 Good afternoon and welcome to the St Lucia House of Assembly, where debate on the amendment to the St Lucia Constitution, the Constitution of St Lucia, the motion moved by Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, the Honourable Philip J. Pierre, as to the ascension of St Lucia to the Caribbean Court of Justice, C.C.J., as the final appellate court, or the replacement to the Pre-V Council. We are about to recommence as Speaker Claudius Francis makes his way to the chamber. With me is... Good afternoon, members. When we rose, we were debating the second reading of the very shortly entitled the Constitution of St Lucia Amendment Bill. Member for the Library. Thank you very much, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, we are still preoccupied with our celebration of independence after 44 years. And, Mr Speaker, we have over the past 44 years celebrated year in, year out without seizing with pomp and pageantry independence from alien rule. But independence from alien rule comes with responsibility and imposes certain obligations, including evolving new economic instruments and building new institutions. And so, Mr Speaker, in the words of President Obama, we must cut loose the shackles of the past and in this present circumstance pivot towards our own C.C.J. It is in this spirit, Mr Speaker, that I rise in this Parliament at this juncture in support of the Constitution of St Lucia Amendment Bill. This Bill seeks to replace the Pre-V Council as the final appellate court with the Caribbean Court of Justice. Mr Speaker, this is a matter that prior to the general election in 2021, the St Lucia Labour Party had signal its intention to replace the Pre-V Council with the C.C.J. This is not a sudden discovery. It is not a product of spontaneous combustion. This is reflected in the manifesto of the St Lucia Labour Party, which is contained in the section Good Governance, Anti-Corruption, and Constitutional Matters. I wish to, even though the Prime Minister read this particular section, I believe it's efficiently important for us to revisit it. And this section reads, Mr Speaker, and I quote, to return our country to a system that respects our democratic norms and the rights of our people. A St Lucia Labour Party government will, and paragraph 4 in that section reads, commence the process for the accession to the Caribbean Court of Justice, C.C.J., as St Lucia's final appellate court as the replacement to the Pre-V Council. Mr Speaker, this is a matter that this government was fully transparent in, articulating its position on this very important matter in its 2020-21 election manifesto. We note that the leader of the opposition has been in the forefront of clamoring for a referendum on the issue of replacing the Pre-V Council with the C.C.J. This argument has been destroyed by self-combustion, Mr Speaker, as he is well aware that as far back as 2014, the OECS Supreme Court of Appeal rule that St Lucia does not require referendum before becoming a full member of the C.C.J., which was established in 2001 to replace the Pre-V Council. According to the Court of Appeal, the government of St Lucia could simply obtain an amendment to the constitution which requires a two-thirds majority in parliament. Mr Speaker, I have heard the argument for putting this matter before the public for a vote rather than proceeding with replacing the Pre-V Council with the C.C.J. through the constitutionally correct process of amending the constitution. These arguments are, Mr Speaker, politically driven in an attempt to make political mileage, Mr Speaker. I wish to again state that we clearly indicated our intention to proceed with the process for accession to the C.C.J. and therefore the public was well aware of our position on this matter. And I dare say the referendum provided to the St Lucia Labour Party was an overwhelming 14-to-2 margin with two independent also winning the seats, Mr Speaker. This in itself, Mr Speaker, provided overwhelming support for the policies that we publicly indicated that we will be implementing during our term in office. It is rather ironic, Mr Speaker, that some people are asking that the Pre-V Council, which was imposed on us as former colonies and remains a vestige of our colonial past, are now asking that we need a referendum to remove the Pre-V Council as our appellate court. Mr Speaker, the public did not vote on a referendum to make the Pre-V Council to be our appellate court. And why we now asking them to vote to remove this remnant of our colonial past? Moreover, Mr Speaker, we are all aware that referendums do not provide the best outcomes for countries. In fact, the recent referendum in the United Kingdom, the country in which the Pre-V Council is based, was mapped by major campaigns of misinformation and xenophobia to entice voters to vote to live in the Brexit referendum. More recent polling data suggest that many people in the United Kingdom have realized that they have been hoodwing and that the promise is made by those who encouraged it were false and have not materialized. Many of these people have now regretted the decision to vote for Brexit. The United Kingdom is still grappling with the implementation of Brexit close to seven years after the referendum. Mr Speaker, our government has undertaken a comprehensive process leading to the replacement of the Pre-V Council with the CCJ as the final appellate court as early as April of 2022. The government of the United Kingdom was informed of St. Lucia's intention to leave the Pre-V Council. This was required by virtue of Section 41 of the Constitution of St. Lucia. The government of the United Kingdom has responded and given its no objection to the government of St. Lucia, thus commencing the legal process to terminate appeals to the Pre-V Council. A CCJ accession committee was also established led by the eminent legal scholar Sir Dennis Byron, former Chief Justice of the Caribbean Supreme Court and I believe former President of the CCJ. This committee embarked on a public relations campaign aimed at sensitizing the general public on this matter. We have now reached the stage, Mr Speaker, today which will allow us to pass this bill, to allow us to proceed to join the jurisdiction of the CCJ. Mr Speaker, as far back as 1970, the Caribbean Court of Justice was proposed by a political delegation from Jamaica at the six Caribbean heads of government in Jamaica. In 1974, the Caribbean Task Force reaffirmed the message of the Jamaican delegation, arguing that the Caribbean Court of Appeal represented the final step in the independence process. Independence imposes an obligation and sovereign nations to be the architects of their own destiny. To fulfill this obligation, the people must, in turn, create their own institutions. The framing of the arguments for the CCJ is over 53 years, Mr Speaker. Do we wish to debate this matter for another 53 years, Mr Speaker? Is that what we want to do? There was a great African who once said that thought without practice is empty, but practice without thought is blind. For 53 years, we have been discussing a simple matter. And up to now, there is debate as to whether we should declare independence from that particular colonial past. And we are