and revenue generation. Ma'am. Speaker, I also wish to provide an update on the proposed acquisition of office accommodation for Anguilla in the United Kingdom. Honourable Members will recall that I previously indicated that I would update this honourable House as further information became available and where it is appropriate to do so.

The Government has been exploring the possible acquisition of office accommodation in the United Kingdom to support Anguilla’s long-term representation and engagement. Anguilla's relationship with the United Kingdom is not occasional. It is constitutional, it is diplomatic and it is financial. It is developmental. It is connected to security, tourism, investment, diaspora engagement and our place in the wider world. And for that reason, government continues to believe that the permanent and appropriate presence in the United Kingdom may represent an important. Strategic asset for Anguilla. However,

Madam Speaker, this is also a matter that must be handled carefully. At an earlier stage, provision had been included in the supplementary budget to allow for the possible purchase of UK office accommodation should the transaction proceed. However, having regard to comments made, the Government has withdrawn that provision from this supplementary Appropriation Bill at this time.

And I want to be clear. Anguilla is at an age where expanding our presence beyond our shores has become necessary. And this is one opportunity to do so. This process did not begin with a final decision to purchase. It began with professional support. To search for and recommend suitable properties, a search agent was commissioned in the early stages to identify options for consideration and to assist government in narrowing the available choices. Following that process, a non-binding offer was submitted in respect of a property in central London.

And due diligence commenced. Madam speaker one, I want to stress those words non-binding. And due diligence. No final purchase decision has been taken. The matter remains subject to contract, satisfactory due diligence and the necessary further approvals. Government will not make a binding commitment unless the relevant legal, financial, technical and Executive Council processes are properly completed as part of the due diligence process.

An independent building surveyor was commissioned to undertake a building survey report. That report has been received and is now being reviewed by the appropriate technical and administrative teams in addition. UK legal counsel has been commissioned to advise on the proposed transaction and to ensure that the government's interests are properly protected. Ma'am, speak on These steps matter.

They show that government is not proceeding casually. We are not buying 1st and asking questions later. We are taking professional advice, we are assessing the physical condition of the property, we are reviewing the legal and commercial arrangements and we are ensuring that the public interest is protected before any binding commitment is made. But given the sensitivity of the matter and given that due diligence is still underway, government accepts that it can return to this honourable House at a later stage when the matter is sufficiently advanced and when more information can properly be shared without prejudicing the public interest or the commercial purposes.

Madam Speaker. Serious governments must make serious decisions for the long-term benefit of their people. But serious governments must also know when to pause, provide further information and ensure that the process carries the confidence of the House. And the public and that is the approach we are taking. The possible acquisition of UK office accommodation remains under consideration as a potential strategic asset for the Government of Anguilla.

But any request for budgetary authority will be brought back to this honourable House at the appropriate time, following the necessary due diligence approvals and further consideration. We will proceed carefully. We will not compromise the diligence, we will not prejudice the public interest by disclosing commercially sensitive information prematurely and we will continue to update this honourable House as and when further information becomes available and it is appropriate to do so.

In closing on this aspect, I want to particularly note, Madam Speaker, that the monthly expenditure for the full relief package is approximately, as of today, a $4.5 million per month. And the proposed acquisition of real property, IE the purchase of an asset in the UK for use by the people of Anguilla and for the benefit of the people of Anguilla is equivalent to less than two months of the fuel relief package. Madam Speaker, the government recognises that supplementary budgets must be used carefully.

A supplementary budget should not become a substitute for proper planning. It should not be used to encourage departments to rely. On additional funds rather than manage within approved allocations, and that is why the distinction in this supplementary budget is so important. A significant portion of the supplementary budget relates to the redistribution of an already budgeted central provision. It is not new policy spending. It is the movement of funds to the correct heads of expenditure for proper execution and monitoring. At the same time, the genuinely new or urgent expenditure items have been separately identified.

These include medical treatment overseas and like related obligations. Policing support, fuel surcharge relief and strategic capital reallocation. And, Madam Speaker, the government will continue to monitor implementation carefully. Treasury and the Budget unit will be required to reconcile the supplementary allocations against payroll out turns during the year to ensure that the amounts transferred are sufficient, properly classified and not exceeded without further authority, and this is how fiscal discipline is protected. Madam Speaker, this supplementary budget is being brought forward in accordance with the Financial Administration and Audit Act.

We are placed in the revised expenditure requirements before this House for debate, scrutiny and approval. And following supplementary budget number one the revised fiscal position is as follows. The original approved 2026 budget was 631.149 million and the total supplementary budget adjustment is 26.483 million. The revised 2026 budget is therefore $657.631 million. Recurrent expenditure moves from 397.789 million to 426.825 million. Capital expenditure moves from 233.36 million to 230.806 million.

And Madam Speaker, the detailed adjustments are set out in the schedule to the supplementary budget. Madam Speaker, every budget tells a story about the choices a government is prepared to make. The supplementary budget tells the story of a government that is prepared to manage difficult transitions with discipline, with compassion and with confidence. We are living in a time when government cannot afford to stand still. The systems that served Anguilla yesterday must be strengthened for the Anguilla we are building tomorrow. Madam Speaker, reform is not always easy.

It requires explanation, it requires patience, courage, and sometimes it requires government to hold steady even when the conversation is difficult. And this supplementary Budget seeks. To strike that balance, it recognises the personal realities facing public officers. While remaining committed to a compensation framework that is structured, evidence based and sustainable, it responds to urgent needs in health and security while insisting that those interventions must be properly controlled and accountable.

It addresses legacy obligations not to look backward, but to clear the way for investment, resilience and a more secure energy future. And madam Speaker to the people of Anguilla deserve a government that can do more than react to pressure. They deserve a government that can plan beyond the immediate moment. They deserve a government that can protect today while preparing for tomorrow. They deserve a government that can be compassionate without being careless, ambitious without being reckless and disciplined without being indifferent, and that is their approach reflected in this Supplementary Budget. We are not bypassing scrutiny.

We are coming to this Honourable House. We are not hiding the cost. We are placing them before the people. And we are not pretending that every decision is simple, we are explaining why the decisions are necessary. And Madam Speaker, this is how confidence is built, This is how institutions are strengthened.

This is how public trust is earned. Supplementary budget number one for 2026 is therefore a measured, responsible and forward-looking instrument. It invests carefully in the systems and institutions Anguilla will need for the next stage of national development. And Madam Speaker, before I end, I want the persons to know that this government is also looking at the Legislator’s Pensions Act with a view to revise the same and you will hear more in the weeks and months to come.

May God, I therefore complement the Supplementary Appropriation Bill 2026 to this Honorable House. May God continue to bless this honorable House, and May God continue to bless Anguilla. Thank you.

Thank you, Honorable Premier. What I should have indicated as well before we started, which we discussed offline was the proposed timelines, which I will know set forward for your consent, hopefully. I propose given the volume of debate and given the volume of. Consideration that I anticipate I proposed by letter to all of the Members on the 7th of June a timetable wherein the leader from each side would be allowed an allocation of one hour and 30 minutes for their presentations and debate, all other members 45 minutes for consideration and debate and the Premier's right of apply for 30 minutes.

This is subject to your consent, so I therefore put the question that the Assembly consents to the debate timetable that was submitted to all of the Members on the 7th of June with the time frames that I have proposed, those in favor can indicate by I. Those in favor to the proposed time frame, I should say that it allocates a total time of 11 hours and 45 minutes for consideration of this supplementary. Those in favor say aye, Those opposed say no. So I registered that there is one opposing the time frame and I think one silent and all else in favor so the ayes have it.

I recognise the Honourable Member for Road South.

Madam Speaker, this is not a big change but I was thinking the fact that you just gave a total amount of hours which would be eleven

Two days, 11 hours.

So it means therefore that we'll be running into Tuesday.

Yes. So the proposal runs over. Sorry, the proposal runs over. Would you have seen the note that I circulated? I circulated the note twice, once if we had started at 9:00. And then I believe that everyone wanted to start at one. And what the note did was to give consideration so that everyone has a fair contribution over the course of two days.

And what I recognise is that we have specialty staff and technical staff that are attending for the purpose of the committee stage and that is anticipated to be tomorrow, the 11 hours. 45 minutes actually takes us down to 7:30 today and the full day tomorrow. That's with everyone having 45 minutes. I recognise that everyone may not use their 45 minutes, but I had taken a position before that there would be no yielding of time for this constitution of this House because it's very difficult to manage.

We did talk about it offline, and I believe generally the Members were satisfied with it, but I do take the position that you might want a little bit more time.

Just action because. Initially when we discussed it, I figured that we would have been able to wrap up today, this evening, so that the technical officers don't have to be here today and then be here tomorrow. Because if you're running into tomorrow, then it means that technical officers will need to be here today.

Yeah.

Because they only here for the committee stage, so.

Well, I did indicate the technical officers that they wouldn't be required until tomorrow at 3:00. So that was me factoring in the timetable. I think that they were gracious to be here just in case we they were hopeful probably, I think maybe them being here is to spore us on, but they're prepared to be here tomorrow at 3:00 if everyone uses their time 45 minutes for the supplemental I think is reasonable. What is the suggestion that you wish to make in respect of it?

Not nothing, no major difference, maybe an hour, because there were some things that were said by the honourable Premier that needs to be debated as well, just because they were mentioned.

The leader has an hour and a half.

Right.

The honorable premier spoke for 43 minutes and 48 seconds, So I'm her entire presentation as a leader moving the motion was less than 45 minutes itself.

That is usually the case, but the leader of government business still have another hour and a half to respond after everyone has spoken.

No, the leader of government business has 30 minutes to respond. If you look at page two of the notice that I circulated each leader I'm proposing and this is because I in allocating the time it is tricky, but you have to look at the overall time of occupying staff that sit here members ancillary and support staff 11 hours and three quarter minutes almost 12 hours over 2 days on a supplemental. Is reasonable when you consider that everyone may not use their 45 minutes. I think as we progress, and I had said it offline in the spirit of camaraderie and in the spirit of our wonderful opening prayer, you may want to talk to members after and see how they feel about an additional time for you because I know you've indicated to it offline that you may want an hour.

The majority is satisfied with 45 minutes, and the Leader of Opposition hasn't said, but he does have an hour and a half. Why don't we just progress through the debate and see how it goes in respect? Because if the movers book for 43 minutes, I'm pretty sure that we can accomplish. Within 11 hours of 45 minutes. But let's start with the debate.

I understand that the Honourable Deputy Governor travels tomorrow and does want to make a presentation as it falls within his remit, I think. Are you minded for us to proceed in that vein, see where we land at the break and then maybe have some discussions? Yes? OK. Please proceed. I recognise the Honorable Deputy Governor in terms of his contribution in respect to the Bill that's on the floor.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. I also want to thank my colleagues in the House for indulging me. Madam Speaker, I don't usually speak in Parliament, but I think today I feel constrained to make my representation. As you suggested earlier, the given the nature of the bill as it relates to the public sector compensation framework. And give him a substantive role as head of the public service. I think it's very pertinent that I do address Parliament today. At the outset, I do wish to place on record my appreciation for PS Finance and PS Public Admin and their respective teams.

This was a lengthy piece of work, considerably complex and technically complex, A very demanding exercise involving job classification, payroll validation, financial modeling, implementation planning, stakeholder engagement, and policy development. Also want to thank both administrations given that this work spends both the APM and the AUF administration as it relates to securing PwC for this work to where we are today. This is much more than a supplementary supplemental appropriation. It is about whether we are prepared to confront long standing structural issues within the compensation framework of the Anguilla Public Service in a responsible and measured way.

This is not just not a matter of paying people more money. This is a structural reform that is highly necessary. It is what correcting long standing inconsistencies, modernizing and outdated framework, improving transparency and fairness, strengthening workforce management and ensuring that the Anguilla public service remains capable of attracting and retaining the people required to deliver services to the people of this country. The last comprehensive review of the Public Service Compensation Framework was undertaking in 2007.

Since then, the public service has changed significantly. The complexity of government has increased. Public expectations have increased, Technology regulation, compliance obligations and service delivery standards have evolved considerably. At the same time, members will recall the difficult fiscal adjustment period following the global financial crisis, during which salary reductions and the suspension of increments were introduced.

Although salaries were restored in 2008 to the 2008 position in 2024. The reality is, in 2026, public officers are still effectively operating within a compensation framework rooted in a 2008 salary level. To repeat, it is 2026 and public servants have been paid as if it is still 2008. Members, Madam Speaker. That is simply not sustainable over the long term. We cannot reasonably expect the modern public service of 2026, operating in a formal, complex, demanding and competitive environment, to continue indefinitely under compensation assumptions fundamentally anchored in almost 2 decades in the past. The position has become increasingly untenable. It is neither competitive nor sustainable, nor conducive to maintaining morale, recruitment and retention across the public service.

And responds to these long-standing issues, the government engaged Price Waterhouse Coopers in February of 2024 to undertake a comprehensive job evaluation and reclassification exercise using an internationally recognised methodology. It is important to understand that this exercise was not conducted arbitrarily, nor was it approached as a simple percentage increase exercise. PwC applied a structured methodology designed to evaluate posts based on. Responsibility, complexity, supervision, scope, technical expertise, decision-making authority, operational impact, and working conditions.

Importantly, the methodology focus on evaluating the requirements and responsibilities of positions rather than the individuals occupying them. The objective was to establish a more transparent, consistent and defensible framework capable of supporting recruitment, workforce planning, progression and future compensation management in a more systemic way. Honourable Members, I also recognise that there has been considerable discussion, both within the public service and the public, regarding the fact that different posts have seen different outcomes under the framework. Madam Speaker, we hear those concerns.

However, it is important to explain that the principle. It is important to explain the principle underpinning the exercise. This review was never designed to produce the same dollar increase for every public officer. Had that been the objective, we simply could have implemented an across-the-board increase. That would have undoubtedly been simpler administratively and would and it would have addressed the deeper structural issues, but it would not have addressed the deeper structural issues that have developed within the public service compensation framework over the many years.

The purpose of the exercise was instead to determine the appropriate placement Of roles within a modernised public service structure, taking into account the relative responsibilities, complexity, accountability, and organizational demands associated with each post. Put simply, Madam Speaker, the exercise was not intended to ask how much should every individual receive, rather, it sought to ask what is the appropriate place of each rule within the modern public service structure.

That distinction matters, Madam Speaker. The methodology focuses on evaluating the job itself rather than individual occupying the position. It requires it considers what the role is required to do, the level of judgment expected, the complexity of the duties involved and the level of accountability attached. The exercise then places posts within a more coherent job architecture so that work of comparable responsibility and complexity is treated more consistently across ministries and departments.

What this This is what allows government to move away from fragmented and often outdated arrangements toward a more unified and transparent compensation structure across the public service. Madam Speaker, that inevitably means different posts will be affected differently. Some positions were identified as being significantly below where they are reasonable to sit within the structure, some are already more closely aligned to the revised framework, and some posts were reclassified. Some arrangements were protected and some areas may still require further review as implementation proceeds. That does not mean that government is indifferent to concerns about perceived inequality. Rather, it reflects the important distinction between sameness and fairness.

An identical dollar increase for every officer may appear equal on its face, but it does not necessarily affect. It does not necessarily address underlying inequities within the system. A structured job evaluation exercise seeks and set to place jobs within a coherent framework based on relative responsibility and organisational value. For example, you may have two officers, both hard working and deeply committed public servants, but their posts may involve different levels of technical complexity, supervisory responsibility, operational risk, financial accountability, or decision-making authority.