doing so today, Mr Speaker. We are taking a patriotic leap of faith today. We need to be bold and decisive and take the step to abolish appeals to the Privy Council and replace it with the CCJ to thereby complete the cycle of independence of our countries, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, I've heard the unfortunate argument advanced by the leader of the opposition that only four countries have joined the CCJ and therefore we should wait for other countries to join before St. Lucien makes a decision to join. Mr Speaker, we did not wait for the rest of the Caribbean to produce two Nobel Prize winners. We did not wait, Mr Speaker. At one time, you put the rest of the Caribbean together, then they couldn't come up with one. We did not wait, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, if all countries adopted this thinking, then no country will join the CCJ. The four countries, namely Barbados, Guyana, Belize and Dominic, are leaders in this matter. And I am extremely pleased and proud that St. Lucia will, by approving this constitutional amendment, join those leaders and signal to the rest of the Caribbean community that they also need to join. It is to be noted, Mr Speaker, that the Caribbean countries are among the only independent countries that rely on the United Kingdom Privy Council as the final appellate court. I have heard the argument against replacing the Privy Council with the CCJ as the appellate court, and I believe that many of these arguments are specious. One of the main arguments put forward is that relating to a lack of trust and confidence in the CCJ, it has been stated that in the small societies in Caricom, some judges may be reluctant to offend politicians who hold the reins of government of the day. Storybook, Mr Speaker, science fiction. There is also the argument that CCJ judges could exhibit some bias if cases come in before them involve people who they know or have a friendship with. Perhaps they were friends at university. Mr Speaker, this argument is one which has no basis in fact. The Eastern Caribbean Court of Appeal has been an exemplar in this regard and has established an impressive track record in terms of the quality of his decisions. It is also the case, Mr Speaker, that the trust fund of US $100 million to finance the operations of the CCJ, thereby giving it financial independence from the member governments and member governments and not responsible for the appointment of judges as accentuated by the Prime Minister. We have already made the investment in the CCJ and that investment needs to be realized through our use of the CCJ as the final appellate court. According to Byron Blake, a former assistant secretary of the Caricom Secretariat, I believe, if I take my journey through the corridors of time correctly, the CCJ is significantly insulated from capricious action by any government using the power of the purse. The trust fund management independent board, chaired by a member of the private sector, is charged to ensure that there are resources to finance the operation of the court. It is perhaps the only court in the world with that level of financial independence. So Mr Speaker, like I said, the arguments have been destroyed by self-combustion. Byron Blake further states that the judges of the court are insulated against the action by a state or states. They are appointed by an independent judicial services commission and once appointed they have tenure to retirement. The president of the court is the only member whose appointment to that position is sanctioned by the heads of government. But listen to this, the governments can object to a recommendation by the commission but they cannot recommend another person for the office. That is in the sole responsibility of the commission. The counter argument is that the private council is so far removed from our customs. That is the real argument. Culture and tradition are therefore insensitive to Caribbean conditions. Many of the private council judges know very little about the Caribbean as indicated previously. It is to be noted Mr Speaker that Lord Hoffman, judge of the private council, is in favour of abolishing the private council as the final appellate court as he stated that he's not qualified to deal with such cases because he does not understand our culture. In fact, Lord Hoffman told attorneys in Trinidad and Tobago as far back as 2003 that a court of your own is necessary if you are going to have the full benefit of what a final court can do to transform society in partnership with the other two branches of government. On quote, it is also the case Mr Speaker that the intellectual capacity of judges in the Caribbean can be compared favorably with any group of judges in any jurisdiction in the world. Mr Speaker the ability to analyze legal issues and write carefully crafted and reason judgments is not a matter in dispute. It is within the sphere of competence of ours to rise to any level attainable by any other people. Another compelling case for joining the CCJ is that it will provide Caribbean and St. Lucian citizens greater access to justice. St. Lucian citizens will be able to take the matters to the final court of appeal at much reduced cost. Mr Speaker we have seen many instances in this country where land etc have been left to certain families and because they do not have the resources to fight it sometimes somebody with the financial resources can grab it because if they have $10,000 to take to take care of the kids or to spend it going and fighting the courts most times they would take care of the children instead of fighting it. Far less to go to the Privy Council but if it is within reach Mr Speaker then there is an improved framework for them to find justice. It is also to be noted Mr Speaker that appeals to the Privy Council are extremely costly and this act as a severe deterrent in prosecuting unappeal before that body. Mr Speaker it is likely that if the appeals were to be prosecuted in Potter Spain at the headquarters of the CCJ then many more persons who may be aggrieved by court of appeal decisions in the Caribbean would be in a financial position to approach the CCJ. In conclusion Mr Speaker I hold the very strong view that we need to move swiftly in replacing the Privy Council with the CCJ so that we can according to Justice Duke Pollard close the circle of independence. Mr Speaker I thank you. Remember for grossly. Mr Speaker today I rise as a patriot to lend my support to the constitutional amendment to allow solution to have the Caribbean Court of Justice be our final court of appeal and I do so proudly Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker please allow me to leave to first of all congratulate Julian Alfred and again so in St. Lucia and the region's metal in track and field. Mr Speaker as the member for Viewport South said before me the Caribbean continues to prove that we have the best in the world Mr Speaker. We have the best intellects in the world and of course we have the best sprinters in the world Mr Speaker and so Mr Speaker we're seeing that even in our young athletes that you don't have to be from a particular region a particular creed or color to provide some form of service to your country