Under a structured methodology, those differences must be recognised. Equally, where two posts are genuinely comparable in value and responsibility, the framework should support more consistent treatment across the public service. That is a discipline of the methodology. Madam Speaker, no methodology is perfect and no reform exercise of this scale will eliminate every concern or disagreement.

However, this approach represents a structured attempt to bring greater order, transparency and consistency and fairness to competitor competency system that over time, had become increasingly fragmented and difficult to manage coherently. Another important aspect of the exercise was the recognition that the Anguilla Public Service does not operate in isolation from broader labor market realities. The benchmarking exercise therefore considered comparable public sector environments, regional compensation, trains trends, labor market pressures, professional scarcity and broader market realities.

This was particularly relevant in certain areas like health services, finance, legal services, engineering, information technology and certain specialist technical positions. At the same time, the exercise was not intended to mirror private sector salaries or create unsustainable arrangements. The objective was to strike an appropriate balance between competitiveness, internal equity, affordability and fiscal sustainability. Honourable Members, different implementation options were therefore considered.

As the Premier would have mentioned earlier, the lower percentile option would have been less expensive but may not have sufficiently addressed recruitment and retention concerns. The higher percentile option would have produced a much larger salary movement, but was considered. Difficult to sustain and justify fiscally over the long run. The recommended approach was considered a more balanced and sustainable middle ground.

Honourable Members, this is not a small undertaking. As you would have heard earlier, the estimated fiscal impact is farther $ 41.4 million. This is an increase of approximately 25.7% over the current Labor bill. However, I must say that this was not entirely unforeseen as this was forecasted into the government's medium term economic and fiscal plan as we had anticipated a growth in the region of about 25%.

So the fact that we came in at 25.7% I think is a Good testament to the skill and dexterity at the team over the Ministry of Finance for getting us so close to what we had estimated. It would be irresponsible to undertake. A reform of this magnitude. lightly equally, we can ignore its long standing structural iniquities indefinitely. Compensation reform cannot exist in isolation from wider public service reform.

So as the government moves to modernise modern modernise the compensation framework, parallel work is also underway to strengthen the broader systems of accountability, performance management, and professional standards across the public service. This ongoing work includes implementation and strengthening of the Public Service Commission regulations, improvements in performance management and development review processes, A clearer framework for conduct, discipline and accountability. Leadership training and workforce planning. And a broader set of public service reforms aimed at modernising the machinery of government. Madam Speaker, the objective must be a modern public service that is not only better compensated but also better managed, more accountable, more responsible and more performance oriented.

The public is entitled to expect professionalism, fairness, integrity and high standards of service of delivery across the public service. Equally, public officers are entitled to expect clearer systems, fairer structures, improve leadership support and more transparent processes. The reform agenda must therefore be understood as part of a wider effort to strengthen the overall effectiveness, credibility and sustainability of the Anguilla public service.

Honourable Members, compensation reform alone will not modernise the public sector. Salary adjustments for themselves do not automatically improve performance, productivity, accountability or service delivery. Those things require broader institutional reform, stronger management systems, clearer expectations, and sustained leadership across the public service. And as the government invests significantly in the public service.

The public is entitled to expect, again, as I said, improve responsiveness, stronger accountability. Greater professionalism and better management of underperformance. And expect higher levels of productivity across the public service from all ministries and departments. This reform therefore cuts board raised, Madam Speaker. Government is making a significant investment in the public service because we recognise the importance of the institution and the people within it, but equally, the public service must continue evolving towards a stronger culture of performance, productivity, innovation and accountability. Madam Speaker, I also think it's important to recognise that no reform exercise of this scale will satisfy every individual expectation.

That is simply the reality of any public service compensation review. There will inevitably be persons who believe they should have received more or who may disagree with particular outcomes. However, the objective of the exercise was not to create a perfect outcome for every single individual post. The objective was to produce a more coherent, equitable and sustainable framework across the public service as a whole. In many respects, this exercise seeks to achieve the greatest overall fairness and structural benefit across the widest class section of the public service possible, while still maintaining fiscal responsibility and long-term sustainability. Madam Speaker, there's also understandably been public discussion concerning the consequential treatment of parliamentary and political office for enumeration within the broader framework.

I wish to emphasise that the primary purpose of this exercise is the reform and modernization of the wider public sector compensation framework. The treatment of parliamentary remuneration arises consequentially from the broader structural review and a need to preserve appropriate relativities across. The framework. I will also respectfully urge that we separate personalities from the officers themselves. Our responsibility is to consider the office and the responsibilities it carries, not the individuals whom a temporary hold these offices.

That distinction helps ensure that decisions are principal, consistent and defensible over time. The central focus of this reform remains the Anguilla public service and the wider machinery of government. Auto remembers no compensation framework is ever perfect. However, I believe this reform represents a necessary and important step powers creating a more coherent, modern, transparent and sustainable public service compensation.

System for Anguilla. I therefore support the provisions contained within the supplementary approach Appropriation Bill necessary to facilitate the implementation of this reform. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Honorable deputy Governor. Does any other member wish to speak? I recognise the honourable Member for West End. Thank you.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, again, as always, I thank the people of District 7 who afforded me the opportunity to stand in this honourable House and make a presentation on their behalf and by extension, as the Minister of Health, Tourism and Sports for the people of Anguilla. Madam Speaker, I want to start by thanking the Premier and also the Deputy Governor for their presentations.

I do believe that. It's pretty straightforward. I will give my views on. Say from my ministries where I do believe that it will help our people of Anguilla. Madam Speaker, of course I thank the various ministries, especially the Ministry of Finance and. Again, my Ministry of Health, Tourism and Sports. For the work that they've done in making this happen or bringing this to the House of Assembly, it is whenever you talk about finances, people are always concerned how much somebody else is getting. Are they getting more than I am? But the fact is, Madam Speaker,

I would like to think that work that was done by Maeza and her team as well as finance. That it must have been a challenge. But again, This is why they take the job. They're up for a challenge just as us as elected members in government. But as a government, Madam Speaker, who prides itself on putting our people first and our Premier’s presentation would have clearly outlined that despite the areas of high costs, our government and the government of Anguilla will look beyond the cost in order to meet the needs of our people, whether they are here in Anguilla or whether they're overseas.

It is vital, Madam Speaker, that we are here to the needs of our people. And it is not just during an election time. But whether you're in opposition or whether you set out to become elected, you really need to listen to the needs and adhere to the needs of the people. Not just listen, but act on it. Number of people would ask, Madam Speaker, when you bring this Bill or this Act to the House, the Supplementary Appropriation 2026 Act to the House, people will ask, how does this supplementary budget affect me?

Because it's it's natural, Madam Speaker, that persons. Will always. Look at themselves first to see whether or not what's in the budget or what programs the government will have whether or not. It benefits them. But, Madam Speaker. The thing is, you don't just support those who are closest to you, but you support all of them, all of the people of Anguilla. And I like to think that's exactly what. Would have happened here today. Madam Speaker, again, as I said to many people, be personal.

How do I care if it affects somebody else? Well, Madam Speaker, we as elected members have to, whether people vote for us or we think they vote for us or not. As the Minister of Health, Tourism and Sports, the figure and our recurrent budget is 7,729,323. And Madam Speaker, most of the time you think of budgets and big figures or figures, doesn't matter how big they are.

The question is, is whether or not in a short space of time that figures enough. What I do know, the challenge that the Ministry of Finance or the PS and her staff will face, is that I'm sure that my ministry, whether it's sports, tourism or health, would have asked for more than what's on paper. But the fact is when the speaker, we're so grateful to what is given.

Madam Speaker. In under health. A doctor for the Agnes Agatha Richardson Clinic in West End, which will benefit not just the people or the residents of District 7. But the school? And I think wherever there's a school, there should be a clinic close by because you know what children are like, they are likely to hurt themselves, they're likely to hurt each other. A number of persons in the hotel industry in District 7.

When someone says they're not feeling well. Most of the time, if not all of the time. Managers by suggested them go home and rest. I would rather, Madam Speaker, they go and check to see what is wrong before they go home and try to sleep it off. As you know, sleeping it off sometimes mean you don't wake up. So, I think this will be something in a community where on any given day.

The staff at. Aurora, Cap Juluca, Four Seasons, the different villas, Malliouhana would probably come close to what it's here in the Valley on a daily basis. And the traffic that goes to and fro means, Madam Speaker, that there are challenges within the community. Madam Speaker, also. We are looking at an orthopedic surgeon. And our ophthalmologists for those. For others, that there'll be an eye doctor. Madam Speaker, again, far too often.

I've got my glasses now too, so I could do that eye doctor, but on a serious note, Madam Speaker, far too often many of our. people have to go to Saint Maarten to get their eyes checked because what ophthalmologists had been available to us has been very infrequent here in Anguilla.

So as you move forward as an island that we can proudly say we honor the prize of the Caribbean. You have to start with your people and it's not just about persons who come here as visitors, the people that live here, the people that needs the support and probably cannot afford at times to get across to Saint Martin. Tourism, Madam Speaker, again is an area.

That affects all of us here in Anguilla. And and meeting what's in the budget as well is to meet part here compensation uplift obligation. Supporting marketing and growth of direct air service through strategic routes, expansion into Anguilla through the Anguilla Tourist Board. So with my colleague, the Honorable Jose Vanterpool and I, we've worked closely over the last year and a bit as to how we can best improve on the numbers are coming to Anguilla.

And I think a shot in the arm for us, Madam Speaker. Has been Bermuda work that has gone into Bermuda air. The fact that. Persons out of Boston, out of Newark, out of Washington, Baltimore and now out of Toronto. That we can go knock on the door and said and say to them that we're from Anguilla, come with us.

They're going directly to Anguilla in the past, Madam Speaker. Questions will be asked even here in the Caribbean, talk about Anguilla, where is that? And then the next question is how do you get there and even for us in the Caribbean, Madam Speaker. LIAT has not done us any favors over the last 15/20 years and most of the airlift within the Caribbean and we're fortunate to have Trans Anguilla Airways and Anguilla Air Services and the beauty about us as a people. Madam Speaker, going back to our history, that's not just about 1967, it is Anguillians regarded as pioneers whether it was in the air.

While in Caribbean terms, it will be Madam Speaker. When it's in the air or on the sea. So, so, Madam Speaker, again, we will do what we can. Let's say we the government of Anguilla would support in any way possible. And with Trans Anguilla Airways going direct to the British Virgin Islands, that again opens an Avenue. for us. That is their relationship again with TCI again is vitally important.

Bermuda out of Bermuda again. As the overseas British Overseas Territories. This in recent times this has been a link. That through the air and through air services and through tourism has grown. It is not just about the JMC going to England and putting the case for the Caribbean. It tells us that we are prepared to work among ourselves in order to make our main industry, the tourism industry, productive to us within the region. Madam Speaker.

Again, I must give a lot of credit to tourism and it's not just the angular Tourist Board. But if the figures were down over the last six months, over the last year, they would be criticised. I would be criticized, the government would be criticized. So. To Jamil as the director Chantelle Richardson. As the deputy director, a new CMO and their staff. But they could not do it alone, Madam Speaker.

The fact is, Madam Speaker, is that it's a partnership. And within the private sector, the private sector, I would believe that. Pretty much all members of the private sector tourism sector would have had. One of the best years ever. I know hotels like Malliouhana said that the first quarter they're up 40%.

Once the hotels are doing well and the numbers are up, it means that our people are doing well, persons within the industry are doing well. It means that government is doing well from the taxes in spite of. Cutting back on the GST and we could talk about 40 plus million dollars, Madam Speaker, but God finds a way to reward those who deserves it.

So, so Madam Speaker again. Things are good but we don't take it for granted. You still have to further invest and sometimes persons will talk about costs. But what is cost when it is an investment and sometimes people want instant gratification, but we know that the strongest hope takes years to be established. So and likewise,

Madam Speaker, what we do today, of course, we have to stay ahead of the game today, but we also need to look, look ahead as well, Madam Speaker, and plant that foundation in the years for the years ahead. Madam Speaker. Again, my colleagues, I think we'll all of them will point out where their ministries, different ministries and departments will benefit from this supplementary. So, and I'm hoping that my Honourable Member.

Evans, McNeil, Rogers will be here before the days out because he's done quite a lot of work. When it comes to what's happening in in health and the beauty of that, Madam Speaker too, it's not just about governments funding. And I think that is another important factor is that the likes of Evans, McNeil, Rogers, through his association over the years has been able to make life a lot easier for a number of our people. And I'm sure the same applies to all elected Members. In fact, you don't have to be elected to help others. But there's always that expectation that you as an elected Member, when help is asked, you have to find a way to get it.

And Madam Speaker, if you have the passion for the chances are you're bound to succeed. Madam Speaker, I am not going to use my 45 minutes to Premier told me I cannot go past her 43 minutes. That's a bit tongue and cheek. Madam Speaker, I try to get to the point and I'll play too much politics.

Although I was told by. Someone earlier today that it is about Politics. No, it isn't. It is about our people, Madam Speaker. And again to the deputy governor who says he doesn't speak much in the House, but when he speaks it's very powerful. I thought his presentation today, I think anybody who had questions about whether or not. The civil servants deserves a pay rise or the process. I think he explained it.

But of course there will be those. Going to try to pick it apart, but that's the political game I suppose. Madam Speaker, I thank you so much for the opportunity to make my presentation. And again to the people of Anguilla, we will continue to do what is required and again, I'm sure when the Premier decides to bring the that building in England to the House, I am prepared to say why I believe that it is in the best interest of all people, whether they hear an Anguilla now or but the people in Anguilla. In England are people that supported us when Anguilla did not have an industry. Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member. Does any Member wish to speak? I recognise the Honourable Leader of Opposition.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and good afternoon. Good afternoon to you, Madam Speaker, the Clerk, the staff. To the Honourable Members of the House, to those in the gallery. To Anguillians here and abroad listening. Speaker, I'd like to start off by saying that I support the. Comprehensive salary and compensation review and certainly.

That the bill has come to the House. Madam Speaker back in 2020. Upon coming into government. The Anguilla Progressive Movement. Met a Bill. To cut public suffering salaries by 5%. And we immediately. Refused to carry forward that Bill. Speaker, At that time, we stated that the public servants were the ones that were essentially protecting the economy of Anguilla. They were the ones who are working in a closed country where our main industry was shuttered because of COVID-19.

And we felt that to cut the public servants salaries further would have led to economic scoring the likes of which Anguilla would not have recovered from, Madam Speaker. Speaker In trying to implement the Goods and Service Tax, which was started by the previous administration, the Anguilla United Front on October 1 of 2019, we were told in order to. Move for the implementation to be later on. That we would have to cut the public servants salaries 7.5 to 10%.

To get down to October of 2022. So we settled for July of 2022, Madam Speaker. Having given up. The ability to grant scholarships. And other necessary entities to help the public servants. To progress. Madam Speaker, we paid the back pay that had been agreed upon. We reversed the 2009 and 2010 cuts for public servants to get them back to their salaries of 2008. And Madam Speaker, we gave ex-gratia of payments at the end of year for two years running.

The Anguilla Progressive Movement commissioned the comprehensive salary and compensation review, Madam Speaker, and as you heard the Deputy Governor say, this PwC was commissioned from February of 2024. So. We are not happy that it took this long to get to the House, but we are happy. That it has made it. So,

I want to commend the Deputy Governor and the government of Anguilla for completing the task to PwC for consultancy services. The Ministry of Finance. Public Administration. For seeing through the report, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. There are many public servants who are complaining. Haven't heard? Seen leaks? Concerned about where they have fallen in this. Compensation review and it might have been a slip of the tongue or Freudian slip, but the Deputy Governor said the iniquities of the process so that that usually means a sin,

Madam Speaker, because. Think he meant an inequity, but he said iniquities and that's what we have seen, Madam Speaker, in this in this process. Certainly, on Friday we had a meeting with PwC and the Minister of Finance, Permanent Secretary and. Got a glimpse of what went into the process, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, throughout the discussions with PwC and recent presentation by the Leader of Government business and the Deputy Governor, I have not heard the emphasis on cost of living, Madam Speaker, which we see that public servants are concerned about. Public servants are concerned that Yes. There may be raises. But do these raises help them in terms of being able to Live, Madam Speaker, in fact.