and indeed to your region Mr Speaker and so when I hear talk about the Privy Council having superiority in intellect and being unbiased and being non-political sometimes I scratch my head Mr Speaker simply because as a sportsman and Mr Speaker you are one of those who always follow the history of events I remember a time when the West Indies cricket team did not exist and the English cricket team dominated the cricket in the world and so Mr Speaker a group of men from the region came together and showed them how it is done and this is what I expect from the Caribbean court of justice that we are sending to today Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker too often we forget our history Mr Speaker too often we forget that we too are powerful individuals Mr Speaker and Mr Speaker I sat there today and listened to the member from Miku South speak and Mr Speaker remember a time playing cricket Devon League cricket Mr Speaker and when I was going and bat Mr Speaker the guys used to say ducky we're not for a duck a little pick on from here to there Mr Speaker and I had to have thick skin and I'm looking at the presentation from the member for Miku South and just mere sentences mere utterances have him turning red Mr Speaker Mr Speaker just as he turned red the people of St Lucia in July 2021 turned red and said we are confident in this Philip J Pierre administration Mr Speaker and so Mr Speaker I have to say to young people that we must understand what our vote stands for Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker before the election of July 2021 the Labour Party indicated its intention to put its trust in this regional body Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker do not tell me that in 2023 we now have to start a communication process Mr Speaker our young people ever since 2001 under the member for view for itself Mr Speaker they started their reading and analysis Mr Speaker and when the election was called in 2021 it was in the manifesto of the St Lucia Labour Party and Mr Speaker young people understand your vote in a general election is indeed a referendum Mr Speaker is a symbol of who and what you believe in and if the St Lucia Labour Party in July 2021 said to the people that we are moving towards the CCJ and young middle class elderly came out in support of the St Lucia Labour Party why are you insisting 18 months later that we need to go back to these very same people Mr Speaker do we have no confidence in our people are we saying that most of them Mr Speaker the land of Derek Walcott Mr Speaker have no idea before they voted that the St Lucia Labour Party would have done this no Mr Speaker they went in droves Mr Speaker and that is where our two-thirds majority came from it came from the people of St Lucia Mr Speaker Mr Speaker have heard some other things being spewed Mr Speaker and sometimes I wonder if people just believe that we are illiterate in this country so Speaker I hear people say that with the CCJ they will have a number an amount of political interference man as if to suggest that Philip J Pianist and Lucia Labour Party the member for castries east can call on a judge and somehow influence some some matter Mr Speaker but Mr Speaker in my limited knowledge of the law I know there is a power of recusal Mr Speaker so if a defendant Mr Speaker is of the opinion that a particular judge is biased against him he has every right to speak to his legal team and move a motion or move a motion or desire recusal of that particular judge Mr Speaker Mr Speaker is this thing new Mr Speaker so when we say that this thing is going to be politically advanced Mr Speaker I wonder if sometimes we do not pay attention to what really happens Mr Speaker Mr Speaker I took a few days off to celebrate getting older Mr Speaker and social media was a blazed Mr Speaker by hacks wanting somehow to start a political movement Mr Speaker let's call it what it is Mr Speaker the fact of the matter is that the only desire that the opposition wants a referendum is because they need some form of political motivation they need to score political points Mr Speaker they do this because they have failed the people of St Lucia Mr Speaker they do this because Mr Speaker they have a leader that is woefully unpopular a leader that refuses to produce a basic document saying what happened at the last election and so Mr Speaker let's call it what it is it's politics it's a show or desire to show some form of strength Mr Speaker Mr Speaker they've gone in all different directions to try to cast explosions on a government in 18 months that have shown the people that they are genuine about putting them fools and so Mr Speaker they tried it to the member for castry south they tried it with a member for castries east they tried it with a member of gross delay all sorts of aspersions i've never seen Mr Speaker an opposition leader say anything at any time just to see what sticks Mr Speaker there is that just belief that people are stupid Mr Speaker and so Mr Speaker you see another attempt foiled because they have no idea what to do Mr Speaker and Mr Speaker i have a special cold attack the member from schoesel but i dare say that member is very aware that this Labour Party is doing the right thing Mr Speaker he is very aware and i need people to ask themselves that question knowing the man from schoesel saltibus there's a reason that even after the political leader the opposition leader did not show up that this member decided today he is going to stand down and we know why Mr Speaker it is because this government is doing the right thing for our people Mr Speaker Mr Speaker let's Mr Speaker i sat here flabbergasted by the noise made by the member for microsoft Mr Speaker there were conversations in social media about constitutional amendment i'm astounded by the fact that he has chosen to speak against this constitutional amendment that potentially makes life easier for the ordinary man on woman Mr Speaker Mr Speaker as i said he's playing politics with a mechanism that brings parity to persons of lesser means Mr Speaker to get justice at all levels Mr Speaker Mr Speaker Julia of Lafayee if she finds herself as an ordinary woman in some battle with her neighbour and for some reason all the courts decide that Julia is wrong Mr Speaker Julia from Lafayee now has a court of appeal that she can with due time apply for to seek justice Mr Speaker Mr Speaker Marissa and all of Monsepo if she's walking down the road and somebody decides to rob her and she defends herself and for some reason the courts got it wrong even she Mr Speaker can apply to the ccj Mr Speaker Rocket of Vesiqui Norbert a staunch defender of myself who may one day find himself defending me too much and maybe defending himself and need the ccj this Mr Speaker will be for these individuals ordinary Mr Speaker Abok grows oh you know them Mr Speaker solution has contributed millions of dollars in financial support to the ccj Mr Speaker i have to ask myself why didn't the former prime minister in his nearly six years in government not request come to this house not request a referendum on the ccj then if you are so concerned why did he do nothing about the constitution to change it so that it