Let's see what the Premier said that salary effects households. Helps to pay bills, pay for food, medicines, affects the ability of families to plan their lives. Madam Speaker, the public servants who are in the lower grades are saying. That the changes. The uplifts. Are so insignificant that it doesn't help them and they still have to consider doing second and third jobs and being tired when they come to work because they have to work also at night or extended hours so that they can make ends meet.

And there was an anticipation, Madam Speaker, there was an anticipation by us as elected Members when we were in government, that the compensation review. Would address that cost of living which would help our people and in this age when we have our young men especially, but young people in general that. Or at home alone and their parents are out working two and three jobs, Madam Speaker.

We were hoping that there would have been some. Greater uplift. For some of our persons in the lower grades, Madam Speaker. I'm not attacking those in the higher grades, Madam Speaker, who are getting uplifts and, you know, 70 to. $80,000 more a year. But I'm sympathizing with those who will see increases in their salaries of only four or $5000 a year, Madam Speaker, and that is concerning.

To me as one who represents all the people. Those in District 1 especially, but Anguillians in general. And now some may be concerned more about Anguillians overseas and providing a house for them in London or wherever in the UK, but I'm concerned about the people here on the ground that, Madam Speaker.

Have to live with the everyday expenses of electricity costs and. And food costs, which have gone up exponentially. Since August 1 of 2025. Another cost Madam Speaker, cost of healthcare and we see that they had to be at $3,000,000 increase in medical treatment overseas. Madam Speaker, that is concerning because. There is an intention that we improve our healthcare services. Upgrades to the hospital, Madam Speaker, I see included in the budget of 2026 and now reiterated in this supplementary specialist services.

This is what we should be concentrating on, Madam Speaker, in that regard, equipment and support staff. Madam Speaker, I think that $9.5 million. Whether that is the amount or 16 or 17,000,000 EC dollars, which we have heard talked about for a place in London. That could be better spent here at home, Madam Speaker.

And I thought we had just gotten past that, Madam Speaker, but it was again reiterated by the Member for West End and the Member for Sandy Hill that this is something that they're gung-ho on pursuing, Madam Speaker. And I think that this is one of the most ill-conceived and misuse of the people's money that I have ever heard about, Madam Speaker.

And I will speak against it until I get blue in the face. The Premier said last time I was here that I was angry, and I certainly am angry. You can. bet on it, Madam Speaker, because I think that if this administration had continued the blueprint that was set out, instead of pausing, reassessing and reprioritizing, Anguilla would be in a much better position than it is right now,

Madam Speaker. And the people know it and they speak about it continuously wherever you meet them when they send messages. They're concerned that this country has regressed significantly from where it was and March of 2025, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker some shocks or external? And some are internal. And the worst shocks you can have is when. An inept administration makes decisions. Or fails to make decision, decisions that leads the country office access, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker. This medical treatment overseas of $3,000,000. I think some of this could have been averted Madam Speaker if we had gone towards the National Insurance Fund and, Madam Speaker, we do know that we have the Senior Shield and Junior Shield, which covers a cross section of the population, but we wanted to see a National Insurance that would cover all the people of Anguilla.

And then it wouldn't be necessary because there would be a fund setup that would cover patients who had to be to have secondary and tertiary care that could not be provided here. Now, I heard the Member for West End, who is the Minister of Health, talk about getting orthopedic surgeon. How can you tell an orthopedic surgeon to come to Anguilla for 251,000 EC dollars? Madam Speaker, that is less than 100,000 U.S. dollars.

There's no way that orthopedic surgeon is going to come here for that. And Madam Speaker, what concerns me, and I'll get to that in a little bit as to the way that the grading is done. We can separate the Deputy Governor and the attorney general out and put him in a special grade. But we need doctors. And nurses. Who can provide services that are necessary to take care of our people so that they are not dropping down and dying at young ages?

From treatable illnesses, Madam Speaker. And we want to offer. 250,000 EC dollars to a specialist. Madam Speaker, there are specialists who can make 250,000 EC dollars in one month. There's no way you're going to attract them to Anguilla. We've been trying to get a psychiatrist in Anguilla now since we came in 2020 and still that has been something that is unattainable because you cannot get a specialist that is in demand elsewhere that will get triple four times what we offer in Anguilla. And so

I would like to see that the government would have taken that into consideration and consider. Certain specialties. That you can't categorise into a grade 10. Just like you can't categorise the DG and AG into the 1 to 11 so they get a special classification. Speaker, This is necessary so that we can save our people.

And maybe I'm concerned because I'm a medical professional. But the other areas, Madam Speaker, Madam Speaker, I'm concerned about teachers, teachers that we have. Said We are giving you our most vulnerable children and asking you to teach them so that they can live to their full potential. We want to invest in our young people and Madam Speaker, we are saying to teachers that you will start at a Grade 3.

Yes, that's a little raised from where they were, Madam Speaker, but you are committing our children to them. And we have to incentivise them so that they can continue to provide them their services, so they can mentor our young people and give them that foundation so that they can function in a global world and, and they have to be able to fit in,

Madam Speaker, and our teachers. Are fit into those categories, Madam Speaker, concerns me. I've always, Madam Speaker, proposed hazard pay. That this should be considered in our grading system. Technical skills. Such as that in our nurses. And then our technicians, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. I listened to PwC on Friday. I listen to the. Permanent Secretary of Finance on Friday also. I'm sure.

We'll hear from the Permanent Secretary and the Public Administration during the comment the committee stage. But I'm very concerned about. Again, Madam Speaker, those persons on the low end, I got a message from our housekeeper, Madam Speaker, who's in Department of Health Services that came in and said that you know they.

Increase. Is less than $1000 a month. And they then look up the ladder. And they see that. Someone in the ministry is getting. 7 to $10,000 more month. And the concern they have is what? Or their worth. How do you calculate worth, Madam Speaker, and I know the Deputy Governor talked about that.

It is the position, not the individual. But you cannot be that. Technical and robotic that you can't see. That this grading system effects people. Effects families, Effects lives effects Anguillians, especially Anguillians who live in Anguilla. And so that's a concern I have with this, with this grading system, not that.

We have an uplift for our public servants who God knows that they deserve it. And they have sacrificed enough. And they should be compensated. But I don't see an issue, Madam Speaker, with. It doesn't have to be straight across the board that this percentile is what you're going to use and it raises someone by $600 a month and someone by $11,000 a month. That to me. Seems inequitable. Maybe an iniquity Deputy Governor? The other concerns I have.

Madam Speaker. Our fire officers certainly love to see that they have been taken into consideration for the risk that they take. So police officers or fire officers, they take risks. And that risk should be built into their salary compensations. I see our constables. Of held low on the pole and then we say we want Anguillians. To want to become police officers.

But we starting a constable as a grade. Three, I think it is. My memory is not that good because I had only a few hours to see the numbers, Madam Speaker, but. If we want to get Anguillians to stay in Anguilla, to work in Anguilla, to want to do jobs in Anguilla, we have to incentivise them. Otherwise, we'll continue that brain drain, which happens. The. I was.

Good. It was good to see that Anglec will be paid the $10 million that was negotiated as the outstanding payment. And that was owed by the water corporation. Of Anguilla. Madam Speaker. I always say. That if we had followed. The plan? That the APM had. Of getting an investor or investors or developers Anguillian or non Anguillian.

To develop renewable energy. They would have come up with the cost, the maintenance, the insurance. And there were proposals, Madam Speaker, that I have seen, and there were over 12 and at least 12 entities that approached us about this, none of which I had any interest in that, as we call, though that was proposed.

Where the cost of electricity per kilowatt hour could have been down to 19 cents, 19 US cents per kilowatt hour. For renewable energy. Just think about how we would not have to be spending the money right now to pay for the fuel surcharge as it goes up, up, up and up. And that money that we have to put now into covering.

The difference from $0.42 to $1.04 could have gone to something else. Could have gone to a vulnerable families. Could have gone to help those seniors who already retired who are getting 3 or $400.00 a month from Social Security. What is happening to them Madam Speaker, they are the ones also who's calling and saying what about them House because.

Dot AI. Domain name registration revenue is for all Anguillians. And they're people in Anguilla who are saying. We know that it's necessary for that dot AI to carry the budgets and the supplementary budgets. But how are we benefiting? Who's looking out for us? And so I would propose,

Madam Speaker, that. Government gives consideration to increasing. Those benefits so that those who already retired. Can get more than the three or $400.00 a month that they get. From Social Security. Increase public assistance for the vulnerable. The APM had increased public assistance by 25% a month for 115 vulnerable families. I'm sure there are more now. That should be a consideration. Remove the universal social levy. 3%,

Madam Speaker, would go back to employees and 3% to employers so that they can continue to a higher persons to improve their businesses. To have a mobile. As stable and predictable. Business remove property tax for Anguillian businesses Madam Speaker, when we remove the property tax for domestic houses, that was about $3.4 million that the government gave up in revenue.

I'm sure that if you remove property tax for Anguillian businesses, that would be less than the $9.5 million that was proposed for a house in London, which has now been removed from this supplementary and I thank the government for that consideration. Because supplementary budgets should deal with. Emergencies or crises or should deal with.

Areas of national importance. I reiterate that a house in London is not of national importance and certainly not an urgency or emergency. Madam Speaker, I'd like to see consideration for regrading of doctors, nurses, dentists, dental therapists, technicians. And consideration be given to their technical skills and the risks that they have to endure exposure to different disease entities. Exposure to infectious agents. Exposure to other hazards. Radiation.

And I'd like to see this discussed at the committee stage in consideration be given. to fire officers, policemen, and to teachers especially, Madam Speaker, that they would understand that they have a role in this society that is paramount, Madam Speaker, when we talk about losing our young people, especially our young men, our teachers certainly have a role to play and

I would like to see them incentivise so that they see this as an obligation to help our people. I'd like to state that one size does not fit all. And so those who are categorised in the lower grades. They may just be technical, they may just be support staff. But they fulfill a role that cannot. Keep the ones at the top. In their positions of decision making and strategic planning.

If you do not have those at the bottom, it's like the worker bees protecting the queen. Without the worker bees, the hive does not survive. And I don't know if the calculations already are done deal. Certainly you would think if things come to the House they can be.

Discussed and. Decisions can be made and taken back to Executive Council and since we don't have to get UK approval now for our budgets, then this can be a consideration. But I would like to see these considerations given, Madam Speaker, so that the people of Anguilla, especially our public servants, can feel that they have been heard.

Because when they call me or they write me, they said they have spoken and they have not been listened to. I will not use my full hour and a half today, Madam Speaker, because I think that I started out by saying. We are in support of. Compensation uplift for our public servants. But I just wanted to point out. Where I think that we have fallen short.

And then in terms of increments and progressions, Madam Speaker. I appreciate that this is now back consideration by the government. And that performance matters and I think that our public servants need to know that that as they perform better. And they get their reviews that show they're performing, that they salaries will increase. And also that they incentivise that as they get more training.

And get degrees that they can change the classifications, their job descriptions and that they can become compensated higher. But I do think, Madam Speaker, that we need to have a floor. That is tenable. For public servants to feel that that somebody is looking out for them and that they can meet their obligations. And I don't think that the floor right now is. One that the most of them will be able to live with in terms of being able to work to give their all to the public service and the service of the people of Anguilla and not have to go out and find other jobs which take away the attention from taking care of the needs, Madam Speaker.

And then and then the ability to keep persons here matters because I still think that our technical persons in the Department of Health. That they still will have concerns about if they can do better elsewhere. And they'll continue be looking and I think one of the goals of this comprehensive salary. And compensation review was to try to retain persons and also to be able to recruit persons into the Anguilla Public Service.

This is necessary, Madam Speaker, that we look at this carefully and critically so that we can keep persons here. We can have Anguillians go off and study and come back and feel that they are being compensated appropriately. And I don't don't feel that they should just. Stay where they go. Speaker, I just wanted to.

Touch on. One or two more areas and then I will. Take my seat. There was a mention of relativity between salaries. At the bottom. Where these posts are considered to be transactional. And support. Versus at the top. Considered to be strategic. Decision making. And these are the ones at the top are the ones that drive the country. Madam Speaker.

I think that unless we look out for those, those at the bottom. Then we'll have a country that is top heavy. And it will fall down. Because anything without a good foundation cannot stand. And I want the people of Anguilla to know that. The intention? When we. Paid for the comprehensive. salary review and company compensation review.

The philosophy was that. Like the Honourable Father of the Nation said. That when the big ships rise. That the small ships would rise also. Madam Speaker I think that. We're getting it right near the top. We are not quite there at the bottom or in the middle. And I would. Respectfully ask.

The government of Anguilla. To reconsider. Whether this should be across the board there? Compensation. And percentile or the ones at the bottom should get a higher compensation percentile so that they too. Can feel that this compensation review mattered. I thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Honorable Leader of Opposition. Does any other Member wish to speak? Does any other Member wish to speak? We are doing great for time. Oh, do you wish for a break? Thank you, Honourable Members, you've been following my timelines. It is actually the scheduled break that we had intended to take at 4:00 PM.

Thank you for reminding me. I will propose, however, that we take just a 15 minute break as opposed to a 30 minute break because we're making for good time and I think we could press on. So unless there's any objection to it, I propose that we take a 15 minute break now.

Yes, OK, we'll stand down for 15 minutes.

This house resumes its sitting. As we were before the break, are there any other contributions to the bill that is on the floor? A Bill for Supplementary Appropriation Act 2026 Amendment Act 2026. I recognise the Honourable Member for Road South.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Today is really a bittersweet day. Sweet because this has been a long, long time in the making. Very long time in the making. Madam Speaker. In the latter part of 2005. The Political Directorate. Led by the Anguilla United Front. Mr. Osborne Burlington Fleming.

Raise the salaries for the parliamentarians. And only for the parliamentarians. When the public service got wind of it. They protested. And so the Government of Anguilla. Went and they raised the salaries again for all the public servants. At the top, they raised it by some 25%. At the bottom, some set 5 1/2 to seven, 7 1/2 percent. In 2007, I believe.

The salaries were raised again. And again. In 2009. When Anguilla was gripped. With the financial crisis. The salaries were raised yet again. No analysis. There were raised yet again. And even though. Everyone knew we had a financial crisis because the government of the day, they held a special meeting for the general public at a Teachers Resource Center at the library. I attended that meeting as well. Where Mr. Fleming and Mr. Banks, along with the rest of the Cabinet, laid out the dire fiscal position of this country, Madam Speaker.

It was so bad. That Evan McNeil Rogers, after having so much difficulties from Her Majesty's Government at a time, said Anguilla need to go into independence, a position I was happy to hear because I believe that we are long overdue. Osbourne Fleming said he was the Chief Minister, Premier of the country at the time. He said Britain need to come for their country. In 2009. The British Government wrote to Osbourne Fleming.

Chastising him about measures that he needed to put in place to fix the fiscal position of Anguilla. Those included a 5% payroll tax, increases in property tax, a number of taxes, Madam Speaker. Significant number of taxes. and Osbourne Fleming ignore them. But at that meeting at the Teachers Resource Center, Dr. Aidan Harrigan, who was a Permanent Secretary of Economic Development. He got up and he said I have never seen a situation this bad.