demands a referendum Mr Speaker why he did nothing so Speaker we know what he was doing you know he was selling our land millions to lock a bee horses before people got one room or hotel built scandal after scandal globe charting spending thousands in a hotel but Mr Speaker you were there for almost six years five years plus if you had that conviction why didn't you do nothing then so Speaker i won't stay long because the member for view for itself that was a masterful it in this Mr Speaker masterful Mr Speaker add everything in it as you know Mr Speaker and so we know the facts we know the history we know what happened and we know what this government has to do and we are doing today Mr Speaker i'm very honored to have our next generation of legal minds Mr Speaker as honored to have them here today Mr Speaker because Mr Speaker once we get this done Mr Speaker they will be happy to know that case filing and management case management it done it electronically Mr Speaker the ccj took the lead on the technological advancement of the law Mr Speaker and so Mr Speaker it will make it easier for them Mr Speaker Mr Speaker i'm very confident that in our needs earlier today at least one in fact all of them Mr Speaker because of what we are doing today can have as the ambition sitting on the Caribbean court of justice Mr Speaker one of them here today Mr Speaker and so i look forward to this happening Mr Speaker Mr Speaker sometimes as young people we tend to go with the flow Mr Speaker we tend to just go with what we hear certain individuals in society say undo but let's just think about it for a moment Mr Speaker why are we so afraid Mr Speaker i was in Grenada for a short time and Mr Speaker every time i looked around it was almost as if i saw a St Lucian Mr Speaker these people looked like me Mr Speaker Mr Speaker these people sounded like me i remember being into Bego and of course Soka Monaco was hot at that time we went to you know you hear the music Mr Speaker the people into Bego they danced just like me they probably got wine as good as i could but they danced just like me just like me Mr Speaker Mr Speaker they sounded similar to me so why are we so afraid of these people Mr Speaker Mr Speaker i went to Grandin State University on a scholarship and Mr Speaker our international day we stood together as young people we understood that staying together we could have achieved more than believing that there was a superior class or superior type of people Mr Speaker right after we celebrate 44 years we want to signal to people that somehow our people are inferior i cannot teach my twin girls that we are the creme de la creme we get it done we've shown in times past that we can do more once we come together as a region so Mr Speaker the fact is the constitution of St Lucia requires two-third majority the framers understood that you needed to have this level of agreement on this and this sits in the house today Mr Speaker it could have said half could have said 50% but two-thirds it sits here today so Mr Speaker as a member for grozily representing the ganja man representing the rich man representing white black indian representing the middle class Mr Speaker i stand today unreservedly endorsing the amendment to have the ccj become our final court of appeal and do so Mr Speaker because it is to the benefit of all of us i thank you Mr Speaker Mr Speaker thank you Mr Speaker i rise in support of the constitution of St Lucia amendment bill that seeks essentially to abolish appeals to her majesty and council and to provide for appeals to the Caribbean court of justice Mr Speaker i am pleased to stand here however so much have been said this morning by the member former prime minister i think it would be remiss of me not to thank him immensely to be sitting almost at his feet and benefiting from such a beautiful informative presentation but Mr Speaker my brief contribution i was tempted to as a surveyor to speak of on land disputes maybe contract claims but of course Mr Speaker the issue of social protection social inclusion poverty reduction i just want to briefly link these issues to the discussion of the ccj and how it impacts persons who are vulnerable in doing so mr's picture allow me to capture in my imagination what i consider to be the sacred work of emancipation and as intimidated intimidated intimated by a labor day lecture from one comrade george goddard who stated briefly the work of emancipation is far from over uncaring in this understanding mr speaker as a student i wish to add that more change is needed and more change must come but of course i'm reminded that change does not roll in on wheels of inevitability but comes through continuous struggles so mr speaker as i listen to objecting views on the other side that signals fear the noise or those who suggest that we cannot and we should not pursue what we are doing this afternoon i was allowed to take a sort of a mentor flight from selected periods and to up to where we are now and ask myself a few questions and the first place i would like to capture is about the 15th century when men and women were placed in a ship crossing the atlantic ocean on the way to the Caribbean the commencement of this journey that we are discussing this morning and i asked myself the same question what noise what objections when men while in shackles saying that reflecting on how will they escape there were those who may have been protesting saying we may need a referendum it is not safe to escape because we are on a ship but history would tell us there are some that did not survive the journey they died trying to save their lives but if we move on mr speaker little later to the period on the plantation there were persons who in the words of some historian called the the morons or what would call the negma who did not wait on a referendum or even the proclamation of emancipation but they went to the hills and started their own self-government because they decided that they are persons born in this earth as free moral agents but during the same time mr speaker i wish to submit as recorded in the guardian on 2nd of february 2009 in saying that the first 20 years of the west indian steam existence that there were no though exclusively white captains so for 20 years the west indian steam was not allowed to participate with captains from the region in fact there in the guardian he said that tony cozy wrote in his book that the refusal to appoint black captains because the ruling class considered that black black man was not ready for leadership political social sporting otherwise and if you link that to the noise that is being made today that noise is literally consistent with that time saying that the likes of clad lord gary sobers the war darin sumi is not fit to be captain of the west indian steam and would need a referendum mr speaker even then when the announcement of emancipation was made and the time of sir john come turn and sir joe charles during that time there would have been noise as well but the struggle moved on and today i am privileged and god has allowed me to be here with these honorable men and women to continue the secret work of advancing total liberation from our colonial past so the amendments here that is being