But we must understand something here. When the salaries were increased exponentially. It wasn't out of a need to increase the salaries at a time. It was out of a meeting that was held between the Executive Committee at Cap Juluca and the Government of Anguilla. Related to a new program that Cap Juluca was instituting called the Villa Management Program. And after several attempts to recruit Parsons to run this program at the hotel, they were unsuccessful, even though Cap Juluca itself had invested in Anguillians to train for this program, but no one wanted to take it up. And in the recruitment? That was led by Doctor Phyllis Fleming Banks. found that the only persons who were interested in the program was out of Antigua and they were Philippinos.

So true of Phillippino agency. Cap Juluca decided, you know what, since we can't find anybody to manage this program, we're going to try to get some Phillippinos in here. And the government was resistant to it. And a meeting was held at the Ministry of Home Affairs. Madam Speaker, and I'm speaking because I attended that meeting.

As an executive at Cap Juluca. And in that meeting? Osborne Fleming stated the only way he would approve these work permits is if he is given the top 10 salaries of Cap Juluca. And so the top ten salaries of captured who was granted. And Mr. Fleming said, well, if that is the case, then I have to do something about my salary. No, I'm not knocking Mr. Fleming because in my mind he was being woefully underpaid and personally disagree with that because they're looking at Mr. Fleming as the individual. But we must remember at the time the Chief Minister received some in a region of 9000 EC dollars. Well, because of the way the process was done back then, Madam Speaker.

Everything went haywire. And if you read, and I know Jose Vanterpool is reading man because he said so many occasions if you read the book. Rich dad, poor dad. You'll understand the concept, Madam Speaker. Everything went haywire when these salaries were being increased because everybody across the island started demanding, hence salaries too. Construction workers were now getting paid almost 200 U.S. dollars a day. The shop owners, the shopkeepers and so forth,

Madam Speaker, had to raise their salaries. The banks raise their salaries exponentially. We never will forget that the United Front Leader, Mr. Osborne Fleming, was also the chairman of the Board of Directors of the Caribbean Commercial Bank at the same time, simultaneously, Madam Speaker, so all. Of the salaries went up exponentially. So what happened?

Businesses then increase. Their cost, and so they pass on that cost to the consumer. The chief minister at the time, the United Front Chief Minister, Mr. Osbourne Fleming, said publicly on radio. I want you to go to the bank and borrow. And people across this island rushed to the banks walk away same day. Don't talk about the December specials at NBA, Madam Speaker.

And people borrowed, people borrowed, and people borrowed. So when the crisis came and jobs were lost and salaries were reduced. Persons had already. Fit as I-spy would say, he said. Don't put your hat with your hand can reach, but person had already budgeted. The increased salary and committed themselves to the increased salaries and all of a sudden they were getting these significant reductions in salaries in 2009, in 2010 and I believe in 2011.

So that left public servants in particular. At a disadvantageous position and never mind all the criticism the APM received when we were in office and we were talking about reinstatement of public servant’s salaries, we got a lot of criticism. I listened to our radio program one day, Madam Speaker, where they were saying that 80% of governments expenditure is going into public servant salaries and that is extremely high and this APM need to cut the public servants salaries because you never should forget.

That when we came to office there was a plan to cut the public servant salaries by 5%. Persons were already 5% away from the red line. In all of these things, but, Madam Speaker, the record would show. That as relates to a percentage of government’s expenditure. It was only the region of 43%, which is pretty good. And people need to understand, do a comparative analysis between Anguilla and the rest of the world. And salaries are going up today.

And when these salaries go up, Madam Speaker, it's still roughly in the region of. 50/51% of government expenditure, which is still pretty good. Because you have to look and compare other jurisdictions, Madam Speaker. Hey, Madam Speaker. So it is my hope. And that is why I say it is bittersweet too. That's one of the reasons this is my hope that whatever happens. That this is sustainable. Whatever happens that this is sustainable, and I got a good feeling that it would be.

Because I read a press release by the government of Anguilla led by the Minister of Finance, Miss Cora Richards and Mrs. Cora Richardson Hodge, where she said that the governments of Anguilla's fiscal position, revenue generation is extremely good. Based on the revenues collected from GST and dot AI. So I believe.

That it will be sustainable because in the past when we went through a program like this without any proper analysis, the Deputy Governor said the last time we did any type of analysis was 2007. Somebody can correct me if I'm wrong, but in the past when we did this, we did this on the back of work permit fees and alien landholding licenses. Now none of the Members of Parliament say for Evan McNeil Rogers. Was there making that decision at that time, But you create a situation and people got to understand the historical perspective and cause and effect.

It created a situation, Madam Speaker, where we ended up. Where we are before our fiscal exclusion that we experience in today. Cause and effect because of all of these events and shocks that occurred. Including the banking resolution and so forth, Madam Speaker, which is another case, because there's a case coming up with the banking resolution that we have to consider the possible liability of the government of Anguilla to the tune of about a billion dollars.

And I'm not making this up. Because the proceedings. Some proceedings started in some proceedings are yet to be heard and should be heard sometime this year and next year. Now, I'm not a betting man. But if it was a betting man, I would bet that we would lose that case. But I'm a hopeful man. I'm a prayerful man and I believe in God and I'm prayerful that a government of Anguilla will win that case. Because if the government of Anguilla loses, that case is not a loss for the government of Anguilla.

It's a loss for the people of this country. Because imagine with all of the commitments that we now have because. We have a budget that is approaching a billion dollars, Now, Madam Speaker, billion dollars in expenditure. With all of the commitments that we have and all the unseen circumstances, as Cora Richardson-Hodge, the Leader of the Opposition, would have said in the budget debate of 2025, when she look at the big budget that was presented by the APM, she said this is the budget that does not consider external shocks. This budget is bigger, I'm sure the external shocks have been considered. But if all of that said,

Madam Speaker. Coupled with a loss. Of that case as it relates to the bank. We are going to be left. Well, not Jose, not Cardi, not Cordell, not Hayden, But the rest of us can be left pulling our hair out. Because that will be something to behold. But have No Fear. I am here. Whenever I pray to God my prayers come true.

And I hope that we all will pray for a favorable outcome, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. 657,631,309 dollars. Can you imagine? 657,631,309 million in expenditure this year, Madam Speaker. And it's all fine and dandy where when Doctor Webster brought a budget less than two years ago to this house. Of more than $100 million less. It was too big. It was too much.

Guess what? We didn't need BCQS to manage it. And let it be known. That BCQS that we saw in that press release to manage Government of Anguilla’s capital projects. I hope that the Government of Anguilla send BCQS packed back with packing where they come from because BCQS is DCK and DCK have shafted Anguilla and Anguillians time and time again, Madam Speaker, so hopefully.

That does not materialise because DCK was a contractor at Cap Juluca and we know what happened to Cap Juluca. Teon go get your money. Madam Speaker. I would hope that they do not benefit from the government of Anguilla as the tax-payers money. Madam Speaker. The Honorable Dr. Ellis Lorenzo Webster, the Member for Island Harbor, said. That there's some things that the government of Anguilla can do. And we've said there are some things that the government of Anguilla can do. And I know that the government of Anguilla, the present administration, would support these measures.

One, removal of property tax on commercial buildings in Anguilla. I know they will support it. And I know they will support the removement of the USL because the USL was the interim stabilization levy and it was promised that it will be removed on day one on coming to office by Cora Richardson Hodge. Cardigan Connor, Evans McNiel Rogers, Jose Not Jose Vanterpool.

Sorry, I'll be lying about that. It was promised that. and I think that this is a good time to give the businesses that are suffering some relief. Because one of the things that we fail to recognise. Is this when we're talking about giving some relief to the people of Anguilla, through these Credits. Are matching up in the Premier say that they are not even they can be sustainable. Because the. We don't.

They know they're going to what, a dollar and four cents? Madam Speaker. We have seen since February 28 what has occurred. A decapitation move. By the Orange Man. Madam Speaker. Which was supposed to be a couple weeks. Turned into six weeks. Turned into two months and every Friday. Negotiations are about to sign a deal, and every Monday.

Plan to bomb them into obliteration, Madam Speaker. Every Friday. So we don't know because Iran said that they're not anxious to cut a deal. We don't know what's going to happen. And we saw recently during the ceasefire an escalation in hostilities, which means that there is going to be additional cost to the people of this country and to the government of Anguilla. So we need to understand that we're going to be there for the long haul unless some miracle happened in November.

Madam Speaker, they saying that this. At the risk of losing my visa because, you know, America isn't what America used to be. When I was a child, we didn't have no television, Madam Speaker, We didn't have no radio. But what we did have is a lot of books and magazines and read about a great democracy, America, where there's so many freedoms, and keep away from communism because the communist state called the

Soviet Union was a police state where they were looking at your every move and monitoring everything that you did and say and watching your every move and you could be. You could get at you for the things that you say. Today, travel to the US they are even asking for a cell phone to see what your social media says Madam Speaker.

Look like communism one, because China is a communist country. But anyway, I digress, Madam Speaker. The honourable Premier spoke about the 18 years of salary restraints in cuts, Madam Speaker, 18 years. And that is difficult for public servants. Imagine a public servant 18 years or 17 1/2 years ago. 17 1/2 years ago, receiving all of these cuts. Suffered for 18 years, retired last year Now the increases are happening.

They don't benefit from the increases or the gratuity or the pension relating to the increases? And what if we have a shock such as a loss in the case or some major global event or even an act of God? falling on Anguilla like hurricane Luis or hurricane Lenny or hurricane Irma Madam Speaker.

And you have another. 18 years. But the optimist in me? Will not hold on to that, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. There was a number of areas that were regraded. The Member for Island Harbour spoke about some of the inequalities in someone message me and say that Grade 1. Person, who was receiving $44,356.00, will now be receiving, this on a yearly basis per annum $53,628.00.

Which amongst the $772.66 raise. But the person Who was receiving $93,048.00 will now be receiving $153,732.00, which amongst the $5057.00 monthly. raise which at the end of it. The raise between the $93,000 and the $153,000 is some $60,684.00. Which is more? Then the person Who receiving the $53,000 at this point? Which is that raise alone is more than that. Now I'm not blaming anybody, don't get me wrong.

But this is something. That, I believe is going to cause. Some conflict. Persons to be saddened. Paul seems to be disgruntled, Madam Speaker. And Madam Speaker. Initially. The only things that I was going to speak about. Was water fire the crossing guards, Madam Speaker and Ziggy? I love that man, Madam Speaker.

And the reason why is because. Their salaries were so low, Madam Speaker, and for many years, the Permanent Secretary of Finance, the present Permanent Secretary of Finance is an outgoing, Permanent Secretary of Finance, the Minister, Dee-Ann Kentish-Rogers former minister. They can tell you how hard we fought. But we're always told the same thing. That we must go through this process for us before we can address civil salaries. And this process was started, I believe, in 2024.

Well, the discussion started before 2024 birthday day full process started in 2024 so. I don't know why the present salaries are going to be, but I would imagine that it will be more than what they were getting before, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. Slave wages, you know. You could imagine persons making less than 1000 EC dollars a month. You can imagine persons making in certain respects Madam Speaker, 2000 EC dollars a month and don't talk about the firefighters,

Madam Speaker, I had a debate can't even call a debate an argument, even though I don't like to argue. I had an argument quasi debate, Madam Speaker, with a senior public officer where they said to me. Firemen sit over there and don't do nothing. So why should it be paid?

Now when he said that to me? I was really perturb Madam Speaker. Because as Jose Vanterpool would know, and as Cordell Richardson would know, being. In the Ministry of Infrastructure. That is responsible for fire, Madam Speaker. That if you reduce the numbers of firemen. One call in sick, another fellow boot his toe can't make it that have an impact. On the airport because we are regulated. By ACID And that will have a serious impact on the airport and what type of flights can fly into Anguilla.

So don't tell me sir That a fireman is out there sitting down doing anything. Because if you think they don't just sit down, do anything you want to say, OK, don't pay them. And then you don't have anybody playing for the job because they're not properly paid. And then as Doctor Webster spoke about the risk involved in rescuing people, Madam Speaker, there was a terrible accident, just west of my house one day, one night, and I saw the lights and they came out late in the night.

And when they came out, you know who I saw out there rescuing? Those people out of those cars, Madam Speaker, the firefighters, and they did such a magnificent job. They had to use some equipment called Jars of Life, Madam Speaker, to get these persons out of the car so that the ambulance can take them on their merry way.

I shouldn't say merry, but take them to the hospital, Madam Speaker. And we had several situations like that with the firemen, even though they're dealing with the aviation side, they still had to deal with the domestic side. And I thank God, and I know some people may not like me saying this, but I thank God for the chief fire officer, Mr. Shandel Hodge, because I know how hard he fought over the years. For an increase in the salaries of the firemen. I can recall firemen coming to me complaining about him saying you don't fight for us.

And I was like, no, that's not true. Maybe he needs to tell you what he's been doing, but he fought vehemently. For an increase in the salaries for the firemen. And firemen have to go through a significant amount of training and risk. Madam Speaker, we had young Mr. Rey.

Who got severely damaged, Madam Speaker? By no fault of his own. We're not blaming anyone, but it happens. It's a serious risk and had to be flown out. Came back stronger than ever. Thank God for that. We thank God for everyone who acted quickly, Madam Speaker. But these are the risks, Madam Speaker, in the Department of Water Services,

Madam Speaker, we had critical men. Don't underestimate the value of these men on those streets. Sometimes 2:00 in the morning, you see them walking with their listening devices, listening for leaks and so forth. Anytime you call them out there every single day in the blistering sun, Madam Speaker, many a time I've stopped.

Drinks for them, Madam Speaker, and the blistering sun fixing leaks across this island because of our old dilapidated water network that was laid down bad by my first cousin, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, those guys were getting 2000 EC dollars a month. And staying true to the job. True to the task at hand. Not complaining when they found out I started complaining for them, but as I said. We had to go through this process to get where we are today.

And I'm happy that I said. That we're here today, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. Pensioners. Will be considered. And that's a good thing. Because pensioners are people too. It's more important to deal with the pensions, Madam Speaker. than to spend money in a house in London. and thank God,

Madam Speaker. I never believed that I would be saying this today. Thank God for Madam Speaker. Today, Madam Speaker, because, Madam Speaker. Received a letter from the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. Doctor Ellis Lorenzo Webster, The best ear, nose and throat doctor in the world. The greatest leader Anguilla ever had. Madam Speaker, that we need to take out this House in London out of this supplementary budget.

And thank you, Madam Speaker, I want to place on record. For ensuring. That. It occurred. That we are not here, but even though that be the case, Madam Speaker. We heard the Leader of Government business get up today. And still. Say, we are pushing forward with our House of London, Madam Speaker, pushing forward.

For house in London, charity begins at home, Madam Speaker, not in London. Not in central London. Madam Speaker. Leader of Government Business, the Member for Sandy Hill said. It's about tourism. Madam Speaker. We receive about 4%. Of our tourists. From England Meanwhile, we don't have any representation in the United States of America, where the bulk of our tourists comes from. We have just as many people, Anguillians living in the United States of America than we have in England.

And Anguillians in England, they arent sitting down in London, you know, they are in Birmingham, they are in Slough, they all over the place, just like the Anguillians in the United States of America. So imagine re buying a house in central London. Millions of dollars, Madam Speaker. Because of tourism. 4%. No flights. No flights whatsoever.

But in the country, in the jurisdiction that we received the bulk of our tourists, high network tourist balance speaker spending millions of dollars. And we can't really quantify it even though I hear the honorable Jose Vanterpool trying to say how much money we make from having Bermuda Air flying in Anguilla Madam Speaker, for years no hotel have shared that data.

No one had that data. So I want to know if he pull the numbers out of thin air. But be that as it may, he did say that there would be 3300%. Then it reduced to what? The front percentile? He did say that we're going to have the Caracasbaai building Anglec building completed by December 31st 2025. Last time I went over there I saw a rat-infested cockroach infested open shell. But, that's what he said I am not disputing him.

He knows. Madam Speaker, 4% meanwhile in the United States of America, chief source market, no representation, Madam Speaker. No house, no office, but we're going to England to spend millions for tourism. But not only tourism, Madam Speaker. She also said for investment. For investment, Madam Speaker, we have been a British colony for 400 years.

We were plucked. Out of Africa? Well, not so much Doctor Webster, because. But then again, the Irish. They were slaves of England. So we were all brought here, Madam Speaker, on these ships by the British to invest. When they saw that there was no money to be made, you know what they did? They high tailed out of Anguilla and left the slaves here. That's why we owned 95% of the land the last time I checked at least. Madam Speaker, so much so that we had great famines, not one multiple famines, and we cried out for help.

And in the Parliament of England it was said, not a single white man dwells among them. Wanted to ship us off to the British colony of Guyana. British Guyana at the time, Demarara. Somewhere. Believe it or not, history will not tell you that in Anguilla. But the history shows that somewhere. Madam Speaker.

For the majority decided to stay here some died. Quite a few people died, Madam Speaker, so they were always interested and invested in Anguilla, Madam Speaker, further to that. The West India Committee. The West India committee cut a deal. That is a British company. Blondel Cluff. Isn't she the president? Anyway, That aside. The West India Committee. Cut a deal with the United States government. Where they exploited the guano or the fertiliser. or the, as Merrick would see the bird do-do From

Sombrero and made in today's dollars, millions of dollars from Anguilla, Madam Speaker, millions. So the British always knew about Anguilla. In all of the neglect by the British government. Brought us to a revolution. I was reminded earlier today of the revolution and we just coming out of celebrating our 59th but neglect. We were neglected because when we were lumped with Saint Kitts and Nevis in the late 1800s, before Bradshaw was born, I may add, Anguillians were not happy.

Anguillians wanted to be a colony on its own. Madam Speaker, the British always knew about Anguilla. We were the mouse that roared. We became an independent Republic in 1969 and the British government sent in their army to subdue the revolution meanwhile. And Rhodesia, now known as Zimbabwe. Ian Smith after the British said you know, you should leave those black people or they get a chance to vote.

He said never, not in 1000 years declare A unilateral Declaration of Independence and became an independent country called Zimbabwe. No, it was still Rhodesia became Zimbabwe under President Robert Mugabe. Sir Robert Mugabe, he was knighted by the Queen. Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. But they didn't invade Zimbabwe, Rhodesia. Zimbabwe was run by white people. But Anguilla, who were these gangsters like James Ronald Webster, like Atlin Harrigan. Like Jerry Allan, Jeremiah Gumbs, so these gangsters in Anguilla running this country. ohh the natives can’t run themselves, so they invaded Anguilla and brought us back under heel,

Madam Speaker. The British always knew about Anguilla. They always had the opportunity to invest because it was in 1977 or 1978, the British government in the only great thing they have done for Anguilla. They bought the Mondays Bay Lands, 174 acres, Madam Speaker, for future tourism development. And you know who was the first to talk about tourism development for this country? You will not believe it, A man by the name of Robert Llewellyn Bradshaw. But the first hotel end up being owned by Mr. Lloyd, who opened Lloyd's Guest House in 1959 Madam Speaker

Madam Speaker, so they knew they could have had their investors go down and invest in Maundays Bay because they bought it as a gift to Anguilla. They could have invested in anywhere. But you know, the only significant British investor to ever enter these shores by happenstance was a man by the name of Leon Roydon. And he wasn't even in Anguilla. He wasn't St. Martin in 1978, Madam Speaker, vacationing and there was a lady by the name of Sue Ricketts.

She and her husband were here in Anguilla at the time. And they heard that he wasn't in Martin, he was a rich industrialist, and they went over to see him. They said Listen, I know you don't care about hotels that much, but come to Anguilla, check it out. You can have a lot of opportunities in Anguilla because at the time the wage was about a dollar an hour.

A dollar an hour. And he came over and they took him to the Maundays Bay site because it was the most beautiful site, the most. I saw ranking the other day, Madam Speaker, Maundays Bay was not listed as the most beautiful beach in the world. It wasn't even listed. Shoal Bay was listed on the list, but not Maundays Bay, the most beautiful beach in the world. But Madam Speaker, he didn't like the site.

So they didn't want to let him go, so they took him over to the other side and he fell in love with the side at Malliouhana, which had complications because local land ownership. There is a 99-year lease on some of those lands, Madam Speaker, and that was only British developer.

Major British developer in Anguilla. So Anguilla have been a British colony for 400 years. We had the slave owners who abandoned Anguilla. And then we had Leon Roydon. Don't tell me with all the connections Cardigan Connor has as a British subject accent can't even mimic Anguillians, how indoctrinated he has been by the British. That's not negative or positive or any other way.

But Madam Speaker.

But you have to refer to him as the Honourable Member for West End.

The Honourable Member for West End. Madam Speaker, thank you very much for that correction. Thank you. No, thank you very much for that correction. Cardigan knows people in, the Member for West End knows people in England. He knows people in Australia. He has visited England more than any other Member in this House, even while elected. But we are buying a house in London. We invested in London. They didn’t invested in Anguilla.

We are investing in London. For what? To what end? Oh. The Leader of Government business Cora Richardson-Hodge said we are investing in London for consular services. But, Madam Speaker, if you look at the Anguilla Constitution. We have no responsibility for consular services, Madam Speaker. None whatsoever. They're totally the remit. Of the governor. Totally and absolutely there are certain things that government of Anguilla wants to do and can't.

And can't. Because we are still a colony. They may call it a non self-governing territory, they may call it an overseas territory, whatever they call it. We are colony. That's what we are. So we're building buying this house in central London. No final offer has been made. Madam Speaker.

And it's not only the initial spending on that local website is ongoing costs, property taxes, maintenance, staffing. I don't understand it, but Cardigan said sorry, the Member for West End said. I love him so much my old cousin Cardi, I always call him Cardi, but Member for West End said That he can't wait till they come to this House so that he can defend it.

And I want the public to know who I've been saying it. It is not a retirement home for Cardigan Connor when he retires from some politics. So, when he defends it, don't put that on him. He is only defending it because he is a party guy and he defends what the party does. Madam Speaker.

If there's one other good thing that is coming out of this supplementary. Is Paying Anglec the $10 million? Time? paying Anglec the $10 million, Madam Speaker. Because when we came to office. Anglec was owed more than $10 million. And we started paying that Down. Madam Speaker, said, Madam Speaker, the Leader of Government Business said something very important.

Let us pay it off. We cannot continue paying this off in increments over time. Let us pay it off and I totally agree with that. We built. The financial position of this country to the point. Where we can pay that off? As Kyle would say, as the Member, Single Islandwide Member would say, we built it on the backs of the people. So the government of Anguilla have all this money, I'm just quoting now, but the people of Anguilla have none.

People of Anguilla got money now because Cardigan cannot Member for, West End said. That the people are happy, people are doing well. That's what he said all year in his presentation. And in that presentation, he also spoke about funding Bermuda Air. Toronto etc. But if Bermuda Air is doing so well.

Why do we need to continue funding them? I agree with Shelly Rogers-Webster when she said OK, we were one, but then afterwards they should be on their own. A paraphrasing now because she was talking about Saint Lucia and air lift and what have you Madam Speaker. After we did December to April, if they're doing so well, why couldn't they do like American Airlines April to August on their own?

And why is it that they got to come back another year and we got to fund them- initially Jose Vanterpool, the Single Islandwide Member said. Well Hayden Lying we are not funding them nothing. Then he came back and said, well, we give him $600,000. So it's either nothing I $600,000, which one is it, which is almost 2 million EC dollars,

Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. I want to close up now. Because I'm looking at the clock. Where I'm standing here, I can see that I've spoken for 39 minutes, 40 minutes. So I have 5 minutes and I'm going to close up now, Madam Speaker. The Member for Sandy Hill spoke about building local capacity. Every government speaks about building local capacity. From 1976 to date, we have never had a local Attorney General. We don't have any say in Attorney General selection of the Attorney General, you know.

The only thing that we can do is pay. But we don't have no say. How long are we going to have to bring in someone to be the Attorney General of Anguilla? How long are we going to have to bring in somebody to be the Police Chief of Anguilla? And this is no knock on the present individuals because I like, I don't know the present Attorney General well, but I know Robert Clark well. And I like the man.

On a personal level, I like his passion. For Anguilla and I like his passion for policing, so I'm not knocking him, but how long, Madam Speaker? If you're serious about. Developing local capacity. These roles need to be filled by Anguillians. Not customs, not lands, not physical planning. And if we think about local capacity, how long are we going to leave? Steve Hodge and Peter out there languishing, Madam Speaker, local capacity.

Local capacity, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I'm going to end by how I started. When I started, I spoke about the fact that. Persons are very unhappy. With what they think is just an increment as opposed to a proper raise, some people are excited. My salary going up by 5000 a month, 8000 a month, 10,000 a month.

Some people are sad and vex. That their salary is going up by $2.00 a month, Madam Speaker. And Doctor Webster said something. And he asks the question, how do you calculate worth? Is the dishwasher. Less worthy than the server? Is the beach attendant. Less worthy than concierge? Is a housekeeper Less worthy than the reservation clerk? Are the guys who fix our broken water lines.

Less worthy than our Chief Roads officer? Is the teacher. Less worthy. Then the director of the post office? Is the crossing guard the safety officers. Less worthy. Then the special advisor sports? How do you calculate worthy? Because in my experience, in the experience of some of us here in this room today. If those dishes aren't washed. That's server can’t serve. If the lines aren't fixed.

People can not wash their clothes. If the teacher don't teach. Where will our children be, Madam Speaker? How do we calculate? Worthy. And who is worthy, Madam Speaker? All in all, Madam Speaker. Today is a watershed moment. Today is a historical day. Today is a day that many celebrate. And many cry.

Which one are you? those that celebrate? or those that cry? Thank you, Madam Speaker.

Thank you, Honourable Member. Are there any other contributions? The Chair recognises the Honourable Member for Valley North.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I rise today to support the Supplementary Appropriation Act. For 2026, and in particular to address the allocation of 3,000,000 EC dollars for medical treatment overseas. A program that represents far more than a budget line. It represents hope, it represents compassion, it represents a difference between life and death and some of the most vulnerable members of all community. Madam Speaker, the reality of being a small island jurisdiction is that we cannot always afford every single specialised medical service in Anguilla.

Despite the dedication of our healthcare professionals and the continued investment in our health system, they remain treatments and surgeries, specialist interventions, oncology services, cardiac procedures and advanced diagnostics that may require overseas treatment. When Anguillians require these services, Madam Speaker, government must be prepared to assist. The beneficiaries of Medical Treatment Overseas Program are not necessarily wealthy individuals with unlimited means. They are often senior citizens living on fixed incomes, children requiring specialist treatment, persons living with chronic illness, families already struggling, With high cost of living, vulnerable households who simply cannot absorb the costs associated with overseas medical treatment. For these citizens, a serious diagnosis can become both a medical crisis and a financial crisis. Madam Speaker, that is why the Government of Anguilla has determined that additional funding is necessary to meet the increasing demand for overseas medical treatment and associated patient costs.

The supplementary budget, Madam Speaker, therefore provides an additional $3,000,000. This allocation reflects the reality that demands has increased and government must respond. When I speak on when someone is referred for overseas medical treatment, the burden does not stop at the medical bill. Their airfare costs, accommodation expenses, transportation costs, caregiver requirements, lost income, emotional strain. The stress experienced by families, Madam Speaker, during these periods is immense.

The Medical Treatment Overseas Program helps to alleviate some of those burdens and ensures that Healthcare is not resolved only, Madam Speaker, for those who can afford. As a government, we believe that access is necessary and medical treatment should not depend solely upon one's financial circumstances. That principle is fundamental to social justice and social development, Madam Speaker, and is at the heart of putting people first.

The public will recall, Madam Speaker, statements made by the former Premier. The Honourable Member for Island Harbour regarding overseas medical treatment during his administration. At various times, the former Premier expressed concerns regarding the cost and sustainability of the program and the pressures it placed on public finances. The Member specifically said that persons should consider selling their land to cover medical overseas treatment. Today, however, we are confronted with a practical reality.

When citizens need life saving treatment. Government cannot simply point to costs. Government must also consider the human consequences. We must ask ourselves what is the cost of a life saved? What is the value of a child receiving critical overseas medical treatment? What is the value of giving a mother a father, a grandmother, grandfather, a chance to live? The answer… Is that while fiscal responsibility is important, compassion must also guide public policy.

That is why this government has chosen to strengthen support for overseas medical treatment rather than to retreat from this obligation. Madam Speaker, the Minister of Social Development exists to protect the most… vulnerable among us. We must assist low income households, elderly citizens, children at risk, persons with disabilities, families facing hardship and medical treatment overseas aligns directly with those objectives. A family battling a serious illness is often one of the most vulnerable groups in our society. Madam Speaker.

And it is critically important that we continue to. support them in whatever way we can. Madam Speaker, and that is why I stand by the increase of $3,000,000 in this supplementary budget, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, in addition to this, I also wish to stand firmly in support of the Government of Anguilla's intervention regarding the allocation of 10 million to address matters involving Anglec, including its obligations arising from the former Water Corporation judgment and related arrangements

Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I commend our honourable Premier for recognising, Madam Speaker, then when you are in a position. Madam Speaker. To pay your debts ahead of time, especially when the person on the receiving end or the entity on the receiving end is in a position where they need that money, Madam Speaker, that you honour it instead of

Madam Speaker, waiting years to honor this debt. Recognising that if Anglec is to rapidly move towards renewable energy integration, they need every single dollar that is owed to them by the Government of Anguilla, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, reliable electricity is not merely a utility issue, it is a social issue.

It affects households, schools, small businesses, healthcare facilities, economic development. When government acts to address longstanding liabilities and ensure sustainability and stability within the utility sector, it acts in the interests of Anguillians. A stable electricity system supports economic confidence. Business continuity. Improved quality of life, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, these are people centered and people focused decisions,

Madam Speaker, because we recognise the importance of these levels of interventions, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker. I want to shift a moment. To bring to the fore something that was said earlier by the Honourable Leader of the Opposition. He said that cost of living is not being addressed, Madam Speaker.

And the Honourable member for Island Harbor repeatedly said this, Madam Speaker. And Madam Speaker… I don't know if the Member is being facetious or is it that the Member doesn't spend enough time in Anguilla, Madam Speaker. But I want to remind the Honourable Member, Madam Speaker, of all the unprecedented interventions and cost of living relief that this administration has implemented since they came into office one year and three months ago.

And I want to say that again, Madam Speaker, one year and three months ago, because there are multiple posts that say almost two years in office. I don't know if the APM administration can't count or they are being facetious because it isn't almost two years? It is one year and three months, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, we have offered unprecedented relief within six months of this administration coming into office. Madam Speaker, we made sweeping changes to the GST legislation, Madam Speaker. A significant campaign promise that we delivered within one year of coming to office, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, in addition to that,

Madam Speaker. We have been tracking, Madam Speaker, all of the changes in the global environment, Madam Speaker, and we didn't wait until after to be reactive, Madam Speaker, between the Honourable Mr. Kyle Hodge and the Honourable Premier, our team has been proactive in ensuring that once, Madam Speaker, those the volatility and those changes touched Anguilla, we could effectively respond.