recommended is not only to break up ties of a colonial system and to celebrate how far we have come by by doing things ourselves but it's also to bring justice closer home so that it can be accessible by the ordinary man it is indeed about justice and of course mr speaker i wish to submit that part of the sustainable development goals that have been enshrined and that we have signed on to speaks to access to justice mr speaker if you look at our genie coefficient one would ask what is it that justice have to do with overcoming poverty but the member who spoke this morning placed it well in context that when persons have access to justice the resilience the participation the whole principle of inclusion in society makes a big difference mr speaker there was a time when persons of my growing up on my ethnic group would have given up lands in exchange for flour and sugar because they wanted to feed the kids and within a short space of time value of land increased and they saw multimillionaires on parcels of land that they once inherited and there's no one to turn to because land speculators came into this country and of course in a short space of time a lot of persons who had a short parcel of land became landless when i listen to the likes of our South African comrade who speaks about land Julius Malema it tells me that we need to be careful that we do not set up our population to become ruthless to become reckless because when we choose not to take steps today the generation coming after will certainly take matters in their own hands so of course the rule of law is a basic basic precondition for sustainable economic development and in societies with some legal protection those who lack the resources for access to legal to the legal system are often denied and these safeguards they miss it out completely and of course it is estimated mr speaker that four billion people around the world do not enjoy the protections afforded by law the poorest and most vulnerable instead live at risk of losing their homes sometimes mr speaker you could have stories where persons would have paid a large part of the mortgage and they believe that they have paid out the principal but here comes the bank within a certain time move on to them to take their homes and while they pursue local intercourse that's the end of it they're left to suffer having the a court of that repute within the region provides an opportunity for persons to take those banks to task to the highest level that we could see an opportunity for ordinary solutions the course of going to england to challenge a bank who would have been strapped with expensive lawyers is not a possibility by the ordinary solution mr speaker if serious progress is ever going to be achieved in overcoming extreme poverty the poor must enjoy the rule of law on if unfunctioning institutions of justice otherwise money will continue to flow towards the powerful and those who are more fortunate mr speaker everything that needs to be said about this piece of legislation has been said but i need to remind sentlosions of just this one thing this administration the labor party i have known for a fact have always placed ordinary sentlosions at this forefront of policies and of course when you think of the pillars for social protection the agencies that contribute to the well-being of ordinary sentlosions be it the james belgrave fund that provide micro loans the national conservation authority that takes care of our coastal areas and provide employment for ordinary people the sentloser social development fund that continue to be a motion towards poverty reduction the short-term employment program that is in the estimates that normally provides employment for thousands of persons the public assistance program that takes care of all disabled people and persons who are receiving public assistance the eldercare program the nice program all of these programs comes from the heart of the central labor party program and i understand that it's quite natural that this administration would be the one advancing the caribbean court of justice so that ordinary people got access to justice at this point in time in our development i dare say mr speaker that the hope of a secure and livable world lies with the discipline of non-conformist who are dedicated to justice peace and brotherhood i thank you a member for denry north thank you mr speaker mr speaker i rise to support the bill that is before the house as presented by the honorable prime minister earlier today but mr speaker it would be remiss of me to make a very short presentation on the bill without acknowledging the earlier contribution by the member for view for itself i think mr speaker we were treated to a masterclass of a presentation by the member in supporting the bill as presented by the prime minister but mr speaker i will crave your indulgence briefly to place on the record my condolences to two families in my constituency who have lost loved ones the noel family in ulia and the kelly family of the spin and mr speaker i also want to join the member for grusely in congratulating julian alfred for having represented her educational institution and by extension our country with distinction mr speaker superintendent of police britain deterville is a constituent of mine and i must also place on the record the condolences of the people of denry north to the deterville family on the passing of the senior police officer mr speaker today is historic historic in terms of the parliament and also our country today we boldly transition from the previous council to the ccg as the final appellate court for our people and our country mr speaker i believe that taking this particular bill to the parliament or the amendment of the constitution is a profound expression of confidence in the homegrown legal talent that reside in our country and by extension the caribbean mr speaker there was a time in our history when people would frown on the quality coming out of the caribbean not because we were not matching up to what obtained elsewhere but we had been made to believe that anything coming from us was inferior to what obtained elsewhere and mr speaker thankfully today we are able to see the light for ourselves and tell our people as leaders that what emanates and what comes out of the caribbean is comparable to what obtains anywhere else in the world and the legal fraternity is not an exception mr speaker many have criticized our administration for going the route of the ccg mr speaker the ccg that we are presenting to the people today is not a javasak we gave a commitment to the people of san russia when we were on the campaign trail that we would have replaced the previous council with the ccg as the final appellate court for our jurisdiction mr speaker so this was not or is not a javasak when the people of this country went to the polls they knew what they were voting for they knew they were voting for among other things the reinstatement of the one laptop child program they knew they were voting for an administration that would absorb the cost of cxc math and english they knew they were voting for an administration that would give expression to the philosophy of having one university graduate per household and