We removed all duties on fuel. Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, we immediately came in and subsidised and gave payments and electricity. For the fuel surcharge, Madam Speaker, above anything above the recent increase, Madam Speaker, Madam Speaker, we temporarily removed… duties on freight and insurance, Madam Speaker, Madam Speaker, these are unprecedented changes,

Madam Speaker, upwards of over $10 million in some cases in total, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, recently when the Anguilla Electricity Company came back and said, Madam Speaker. We have to increase again because of the volatility of fuel costs, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, we didn't hide under a shell, Madam Speaker, we didn't cover, We didn't ignore the cries of the people.

We immediately swung into action. Madam Speaker, came to the table with Anglec Met. They made a presentation on what was happening. We saw the volatility of the fuel prices and once again the government of Anguilla stepped up and said we are people centered and people focused and we will share this burden, Madam Speaker, we will not pass on this burden to the people.

And, Madam Speaker, I hear people talking about the $500 credit that was given, Madam Speaker, and I want to remind the general public that was $500 given to households, Madam Speaker. And I'm sure, Madam Speaker, that $500 was well received in that time, Madam Speaker, but we are in an unprecedented situation.

And you know, Madam Speaker, what that $500 didn't take into consideration. The business community, Madam Speaker, not one business community benefited from that $500 credit, Madam Speaker. I can tell you every single business, Madam Speaker, benefited from the unprecedented relief that this AUF administration implemented, Madam Speaker, over the last month and a half,

Madam Speaker, unprecedented. And you know why, Madam Speaker because, Madam Speaker, if energy costs go up for the business. automatically, Madam Speaker, the cost of goods will go up for the consumer. So, Madam Speaker, we did a two pronged approach. We directly invested in our people and provided them with relief, but we never forgot the business community. So I am confused,

Madam Speaker, when I hear and I see that yesterday the APM administration, in one of their posts, the Anguilla Progressive Movement said that “the energy across the island is heavy, families are frustrated, workers are uncertain, and I highlighted this Businesses are uneasy.” But that's not the only references to businesses,

Madam Speaker. There was a previous. A reference to businesses, Madam Speaker. On February 23rd, by the Anguilla Progressive Movement, again saying that, Madam Speaker, “businesses also need relief. They need to be looked at”, Madam Speaker, and it is strange to me. Because we're Madam Speaker. Where was this belief that the business community needed to be addressed during the APM's administration, Madam Speaker?

The business community did not, in their view, did not even deserved the $500 credit Madam Speaker. Instead, the business community was repeatedly referred to as criminals. They were ignored. Their letters were ignored, their letters on GST, Madam Speaker, ignored. There was a whole protest, Madam Speaker. Ignored. They were railroaded in public media and public spaces. One of their largest supporters on Klass FM call them dogs, Madam Speaker.

These are the facts, Madam Speaker, and I know the business community will not forget that. They will not forget, Madam Speaker, how invasive the GST tax was, Madam Speaker. And how many of them, their offices were searched, their documents were ran through, Madam Speaker. The business community won't forget that, Madam Speaker, and we won't forget the business community,

Madam Speaker, and that is why our electricity intervention, Madam Speaker, didn't only just consider the individual consumer, but the importance, Madam Speaker of the business community as well, again, Madam Speaker, I hear about no cost of living interventions, Madam Speaker. In 2022, GST was implemented, Madam Speaker. The cries of the people in the cost of living pressures, Madam Speaker, were ignored.

No significant change to the GST structure was made until January 2025, Madam Speaker, one month before the elections were called. Madam Speaker, many made fun of my Honourable colleague, the Honourable Premier Leader of Government Business, when she served as the Leader of Opposition. When the Leader, the former Leader of Opposition referenced Madam Speaker, the cost of things like corn flakes and other essential items,

Madam Speaker. They referred to my Honourable colleague Mr. Kyle Hodge. Kyle inflation, all sorts of things. Madam Speaker, said that our the Honorable Leader of the Opposition said that our GST relief plan, Madam Speaker, he was disgusted by it. Madam Speaker, his words not mine on Cool FM.

The record exists, Madam Speaker. Yet we were able to come into office, Madam Speaker. Implement it and still manage, Madam Speaker, to continue essential programs and not just continue essential programs, Madam Speaker. Not just continue essential programs, but bring forth an unprecedented budget, Madam Speaker. Revenues are performing well, Madam Speaker.

We've made adjustments, Madam Speaker. We are watching what's happening in the global space. We're being prudent. So on one hand you're asking about fiscal responsibility, but on the other hand, you're saying you left 3,000,000 dollars, $300 million in reserves. Why don't we spend the money? The money is there for the people. Make up your mind. Which one is it? On one hand, the Honourable Leader of the Opposition is saying, Madam Speaker, that nothing is happening in the country.

The country is dead, there's nothing happening. On the other hand, the Honourable Member for Road South is saying tourism numbers are doing good, AI money is doing good. Which one? Is it, Madam Speaker? They need to decide on a position point, Madam Speaker. because it is grossly hypocritical,

Madam Speaker. And I want to remind persons when the Members of the Opposition come to radio. and seek to mislead the people, Madam Speaker, and seek to pander to people, Madam Speaker, to remember that they were serving for five years, Madam Speaker. When I hear them speak, you would assume that this is a grouping of people who've never solved in public office, Madam Speaker, talking about this administration has been here almost two years,

Madam Speaker. Totally disingenuous, Madam Speaker. In addition to that, Madam Speaker, we have always supported. Public salary reviews, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, when public salaries were reinstated in 2024, the record will show that the then opposition supported the reinstatement of those salaries. Madam Speaker, the record is there, It exists.

And Madam Speaker, I think it's time that I shift to the public service salaries. And as we, as I said, both administrations support the increase in salaries, the overall compensation salary review for the public service. And the reason we support that, Madam Speaker, is as it was rightfully said.

It has been over 17 to 18 years, Madam Speaker, since we have had. Comprehensive. Salary Review. Adam Speaker. What that means, Madam Speaker, for someone who has not gotten a promotion, someone whose position has not been regretted or looked at individually and they haven't moved up. Their salaries remain the same. And of course, Madam Speaker, we know that the cost of living has significantly increased globally.

So, considering that, Madam Speaker, that is significant pressure on public servants. But Madam Speaker, where I become lost and confused is here. As the Honourable Leader for the Opposition, Dr. Webster indicated, this process started under his administration. His administration said it is time for us to do a comprehensive compensation review, a policy decision that was determined. We supported that policy decision. Madam Speaker, it was under Doctor Webster's administration that the terms of reference.

For the hiring of this consultancy was developed, Madam Speaker. So when I here Doctor Webster sit in this honorable House and say why was consideration not given to a straight percentage across the board review? I said to myself, was Doctor Webster asleep? because it was your administration that would have determined the policy direction, it would have been under your administration that you would have determined the terms of reference for how the compensation review would have to be managed. A determination was made that instead of doing a straight across the board percentage increase, you would do a more comprehensive review where you would do position by position to be able to do a comparative analysis. Between the individual position and where it sits. In a larger context, Madam Speaker, that was a policy decision.

So now I'm baffled that that administration would have determined that was a direction to be taken. You go through the process of a procurement of a service. You hire the consultant. You start to develop the contract. You call a snap election. A government change because you lost the snap election. This administration comes in at that point in time. This administration has no control over the terms of reference, Madam Speaker. but we support, the compensation review matters because it was necessary,

Madam Speaker, and to be quite fair and honest, Madam Speaker, we supported that approach. And the reason why we supported that approach, Madam Speaker, was because you had a significant number of departments, Madam Speaker, who you know are way below what they were supposed to be at. And so if they're already way below what they're supposed to be at and you do.

Straight across the board percentage increase, Madam Speaker. Then they still remain disadvantaged. So I would imagine that the previous APM administration probably thought it was fairer to do a job by job grading and review than to do a straight across the board one because some people would remain disadvantaged.

I don't know now though, Madam Speaker, because based on what?

Madam Speaker, point of order. The Member continues to misrepresent what I said. Several cases. One, when I talked about cost of living, I was saying that it was not one of the considerations as presented by the DG or the Premier in her presentation, as one of the considerations given at that time during this program, it was not one of the methodologies. That's what I said.

Secondly, she's talking here about. Whatever she's talking about, it's wrong. I did not.

No. Which part? No, doctor, I don't really know. I'm following the transcripts. I'm listening to you, but I'm looking at a transcript just to see that I follow.

When she said that I advocated for a straight across the board percentile. I did not ever say that. And that was never one of the discussions we had with the Executive Council when we came up with the terms of reference. I said earlier, and if you follow transcript, you'd see that I said it shouldn't be a straight across the board percentile because the people at the bottom if they get the same percentile as the people at the top. the numbers are, there's too much disparity.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.

If you, so if you can clarify, what was the methodology that you advocated for today, because I think the Honourable Member is referencing what was said today. So, what was the methodology you advocated for today?

I was saying what the methodology should be, that the persons at the bottom should have gotten a higher increase than the ones at the top in terms of the numbers, not a straight percentile across the board for everyone. I use those words specifically that it should not be one percentile across the board. And I, multiple times I stated that the persons at the bottom day grades should be higher paid than the in terms of the numbers as the persons at the top.

And also, Honourable leader of Opposition, what was the point on the cost-of-living consideration? So, I think you indicated that there was a misrepresentation on that.

Yes, Madam Speaker, and thank you for allowing me to say that, because the member went on for 20 minutes talking about cost of living. What I was saying is that in the methodology that you talked about. Let me see, check my notes. They talked about the job grading classification and that in the methodology what was used, there was no mention that cost of living was one of those considerations. That's what I said in my opening presentation. And if you look at the Deputy Governor's presentation, he did not mention cost of living as one of the considerations. I know it was at some point, but it was not mentioned in his presentation or in the Premier's presentation.

That's what I was saying.

Honourable Member Valley North your response.

Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, two things. And I go back to saying that if the Honorable Premier and his administration wanted the salary compensation review. To focus on giving a higher percentage to those at the bottom and a lower percentage to those at the top, that is what the terms of reference should have indicated, not that you're having a comprehensive compensation review and job grading exercise on each individual position, Madam Speaker.

Additionally, if you wanted a cost-of-living consideration, that also needed to go into the terms of reference, Madam Speaker, because once the terms of reference was created for what PwC is supposed to do. They're not coming in to read the minds of the sitting administration or the new Opposition, Madam Speaker.

They're going based on the terms of reference, Madam Speaker, that they were given a comprehensive job re-grading exercise, Madam Speaker. So, Madam Speaker, that is why I said I think it is critically important that we really lay the facts out for the general public, because it is easier now to say that after the exercise has been completed, it's easier to say this is what should have happened and this should happen,

Madam Speaker.

OK. So I just wanted to wrap up to, so Doc's website did find we made reference to the cost of living, you said. And there was an anticipation, Madam Speaker, that there was an anticipation by us as Elected Members when we were in government that the compensation review would address that cost of living, which would help our people.

And in this age when we have our young men, especially young people in general at that. So that was a comment on cost of living and then there was a comment on the percentage. Methodology. Crave your indulgence. OK, Harry. Yeah, so that comment was. Because anything without a good foundation cannot stand and I want the people of Anguilla. I'm just reading just before I am. The percentage? Hold on. Yeah, I have it.

I was just reading a few lines before it, whether this should be across the board, their compensation and percentile are the ones at the bottom should get a higher compensation percentile so that they too can feel this compensation review mattered. That was at the very end of your speech. But I have to read a few lines before and then and then the ability to keep persons here matters because I still think that our technical persons will have concerns about whether they can do better elsewhere. This is necessary Madam Speaker that we look at this carefully and critically.

So we can keep persons here. We can have Anguillians go off and study and come back and so that they can feel that they're being compensated appropriately. And I don't feel that they should just stay where they go. Speaker I just want to touch on one or two more areas and then. So it's kind of it's a bit difficult to understand what the methodology was.

I think what was stated is that you wanted the compensation to look at percent. I think you said both things and percentile are the ones at the bottom should get a higher compensation percentile so that they too can feel that they were compensation, that their compensation reviewed and mattered.

So I don't know if you actually took a position on the methodology, did you? I don't see that you did at the very end of your speech you just said. It could be either or. I don't know you, you, you indicate so that we can move on from the point of order.

Yes, Madam Speaker, I thank you and thank you for reading the transcript. But what I was saying is that I don't think it should have been a straight across the board percentile. I felt that those at the bottom. Should. Get a higher and I also mentioned about that when the big ships rise that the small ships should rise also.

Basically was implying that those at the bottom should have a higher compensation percentile than the ones at the top.

OK. So that's the position that those at the bottom should have a higher percentage increase and those at the top. And then you did say that it's not a one size fit all so that those who are categorised in a lower grades, it may be technical. So that clarifies what the position was at Doctor Webster took.

Yes, that was the position that I was saying.

Madam Speaker, no problem. I had clarity on the position that he took, and as I said, and I will reiterate that if that's the position Doctor Webster wanted to take, he should have ensured that the terms of reference that were done under his administration effectively said and represented that. But I'm also a little bit confused, Madam Speaker, because I'm sure the transcripts will tell you that Doctor Webster also talked about not being able to attract certain talent based on the figures.

That were given. So attracting certain talent represents those at the higher end of the spectrum, Madam Speaker. So you're saying that some of the specialist positions are inadequately funded, which those are under higher end of the spectrum. So you're saying those special positions are inadequately funded and won't be able to attract certain talent.

But at the same time you're saying the percentage at the higher level should have been lower and those at the lower should have been higher. Again, Madam Speaker, thoroughly confused. But to me it just shows that there's a deliberate attempt to confuse the public and pander to as many public servants as possible. I will move on. No, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, this intervention, Madam Speaker, is absolutely timely and necessary Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, there was a point made by the Member from Road South in, in relation to developing local capacity, and rightfully so. He would have referenced a number of key positions that are being held by persons from overseas, persons from the UK, Madam Speaker, and I wholeheartedly agree,

Madam Speaker. That we need to develop our local capacity, Madam Speaker, which is why it is interesting because the AUM administration, Madam Speaker, that came into office in 2010, one of the first things that they did was cut scholarship funding, Madam Speaker. The APM administration that came into office in 2020, Madam Speaker, one of the first things that were cut,

Madam Speaker, was scholarship funding. And there's no need to object because the records are clear. With which administrations fund scholarship investments, Madam Speaker, the record is there for many, many years. And so it's baffling to me that you expect, Madam Speaker, that these key positions will be held by Anguillians, but yet every chance you get, you cut scholarship funding,

Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, that's not how you develop your people. That's not how you ensure that you develop local capacity, Madam Speaker, you have to. Train your people and promote your people, Madam Speaker, in order for them to perform. But when you train and promote your people, Madam Speaker, your people also need to perform.

So there are many different responsibilities, Madam Speaker, in all of this talk about development and local capacity. We must invest in our people. We must then give our people opportunities to solve, Madam Speaker, and when our people get in those positions. They too must also perform. Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker, this salary re-grading exercise, Madam Speaker, was also dependent on a number of key factors that I think is necessary for the public to understand the re-grading exercise, Madam Speaker, and the whole review was largely based on job descriptions. Madam Speaker, it was the responsibility of many different departments within the public service to submit adequate job descriptions that. reflected the key positions,

Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, if a job description submitted did not reflect The current job position, Madam Speaker, then that would be doing a disservice in the exercise, Madam Speaker. And I think that's critically important to note. There were there were many different layers, Madam Speaker. Of this overall exercise and Madam Speaker.

We recognise that no exercise of this nature will ever be perfect. And that is why it was important for the Deputy Governor to indicate that there would be further considerations, Madam Speaker. And reviews in this. Overall exercise, Madam Speaker, because that is critically important. Something else that's important to note is that there were other positions, Madam Speaker, over the years that were re-graded.

Some of the departments that had uplifts internally because, you know, maybe a position didn't seem attractive enough for different isolated things happen throughout the exercise throughout the years, Madam Speaker. However, there was not a wholesale re-grading exercise and Madam Speaker. That is critically important. I also heard reference, Madam Speaker, to the removal of USL and property tax on businesses.

Now, Madam Speaker, the Members of the Loyal Opposition, when they were on government side, they remove tax, Madam Speaker, property tax on individuals. And This is why I go back to this thing with with with businesses when they reference businesses. It's laughable when they say businesses are uneasy. They had an opportunity to remove property tax On businesses, commercial buildings, Madam Speaker, and they opted not to,

Madam Speaker, GST was over performing. They were doing well by their own admission GSC was over performing. They could have removed property tax on both the businesses as well as the individuals. But now they are coming to tell us that we should remove it off USL, which they made permanent by the way, administration associated with them made it permanent, not our administration. And also that property tax on businesses should be removed, Madam Speaker, But,

Madam Speaker, I am confused. We should give salary increases. We should give more relief, more cost-of-living relief, Madam Speaker, even though we've given unprecedented cost of living relief, Madam Speaker. But on the flip side, we must also remove USL. We must remove. Tax, property tax on businesses, Madam Speaker, but yet we must also be fiscally responsible and ensure that we still maintain government's revenues.

But we must still give more. So we must pay out as much as possible more and more and more, payout more and more, more. And we must not collect anything, Madam Speaker. We are confused, Madam Speaker, we are thoroughly confused. But the reality is no, Madam Speaker, is this.

This administration remains people focused and people centered, Madam Speaker, not just in word but also indeed, Madam Speaker. And that is why I want to reiterate to the general public, we recognise that the cost of living is high globally, not just in Anguilla. If you visit other Caribbean islands, the reality is the same. On the ground in terms of the cost of living, but I will tell you what is not the reality on the ground you go to Saint Thomas. Ask the St Thomians about WAP. Ask the St Thomians about the rationing of electricity.

Ask the St Thomians if any of them are getting any cost of living. adjustments, Madam Speaker, and fuel costs go right across the water to Saint Maarten, the people up there beating up the poor St. Maarten government. No cost-of-living adjustments, Madam Speaker. Across the Caribbean, skyrocketing fuel costs, Madam Speaker, this administration was one of the first,

Madam Speaker, to step out front and say this is the unprecedented amount of funding that we are going to ensure that we give so that our people are able to catch themselves. Madam Speaker, in the face of all of this volatility that's happening in the market, Madam Speaker, we did that.

For the first time, Madam Speaker, since it was implemented, we are the only administration that has temporarily removed duties on cost insurance freight. Madam Speaker, unprecedented. So don't come, Madam Speaker, and tell me that we are not doing enough, Madam Speaker. We keep doing, we keep doing, we keep doing, Madam Speaker.

The largest amount of money in the last budgetary period allocated to scholarships for the development of our people, Madam Speaker, unprecedented investments in healthcare, Madam Speaker, for the first time in history. In the public service you have modern mammography equipment, brand new state-of-the-art equipment, Madam Speaker. We have a second theatre, Madam Speaker.

At the hospital, Madam Speaker, so that you could deal with. A number of the surgeries related to accidents and stuff, Madam Speaker. We had a number of gunshot victims, Madam Speaker, that have survived in recent months, Madam Speaker, that in the past had to be flown out because they have a great Sergeant,

Madam Speaker, and now you have state-of-the-art equipment. That's facts, Madam Speaker. That's investments in healthcare. Madam Speaker, that's putting people first. We recognise that you don't want to keep spending in overseas medical treatment. So we are taking a two-pronged approach, Madam Speaker. We are uplifting overseas medical treatment, but at the same time we are ensuring that we address the healthcare needs on the ground, new state-of-the-art equipment, additional medical staff, Madam Speaker, but also the non-communicable disease unit,

Madam Speaker, is also aggressively ramping up what they are doing. Space, Madam Speaker. To ensure that Anguillians recognise the importance of changing your lifestyle, the importance of eating better, the importance of reducing your alcohol consumption, Madam Speaker, because all of these are leading to strokes and other issues,

Madam Speaker. But not just that, Madam Speaker, I'm sure you have heard that we are about to launch groundbreaking, Madam Speaker. Access to diabetic and hypertension medication for uninsured, Madam Speaker, Not just if you're coming to the local hospital, Madam Speaker. It doesn't matter which pharmacy on island you go to, Madam Speaker, if the local pharmacy doesn't have it, that is also being extended to the private pharmacies,

Madam Speaker. And you'll hear more about that program very, very soon, Madam Speaker. That is putting people first. That is investments, Madam Speaker. Solid. Investments. Madam Speaker, in healthcare and putting people first. This supplementary budget also considers Madam Speaker. Additional reallocations and investments in healthcare because we recognise that. Madam Speaker.

So when I hear talk about not investing more in healthcare, it is so strange to me because Mr. Rogers, from the time we came into office, all he has been doing is procuring state-of-the-art equipment. state-of-the-art dental equipment just came into the island recently, Madam Speaker. Round the clock we are walking and I guarantee you God's spare life after speaking to the existence, by the end of our term we will have a state-of-the-art medical facility in this country. Madam Speaker, we will.

Because we recognise. That putting people first is not just in word, but in deed and in action, Madam Speaker. And we are working. We are working around the clock, Madam Speaker, for our people around the clock. During the campaign, when we did our research, Madam Speaker, during the campaign.

Healthcare was one of the biggest issues. During the budgetary cycle, when you sent out information, Madam Speaker, for the public to give reviews and responses, Madam Speaker, healthcare, again, was at the top of the list. So, I want to commend Mr. Rogers because he doesn't really like to toot his own horn, you know, but

I want to commend him for the work that he's doing. Around the clock to ensure that every chance we get, we improve the quality of health care being offered. I know women are happy that they now have mammography equipment in the public service for the first time in the history, Madam Speaker. early intervention, early detection is critically important to treatment,

Madam Speaker. So, Madam Speaker, again, this supplementary budget is critically important. Madam Speaker, it's important to ensure one, That the. Public service salaries are properly appropriated and I want to remind the general public that. In the 2025 budget there was an appropriation for salaries. The 2026 budget there was also an appropriation for salaries. What this is doing currently is not necessarily appropriating way more money for salaries. What this is doing is taking the appropriation out of the Ministry of Finance and putting it in the various ministries where the salaries are being paid from.

Madam Speaker, how much more time do I have? With the various salaries are being paid from Madam Speaker. So, Madam Speaker, I again want to thank the Honourable Premier as well as the PS responsible for Public Administration and Finance for the mammoth task that they've undertaken to do this,

Madam Speaker, because it is important and it's been a lot of hard work. Madam Speaker. I also want to thank the Honourable Premier for recognising the importance of slightly delaying this implementation, Madam Speaker, to ensure. That wage workers and the statutory bodies that. Receive a direct subvention from the government of Anguilla was also adequately considered, Madam Speaker, and

I want to thank the Premier for that's critically important, Madam Speaker. Because those who are our wage workers are essential. And I hear a lot of persons talk about all of the wage workers and how they're not looked at and all of those things, Madam Speaker. But I will tell you that this administration has committed, Madam Speaker, to undertaking and dealing directly with the unestablished worker situation.

We have significant amounts of unestablished workers, Madam Speaker, who have been in the public service for years, and when they go home, they will not receive. A pension, they do not receive insurance, Madam Speaker, this administration is not going to sit by and allow that to continue. And we have aggressively started the process of regularising that so that by 2027, those people that are working full time, 8 hours a day in the public service, ensuring that the public service does well also benefits,

Madam Speaker, from insurance as well as. A long term pension when the time comes, Madam Speaker, critically important, Madam Speaker. So, Madam Speaker, once again I wish to put on record my sincerest support, Madam Speaker, for this. The APM administration has asked countless times when will this happen? Well, it is here, Madam Speaker, we have waited and of course, that when will this happen was disingenuous because the APM administration knows that they made a policy decision and rightfully so.

To go through a comprehensive review. A comprehensive review, Madam Speaker, doesn't happen overnight. There's a methodology that's undertaken. There's time that goes into doing things the right way, Madam Speaker. So when they got on radio every week talking about when will the salaries happen and when will the salaries happen,

Madam Speaker. And then all of a sudden, I saw a post pretty much saying that, you know, it seems like, like it's being rushed again. I was confused, Madam Speaker. Because on one end, you're saying that the salaries, when are the salaries coming? When are the salaries coming repeatedly? And then on the other hand, now it's like, can we sustain it? But you know, we can sustain it. And the reason why is because there was an allocation in the 2025 budget, Madam Speaker.

When the AI revenues were not doing as well as they're doing now, Madam Speaker, and you had it included in there, Madam Speaker. And in 2026, we also included the salary uplift, Madam Speaker, because again, it was important. So, I know that there are times when the Opposition must oppose for opposing sake,

Madam Speaker, but I beg of them to be genuine about it. The disingenuous nature, Madam Speaker. Really doesn't give them a good look, Madam Speaker. I ask that they be responsible with the people's business, that they communicate effectively, Madam Speaker, and that they explain to the people. While now from the outside looking in, they may have regrets about the methodology that has been undertaken. This methodology was issued to be undertaken under their administration, Madam Speaker, and I think that is critically important that it must be admitted,

Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, at this time I wish to end my presentation in relation to. This supplemental budget and again confirm my support of the same. Thank you.

Thank you, Honourable Member. At this time, I propose that we take a short 15 minute comfort break and then we will resume 15 minutes. Thank you, Members.

This Honorable House resumes its sitting. As we were before the break, thank you to the listening public for your indulgence. We did need a comfort break for our Members to all refresh and to be ready to continue with the debates. The debate on the floor is in respect of the Bill, a Bill for Supplementary Appropriation 2026 Act, 2026 Amendment Act 2026.

Are there any other contributions to the Bill? And I do remind our members as we were in respect of the time limits. I do recognise the Honourable Single Island. Electoral District Member Bryan.

Good evening, Madam Speaker, and thank you. Good evening to the Honourable Members, staff and the public that's spewing on social media. And I know that we want to advance this evening, so I'm going to keep it short and direct to the point. So, I'm not going to go to 2007, 1969 and then come back to the 2026.

Madam Speaker, in some instances, people. Believe or mainly perceive… A supplementary budget as bad, a signal of bad financial planning or financial failure. Which could be the case, but. This evening, this is not the case. What we are seeing this evening is a reallocation of money from a restricted expenditure account that was budgeted for, for this 2026 and is now going to be redistributed to the correspondent ministries for their purpose, which obviously has been mentioned on the floor previously, which is salary payments and.

In areas that are just as important. For the social and economic well-being of this nation, call it health, the electricity relief package, and the others, so I stand in support. Of this supplementary budget, and if you notice, I made very specific mentions of two areas, which were health and the electricity relief package. Because all three of all two of them have a direct impact. To the people of Anguilla. In health, as is requested. 3,000,000 increase in the expenditure of overseas medical treatment.

Now, when it comes to life, opportunity. And the funds are available and it does not affect in depth the operation and the delivery of government. I personally will always stand and vote in favor of giving those people the opportunity of life, of a second chance to get their treatment and recover back. Why? Because.

Currently, we're sitting in this Honorable House. And we are healthy also, we think. But life is so unpredictable. That even when we leave the session, we'd never know if we might be one of those that have to be flown out and God forbid and protect us from anything like that and everyone so.

Today it has been. Said for example by the Honourable Leader of Opposition when he criticised the Honourable Minister of Health, Honourable Mr. Cardigan Connor, when he spoke in terms of the salary and he made mention that. A surgeon can make 100,000 U.S. dollars in in a week. He can correct me on the floor if it's it was not a week.

A month and that, when you compare both salaries and what is being offered in Anguilla, is not enough. And he's a professional in the area. I might agree with him. OK, but now? I'm, I'm a bit confused because when we were talking about the salary in terms of the salary increments, he also expressed disappointment in terms of what came out.

But I thought that the salary review was to fall in line with the other OT islands and to make it competitive. So at this stage, I cannot understand the Leader of Opposition's disappointment. When this process started under his administration and as the Honourable Minister for Social Development indicated, he was part of the terms of reference that was indicated to PwC and how they should proceed with this review. So.

Taking advantage of the emotions of people that are outside there listening and probably might not have the knowledge of what was the terms of reference or what this company had to work on is very heartless and especially coming from the Leader of the Opposition when you try to play with the emotions of the people. So.

Treatment, overseas treatment will always get my support. Once there's the funds available to make it happen and there's a willingness because you have to make it clear, and there's a willingness for the repayment of the money back to the government. The electricity relief package. With the volatility of fuel.

The affected ones are the families and the businesses that obviously need to continue to operate and survive in the current atmosphere. So what should a responsible government do? A responsible government should always do what this current government is doing. And it's the current relief electricity package that has been prepared for the people of Anguilla and the businesses. For their best interests. Why? Because you're not leaving out anyone under the former administration when the 500 EC dollar credit was issued to them.

For the residential homes, and probably not even all the residential homes got the benefit of that. There were people that were at a disadvantage and you had businesses that are also a cornerstone of this island's progress that did not receive that credit to sustain their self. So when you compare what was done to what is being done, actually, there's a huge difference and.

I know in this House we have Members that lie deliberately and try to confuse the View in public. But the people of Anguilla.

Sorry, you have a point of autumn, remember? I see if you have a point of order. The unparliamentary language lie There was unparliamentary language earlier when the government was called inept. I let it slide so. Yeah. you may rise.

No, I wasn't really standing on a point of I wasn't really about to make a point of order, but we still have to try to keep the house at a certain decorum and.

And I hope that you do help me do that on your side too, so.

Madam Speaker, respectfully, you're the one who controls the House, but I was just that's why it didn't rise on a point of what I was just bringing it to your attention. I didn't want to disrupt this because in his in the momentum he had, but.

Yeah.

Just, just to bring it to that tension because the rules are the rules at the end of the day.

Yes. And I count on you to help me insofar as it relates to that. So I'm going to take a more vigilant approach to unparliamentary language because I did feel a little uncomfortable with the use of the word inept earlier too, and I let it slide. So I recognise that and I accept that.

Honourable Member, we accept that. Both sides, both sides, we accept that.

Thank you, Madam Speaker, and yes, I accept it and coincidentally, I have it written here. Inept government. So but I accept it and I make no corrections into false. And coming back, yes. So the people of Anguilla are realising that. When you make the comparison of the 500 credit that was issued compared to what this current government is giving them as a relief, there's a huge difference in benefits and that no one is being left out. So when you compare and you say a government that's caring, this is a government that's caring because this government is not just focused on a certain amount of people to receive a benefit as relief, but rather we're looking at it holistically and making sure everyone is.

By this relief package. And that again, is what you call a caring government and a government that always puts the people first. And I won't keep it long, but Madam Speaker. I support this supplementary budget and. This is about honoring commitments, protecting the vulnerable patients and relieving the burden on families. The people of Anguilla expect leadership, not political theatre. The people of Anguilla expect consistency this government has been doing and not political convenience, and I will rest my case there.

Thank you.