mr speaker they also knew that had they voted for the senatorial labor party they would have seen the young athletes of this country receiving receiving better support in the exploits irrespective of where mr speaker or the discipline that they chose and so mr speaker in equal measure they also knew that once the solution labor party had won the elections to form the government that we would have replaced this previous council with the ccg and mr speaker not only is it contained in the manifesto but in the front speech by the governor general after we became the government the governor general spoke to st lucia embracing the ccg as the final appellate court this was reiterated by the prime minister in his budget address mr speaker so here we are today making good on a promise made to the people and we are being faced with opposition that is not objective but as the member for grocery they quite rightly said mr speaker the opposition sees an opportunity to posture politically because nothing seemed to be working for them and so they believe mr speaker by making noise about the ccg opposing the ccg that will probably give them a food hole and i watched the member for me could solve this morning mr speaker i have been in opposition before opposition is lonely and when he looked to his left mr speaker where he would have had some form of support he noticed that there was nobody to chain on and so he went off on a tangent he tried to speak about crime mr speaker he talked about bad governance and mr speaker to make it worse he even tried to provide or give advice to our government the same man who want to lectures on governance and good governance mr speaker was prime minister for five years he went beyond the customary five years dragged us into a sixth year presided just one head of expenditure constituency development program in excess of one hundred million dollars and he did not give a single project to the six of us who sat in opposition and when he stood mr speaker i looked at the member and i saw a portrait of desperation i saw incoherence i saw a man who did not know what he was talking about but i'm sure mr speaker during the life of this parliament there'll be other opportunities to speak about those things and so i want to say mr speaker that decision and so with the ccj We have achieved a lot as a people and we should never let political opportunities, people looking to score political points to cause us to second guess ourselves and what we can achieve as a people. I have full confidence in the process, I have full confidence in the CCJ and I am certain that when the vote is put to this chamber this afternoon Mr. Speaker and Saint Lucia would have embraced the CCJ that our country and our people would be much better off as a result of the intervention of this government. So Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of Denrinov, I pledge my full support to the move where we replace the Privy Council with the CCJ as the final appellate court of our jurisdiction. Thank you Mr. Speaker. Thank you Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this Constitution of Saint Lucia Amendment Bill that is tabled earlier today by the Honourable Prime Minister and member for Castries East. Mr. Speaker, in my training as a secretary I learned something called shorthand and what it did was allowed us to praisey what was being said. So this afternoon and today I know we have heard quite a bit. I want to join the other members here to commend our former Prime Minister and member for View Fort South for his eloquence, his clarity in giving us the history of the CCJ, but more importantly the importance of the CCJ in ensuring access to justice by the average inclusion among other things. Mr. Speaker, before I go into this very short presentation here today, I want to also join members in congratulating our Julian Alfred and as I watch the race it was telling us as usual we are as good as the race, Mr. Speaker, and in some cases better than the race. So Mr. Speaker, the importance of this moment in our history as an independent nation must not be underestimated. And I'm pleased that today within this August chamber were generations of young lawyers who came in, who sat and listened to this debate. It's a historic moment, Mr. Speaker, and I am also thankful to the Almighty for giving me this opportunity to be in this August body. Mr. Speaker, only last week, the 22nd of February to be exact, solutions celebrated 44 years of our independence. Today, February the 28th, we are taking the bold and courageous step of amending our constitution to modify provisions that allow appeals to our majestic council and to provide appeals to the Caribbean court of justice. Mr. Speaker, you've heard this morning from our Honourable Prime Minister and he articulated a few things that I want to just repeat here and reinforce that all the constitutional requirements have been met. The need for 90 days between the 1st and 2nd reading of this bill was met. We've heard very clearly both from the Honourable Prime Minister and the member for V4S and other speakers here today of the independent funding structure for the court in the establishment of the U.S. $100 million trust fund. We've heard as well of the independence in the selection of the judges and staff of the CCJ. So Mr. Speaker, we've heard as well that the issue of adopting the CCJ as a centrucial final appellate court was a promise made by this Centrucial Labour Party administration. And you've heard members before me reading the exact sections of our constitution on page 28, so I will not repeat it here today. But one of the main reasons that was articulated in this manifesto was to return our country to a system that respect our democratic norms and the rights of our people. That was one of the main reasons why we decided that we were going to commence this process to adopt the Caribbean Court of Justice. We were very clear, Mr. Speaker, and there is a saying that we were crystal clear, Mr. Speaker. It was documented. So today we are keeping this promise, Mr. Speaker. We made a promise to the people and we are keeping it. And Mr. Speaker, the fact that the people of this country voted overwhelmingly for the Centrucial Labour Party at the last election, selecting 13 of the 17, and now through consensus we have the additional two members with us, making it 15, Mr. Speaker. I believe that all the people, the majority of the people, are supporting what we are doing today. But Mr. Speaker, notwithstanding the above, let us take a minute again to re-emphasize the pros and cons of moving to the CCJA as our final appellate court. And I want to look at a document that we have here where we say 10 reasons why Centrucial should exceed to the CCJA. And I will just speak up three. Item five speaks of the fact that going to the Preview Council is extremely expensive. And that explains, Mr. Speaker, from information that we have, a minimum cost is about EC $130,000. Stay beyond the affordability of the average Centrucial. The other reason why we must get on to the CCJA, Mr. Speaker, this document is telling us that the experiences of those curriculum states that delinked from the Preview Council to the CCJA, and namely, Barbados, Belize, Dominica, have one thing in common. The volume of the second-tier appeals has climbed enormously, which in essence is saying these countries, their constituents now have greater access to justice, Mr. Speaker. And another reason presented in this document, the CCJA has remained and is keeping in touch with modern times and has, again, increased access through modernizing the courts and allowing persons to participate in that system electronically. Mr. Speaker, we've also heard from speakers before us that over the last 16 years, only 17 cases from Centrucial have reached the Preview Council. Mr. Speaker, there is a saying that justice delayed is justice denied. And one of the key comments concerning the Preview Council is the duration, the length of time it takes to give a decision. So Mr. Speaker, what is the average person saying or what should they say as we make this move? I look at a leaflet in terms of communicating, and this leaflet was prepared by the committee that was tasked with the responsibility to speak about the CCJA to our people. And it says, it speaks about independence, it speaks about accessibility, effectiveness and the original status of our Caribbean courts. Mr. Speaker, for me, as I look at this leaflet, it speaks about the mission of the Caribbean Court of Justice. And that mission is saying that the CCJA is committed to providing accessible, fair and efficient justice for the people and states of the Caribbean community. It is also asking another question, do you know what the appellate jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice is? And the response is, it is an appellate jurisdiction, the Caribbean Court of Justice has appeals from the lower courts in both civil and criminal matters from countries which have decided that the CCJA should be the final court of appeal. So Mr. Speaker, why is the CCJA so important to our people? As a parliamentary rep for Souffre for CCJA, I place great importance on the issue of access to justice, Mr. Speaker. And this access hinges on one, affordability, and two, speed at which the cases are heard and decisions made. So Mr. Speaker, the fact that the CCJA is a Caribbean Court is very important to us as a people, the pride in embracing our own, the pride in realizing that we are of age, the pride in accepting that as a Caribbean people, we have the ability to dispense justice impartially. And I think that is important for us because that's the question out there. Can we, do we have the integrity to present justice in an impartial manner? So Mr. Speaker, and again I will repeat what has been said, the Caribbean region has given the world eminent jurists and we've heard some names today. And I don't think that I should ignore some of them, suddenly Alexander is the one that I will mention first because he is from the land of lands, Souffre. And I could remember as a child passing through the area where this house still stands, where this gentleman and his relatives where he was born. And we always thought that you can achieve, that is important for us. When you think of the late Sir Vincent Rosack from Swazel, you've heard from, we have Justice New Rollins from St. Kitts, we have Dame Janice Pereira from the BVI, and my late friend, Madam Susie Duvay, Sir Lady I had a lot of respect for from castries. And this morning in this august body we had Sir Dennis Byron from St. Kitts, who have represented the region well internationally. And when I look at the documents before me, I learned something as well today of the late Madam Justice Marie Elizabeth Born Holland, first woman judge of the Commonwealth Caribbean who was born of the morn in castries, Mrs. Speaker. So Mrs. Speaker, I repeat all of this to say that we have enough evidence to show that our men and women of this region are of the highest integrity and highest competence for us to have our own Caribbean appellate court. So Mrs. Speaker, let us seize this moment Mrs. Speaker, because it is an important moment for us. Mrs. Speaker, as we go through this debate, I also try to understand why some of us are afraid of change. It is a natural thing. Persons are afraid of change. But I also have been reminded that change is something that is also constant. The world is changing. I believe on this side and as a member of this government, our government, that by all means we must continue to provide the public with information on the workings of the CCJ so that they may feel that they may understand and be comfortable of the CCJ as our Caribbean courts. So I want to thank the committee who has tasked me with that responsibility. And I saw two, I think at least two members in this August chamber with us this afternoon. And I'm told that the committee will be having a strong haul in Superan Saturday. I want to encourage members to attend and I want to encourage the public to continue engaging to understand the work of this very important body. By all means Mrs. Speaker, let us continue to work to improve the overall justice system in Sanctucia. Because the man on the street will make decisions concerning the CCJ based on the experience they have in our local system, whether we like it or not, this is a reality. And we've heard from the member from Vifort South where he lamented the fact that the magistrate courts in Vifort is closed. And Mrs. Speaker, I recall very clearly once having a conversation with a vendor in the Souffre Market. And she was actually a lady from Swizzale. And she was talking about she lost her son in a murder case. And she was speaking and I could see that she was bleeding inside. And she was calling for justice. So as we debate this, I remember this lady because she might never be, she might not have been able to afford going to the Privy Council. But what we are doing there today, we are addressing persons at that level who really want and who are really seeking justice. We are giving them an opportunity to access this justice. I remember as well, Mrs. Speaker, as we speak, we have several inmates in our prisons who are on remand. Some of them believe that they deny justice. Going to this Caribbean court of justice will open access to those persons. Access to justice. So Mrs. Speaker, by all means, let us thank the British for providing us with the services of the Privy Council for such a long time. But Mrs. Speaker, by all means, let us make this move to the CTJ and let justice and peace reign in our land and our region. Yes, Mrs. Speaker, we must embrace the CTJ and the time to do so is now. The time when the people of Central Asia have placed their confidence in this administration. They've given us the mandate to do the things that were difficult. Now they've given us the mandate. Now is our moment to move. We can no longer delay this process. So as I stand here, I support the bill before us. And I say to all, let the good Lord guide us on this journey. I thank you. The member of view for North. Thank you very much, Mrs. Speaker. Mrs. Speaker, today, February 28th, 2023, will go down as a day of resolute decision, Mrs. Speaker. Today, February 28th, 2023, the member for Castries East, my good friend, has taken the boat of decades of effort to shore. I joined my colleagues in the parliament today to pay homage to