Thank you, Honourable Member. Are there any other contributions? I recognise the Honourable Single Island Wide Electoral District Member Vanterpool.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Good evening, Madam Speaker, Good evening to the. Colleagues on both sides of the aisle, the House of Assembly staff and Anguillians were listening via the various means. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of the bill before us and I'm quite happy and pleased to hear that the Leader of the Opposition and his team are also in support.

Madam Speaker, earlier and his presentation, the Member for Road South, Mr. Haydn Hughes, would have recalled that salaries were raised in 2005 and again in 2007, with no analysis having to take place. He further stated that the Deputy Governor indicated that the last time that an analysis was conducted was back in 2007. And that everything went haywire when salaries were increased in such an ad hoc manner, and that everyone across the island wanted increases which resulted in salaries across the island increasing exponentially. Madam Speaker While the Leader of the Opposition would have indicated that not everyone is happy with the proposed increases.

With some persons feeling that they have been unfairly treated and, Madam Speaker, I too, as well as Members on this side of the aisle, have also received calls from some person saying that they were not pleased with the proposed increases. What I can say is that, at least this time around, what we can appreciate is that this review was the result of a process that was followed. Of course, it could be subject to review, but at least this time around a process was followed. Experts were brought in to conduct a comprehensive review, the results of which, while some may consider not perfect, was produced through a lot of hard work and rigorous methodology. And I, Madam Speaker, I'm no expert in compensation review.

That's a beast of its own. So I'm just guided by their recommendations and the report that they produced. I would like to offer my sincere thanks and gratitude to the Honourable Premier, the Permanent Secretary of Finance and the teams at the Ministry of Finance, the Deputy Governor, the Permanent Secretary of Public Admin and the team at the Department of Public Admin, as well as to the team from PwC for all of the hard works and the effort it took to get us to this point.

Madam Speaker, while the Honourable Member for Road South would have mentioned that the increases that took place didn't arise out of a need at the time back in 2005, 2007, I think that we are all in agreement that the public service today, which is operating in 2026 on a 2008 salary, that today there is definitely a legitimate need, which is why I once again reiterate my support for the Bill before us. Madam Speaker.

The Leader of the Opposition, Dr. Webster, would have said that had we followed the APM plan to allow an investor or third party to set up solar for Anglec, we would not be here today dealing with the high fuel surcharges that we are seeing. Madam Speaker, my response to this.

While having an investor come in, set up solar and sell us energy via PPA is an option. It is not the only option. I must also highlight and stress that the lead of the opposition and his APM administration would have said on multiple occasions, Madam Speaker, that the option of Anglec securing a loan from the Caribbean Development Bank was off the table, that it was not viable, it was not feasible and that Anglec would not be able to take that loan due to contingent liability which the UK would have to sign off on and would not allow.

Well, Madam Speaker, by the looks of things today, I think we can clearly see that this was simply not true. After speaking to the President of the Caribbean Development Bank within weeks of this administration coming to office and letting him know that we are in support of Anglec transitioning to renewables and leading the transition as the utility, within a mere matter of months, Madam Speaker, Anglec was able to secure the loan on their own standing.

Government didn't have to cosign. The UK didn't have to give the approval. All that was needed, Madam Speaker, was the blessing of government. All they needed was for government to tell the Caribbean Development Bank that we agree with Anglec pursuing this via this means. So while the Leader of the Opposition may be correct that today, had they gone forward with a PPA, that some of the exposure that we are seeing to high fuel surcharges could have been mitigated.

I would argue that if the previous administration didn't spend 2020 to 2025 fighting with Anglec and instead they had chose to walk with them. And help build the utility today we would not be dealing with the high fuel surcharges that we see. Where the outcomes would ultimately have been the same, the difference is that the profits would be retained locally within our economy and able to circulate so that all could feel it and all could benefit, as opposed to being exported overseas.

So I'm happy to hear, Madam Speaker, that the former Minister of Utilities is happy to see a $10 million included in this supplementary budget to pay Anglec for the outstanding debt, for the water Corporation debt as well As for the street lights. Madam Speaker, this isn't just a clearing of a debt, it is strategic.

We are not just paying a debt, we are reducing the need for future subsidies. The arrangement, previously agreed to repair the Water Corporation debts of close to $10 million, was a monthly repayment of $100,000 at 0% interest until fully repaid. Madam Speaker, I'm of the view that this arrangement is totally unfair to Anglec as a utility.

This payment doesn't just fix an unfair arrangement to the utility, but, well, the payment that we're making today, Madam Speaker, doesn't just fix the unfair arrangement to the utility, but it provides them with much needed liquidity at a period where fuel costs are high and they will soon have a loan obligations to refill.

This provides the utility with liquidity, with leverage, and ultimately with support from their government. And as it relates to the payment of the outstanding streetlights, Madam Speaker? Again, the previous administration chose to fight with Anglec instead of insisting that they pay only 120,000 per year, knowing full well that at the time that flicker was put into legislation there were only about 200 streetlights on the island. And today, when we are now operating with over 2000 streetlights on the island, we are asking them to operate at a loss. That payment of $120,000 that the government wanted to pay annually can't cover the actual cost of paying. The electricity bills for the streetlights for two months, Madam Speaker.

This administration is formally of the view that the time of government abusing Anglec must and has come to an end. We are walking along with Anglec to amend this to ensure that government pays its fair share of its cost for usage so that the company doesn't have to pass on these expenses to the people of Anguilla.

Madam Speaker, I get many calls weekly from persons begging for streetlights. The ministry has a huge backlog of streetlight requests and applications going far back to in the previous administration was in office. We hear the cries of the community that the place is too dark and in light of the recent surge within crime and violence, we are aware of the security risk that that darkness poses. No, Madam Speaker, I can't blame Anglec for not wanting to install additional streetlights if they are the ones who are asked to carry that cost unfairly.

This is why this administration has sat at the table with Anglec. Not as enemies, not as opponents, but as partners walking together in mutual collaboration. This payment due to Anglec is government's commitment to doing the right thing and the first step in moving forward to addressing that backlog that continues to grow daily and moving forward, literally, Madam Speaker, towards a brighter and safer Anguilla.

Madam Speaker, the Leader of the Opposition, Dr. Webster, also mentions that the previous administration paid for this compensation review since they were in office, and he asked the question then why did it take so long to complete? The full story, Madam Speaker, is that while the previous administration paid for it, they left without having a signed contract in place, which,

Madam Speaker, seems to be a recurring theme. In previous debates, it was mentioned that the Government of Anguilla Office Accommodation Building had $10 million budgeted for 2025 and was due to start in October of that year. However. No plans were left for us when we came in office to move forward with. The same for many roads across the island. But before I get to roads, Madam Speaker,

I want to address a comment made by the Member for Road South and Madam Speaker, that government office accommodation was included in budgets going as far back as 2023. The Member said that their administration didn't need BCQS to come in and manage all of governments capital projects. First of all, Madam Speaker, for clarity of the listening public, BCQS is not contracted to manage all of government's capital projects.

They are engaged only and specifically for the Government of Anguilla office administration, building the office accommodation building, a project that was included in budgets as far back as 2023. But what did they, the previous administration, have to show when they left office other than a line item in the budget? Madam Speaker, the Member for Road

South also said that this administration must be careful with BCQS, as it's the same company as DCK. Madam Speaker, I find that to be a very loose statement, one that needs substantiating. And I am not aware of such a case, but I would be grateful if the Member could provide either myself or this Honourable House, Madam Speaker, with evidence of this claim.

Based on a quick search when he made that statement, Madam Speaker. What was what I was able to find out the claim that is that BCQS and DCK are the same company. What I was able to find out is that no. BCQS International and DCK Worldwide are separate companies with different business functions. Although they often work on the same large construction and infrastructure projects throughout the Caribbean.

BCQS is an independent property development consultancy specialising in project management, construction, cost management, quantity surveying, valuations, feasibility studies, loan monitoring, and related advisory services. The act as the owners representative or consultant rather than the builder. On the other hand, Madam Speaker, DCK Worldwide Group is a construction and development company or a general contractor that physically builds projects.

It describes itself as the Caribbean's lead leading builder and has delivered hospitality, infrastructure and commercial projects throughout the region. With that being said, Madam Speaker, I would simply hope that the Member was just misinformed and did not intentionally attempt to mislead this Honorable House and the people of Anguilla.

No, Madam Speaker, as we get back to rules, there are several rules that were touted as priority by the previous administration for 2025. But on taking office, while I must admit that some surveying works were completed, their warrant designs are procurement documents that were just sitting and waiting so that these projects could be progressed immediately.

The lands that were needed to develop these same priority roads had not been acquired. Land owners and stakeholders had not been consulted and engaged, but the previous administration expects that the road would show up overnight. Madam Speaker, I heard the Honourable Member for Road North just this morning speak once again to the North Hill Road.

And while I understand, Madam Speaker, that he has a political rule and that rule involves politicking, I wish to once again reassure my Honourable colleague as well as the people of Anguilla that work is already underway to ensure the delivery of that road in 2027. Work is being done to have the designs progressed as we speak, which will be followed by the preparation of the procurement documents as well as discussions with the land owners so that once the project is properly budgeted for and passed later in this year that we are ready to rule things out as soon as January comes.

Madam Speaker. The Member for Road South. Also spoke to the arrangements with BermudAir and asked for clarification as to whether government would have paid nothing or 600,000. Which is it? Madam Speaker, I find it odd that he would ask this now, to insinuate something to the people of Anguilla.

As in the last meeting of the House of Assembly, when I gave a ministerial update on BermudAir’s performance, that Member was the sole sitting Member of Opposition within this Honourable House's chambers, Madam Speaker. He said nothing. He asked no questions and he sought no clarification. So why show up today?

And actors if you're confused? But for the benefit of the Member, Madam Speaker, as well as the listening.

Speaker point of order. The Member for Road South said that on previous occasion that the Member had stated that there was no payment going to be made to BermudAir here and then later on came and said that they paid 600,000. He is intentionally misrepresenting Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker. I would argue that I'm the one that's being intentionally misrepresented. What I said before is that there was no minimum revenue guarantee and that what we were doing is not what we entered into is a risk sharing agreement. There's a difference. I never said that no payments were going to BermudAir and I would be very irresponsible to say that, Madam Speaker, as the Executive Council minutes themselves speak to the decisions that were being made.

But for the benefit of the member as well as the listening public and to clarify for everyone, Madam Speaker, the previous agreement with BermudAir included risk sharing where of 20 seats that were initially forecasted to not be able to be sold on only two of the three routes, government would cover the cost of 10 seats if they're not able to be sold, while the remaining 10 seats would be taken as a loss by the company.

And these are only on the flights where seats could not be sold. If there was a flight, we have six seats could not be sold, the Government would compensate for three and BermudAir would compensate for three, and this is on the seats above a capacity of 70, Madam Speaker, because the plane's total capacity is 96.

If we were to assume. And let's do a bit of math. That government had to pay for all 10 seats on every flight for the two routes within that agreement. The total cost to the government of Anguilla would have been $667,000. That is the worst case scenario if we had to subsidise every seat in that risk sharing agreement. The actual expenditure, Madam Speaker, resulting from this part of the agreement was $313,218.

Less than half of what could have been due to the performance of these new routes and the success of our combined marketing efforts. So, Madam Speaker, for the people who say that these flights came in empty, this alone shows that just of that risk sharing mechanism, we didn't reach a halfway mark due to such high performance in addition to that part of the agreement. $290,780 was spent on marketing collaborations across the three routes.

This brings the total investment in this partnership and establishing direct routes. To $603,988. The total investment, Madam Speaker, including seats and marketing, $603,988 in total. As mentioned in the update given at the last sitting of the House, the economic impact forecasted from these flights was $11.5 million across the season, Madam Speaker.

So while the Member joked that I initially said that our investments could bring about up to 3000, and I stress, Madam Speaker, up to based on the forecast, 3000% return on investment, the actual return having spent $603,988 and making $11.5 million is actually 1900%, Madam Speaker. No, I would argue that maybe I shouldn't have said up to and set the bar so high.

But, Madam Speaker. This means that for every dollar that the Government of Anguilla would have invested in this partnership with BermudAir, $1900 was returned into our economy. Now, Madam Speaker. I don't know what kind of investments the Members of the opposition have, but to me the math sounds like this was very much worth the investment to the people of Anguilla. Madam Speaker, reference was also made to the money shifted in this Supplementary Budget to support the upcoming season, and the Member asked why we should partner with BermudAir after I indicated that the initial agreement was only for the initial season.

Madam Speaker. The arrangement for the upcoming season is not the same agreement that fit for the previous season. First things first, Madam Speaker, before we go and hear it on the radio, let me be abundantly clear. For the upcoming arrangements, there will be no agreements on any seats for any of the routes. Seats will not be factored into the upcoming seasons agreements. It will not form part of the new agreement for the upcoming season. The funds allocated to be allocated for the are to be allocated for marketing across all of the routes, particularly the new routes to be introduced.

So, Madam Speaker. While we will continue with the three direct routes that were launched last season from Newark, Boston and Baltimore, they will be increased frequency to these destinations with an additional flight from each of these destinations that first stops in Provo in Turks Caicos. And then that flight would then come onward to Anguilla. Not only is this strategic as it forms part of our plan to make Anguilla the hub that connects the overseas territories, but also due to the fact that we will be launching a new route in partnership with BermudAir, one that goes from Toronto to Anguilla with a single stop in Provo. This provides greater options for guests to get to Anguilla, as well as for Anguillians to travel to other destinations in other markets.

And Madam Speaker, aside from Anguilla to Provo to Toronto or Newark or Baltimore or Boston, there may very well likely be options from Anguilla to Provo and then onward to Tampa, or if you would like, even onward to Belize. And vice versa, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, we are building Anguilla’s connectivity map, giving our existing guests as well as our new guests plenty of options to visit our shores.

The Minister of Tourism was proudly able to brag about month over month record-breaking arrivals tower shows, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, we are simply laying the foundation to develop, grow beyond that and break records month over month for the upcoming season, something that benefits all of the people of Anguilla.

As our aviation sector grows, Madam Speaker, and as our tourism sector grows, as and as our businesses benefit, we cannot leave the hard working civil servants behind. And that is what the bill before us today ensures does not happen and why I offer my support and I'm proud to stand behind it, Madam Speaker, I thank you.

Thank you, Honorable Member. Are there any other contributions? Members, I know you're tired, but if you do wish to speak, please indicate and then we can move on. I'm going to ask one more time because I know Members I've got the last time it happened. If there are no other Members wishing to contribute, I am going to invite the mover to respond.

Are there any other Members? Mr. Rogers. Seven O’clock Members, I do have room or capacity to go, maybe one more hour. I do know that everybody would wish to speak, but if you don't, we can move on and move to committees. I just would need to have some notice to call the public servants back to move on to committee.

Let's stand on for a few minutes, please. This House stands down for 5 minutes.

This House resumes its sitting.

Members, I do go on record to express my deepest gratitude for you for your collaboration and camaraderie today. As it relates to whether we would press on or not press on, I think in the spirit of ensuring that there's good workplace accommodation for our staff and our Members, this is a convenient time for us to break. And if you are minded, I would invite the Honourable Premier to make the motion for an adjournment for the sitting.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Madam Speaker, I hear by move that this Honorable House be adjourned to tomorrow, 9th of June, 2026 at 8:30 AM.

Thank you. Honorable Permier. Do I have a seconder?

Madam Speaker, I rise a second.

It has been moved and seconded that this Honorable House stands adjourned until June 9th at 8:30 in the morning, where the debates on the Bill will continue. Those in favour say aye, those opposed say no. The ayes have it. This House stands adjourned. Have a good evening everyone.