all those who toiled throughout the years, Mrs. Speaker. I pay homage to those like the member of parliament for view for itself, Dr. Kennedy Anthony, who pioneered the process along groups over the years who have been fighting for justice, liberation, independence and freedom in the Caribbean, the unions, the Rastafari movement, the cultural heritage movement, all progressives over the years. For Mr. Speaker, the independence of the Caribbean and the movement for an independent Caribbean civilization, this movement has been driven by the sacrifice, energy and fire of many grassroots indigenous movements, and all of this energy fed into the work which was done by Dr. Kennedy, Anthony and others in the region to bring us here today. We await the culmination of this movement, or another step in this movement rather. We await with bated breath the day when we will become a republic, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the absence of the opposition is also a powerful demonstration of how the leader of the opposition, how he thinks about us. And today, therefore, the debate about the amendment to the constitution in relation to the CCG is very important. I'm proud, Mr. Speaker. I'm very proud to be here today to join my colleagues in this historic moment. But I want to take a few minutes, Mr. Speaker, to look at this debate and this amendment. First of all, Mr. Speaker, many people speak about the Privy Council, and they talk the virtues of the Privy Council. But why was the Privy Council really formed? But very briefly, Mr. Speaker, I'm sure you will recall that it was way back in the days when the monarchy, whether it be a king or a queen, they wanted people to advise them on matters of state. And I heard it before in the debate. In those days, what would be matters of state for the kings and the queens, possibly how to plunder another country, maybe how to invade another small island, possibly how many hundreds of slaves would be on that particular island, just as an example. So the Privy Council was formed to advise the kings and the queens. I don't want to go into the details. Where is the Caribbean Court of Justice, and why was it formed? It is the Court of Final Appeal. It's been said before, it was established in 2001, and we are very fortunate to have one of the signatories here with us. It began operating in 2005. It has two jurisdictions, the original jurisdiction and the appellate jurisdictions. In the original jurisdiction, it is used in respect of the interpretation and pronouncements of treaties such as the revised Treaty of Shagoramas, the treaty which established the Caribbean community. So immediately you begin to see the difference, Mr. Speaker, and it is very important to establish these very foundation issues so that our people understand when people are debating why do we go to CCJ, why not stay Privy Council and so on. And even though we don't have all of the time today, it is important very briefly to establish those very base arguments. The appellate jurisdiction, Mr. Speaker, the CCJ has appeals as the Court of Last Resort in both civil and criminal matters from the member states which have ceased to allow appeals to the Privy Council. Mr. Speaker, if we just go back to 2018, we have the Ketone News Editorial of Guyana. Went on to explain the whole history of the formation of the Caribbean Court of Justice. I will not go into it because the member for view for itself did a great job this morning, but the both of the CCJ, again, very, very important and another picture of our journey to independence of our Caribbean civilization. It's very interesting that Jamaica, a country which had the six Caribbean heads of government conference in Kingston, that delegation tabled a proposal to establish the original Court of Appeal, but it's very interesting that they are not a member of the CCJ. Again, the ups and downs of our history and our struggles in the Caribbean to ensure we attain an independent Caribbean civilization. We continue to work in the Caribbean. If I may go for a little of Sir Dennis Byron's mind, and we have spoken of Sir Dennis Byron, he was in the chamber this morning, and he spoke about the role of the CCJ and the importance of the Caribbean judicial and economic development. In 2013, he spoke about the importance of settling trade disputes. He spoke about the vital importance to the entire region to facilitate the single market and economy. So it's very important for trade and how we succeed in the economies of the Caribbean. And there are several examples of cases which have gone to the CCJ. The cement manufacturer in Trinidad and Tobago in relation to tariffs on the imports of cement from the Dominican Republic successfully done, complaints from manufacturers of wheat products to compare the Surinamese government to impose tariffs on imports from the Netherlands. Another example, and a member of the Air Force South spoke of the Shannock-Mairi case. I can remember during that time the excitement that was all around the Caribbean when this lady decided to be bold enough to challenge the government of Barbados. Sir Dennis Byron goes on to indicate that the CCJ assists with the expense and in the complexity of lodging cases. And the member of Air Force South and others have spoken about the number of Caribbean people who are accessing the court. In a case, Ross versus St. Clair from Guyana. This was a lady whom it was proven that she came from very modest means and she wanted to lodge an appeal. She was afforded the opportunity without charge. So when the member of Air Force South spoke about individuals who want to access the court, we have an example there in Ross versus St. Clair. The use of technology, videoconferencing, audio conferencing. Well, Mr. Speaker, we have heard an elaborate description of the history and so on from the member of Air Force South. But it's very interesting to go back to read what the law lords themselves from the Privy Council had to say about justice for people in the Caribbean. And I want to go all the way to 1830 to 1834. 1830 to 1834. Lord Brohum, Lord Chancellor of England between 1830 and 1834. Hear what he had to say about justice in these far out regions, Mr. Speaker. And I quote, Lord Brohum said, it is obvious that from the mere distance of those colonies and the immense variety of matters arising in them, foreign to our habits and beyond the scope of our knowledge, any judicial tribunal in this country must be of necessity, be an extremely inadequate court of redress. And I quote, that's from 1932, sorry, 1832, 1834, you know. A lord, Lord Chancellor of England said so. But in 2023, the leader of the opposition want to tell us that we cannot proceed with our independence. And the member, my colleague, the member for library, spoke about Lord Hoffman. And when he said that I smile, at the annual dinner of the lawsuit station of Trinidad and Tobigo, he indicated, and I quote, although the Privy Council has done its best to serve the Caribbean and I venture to think has done much to improve the administration of justice in parallel with improvements in the United Kingdom. Our remoteness from the community has been a handicap. My own view is that a court of your own is necessary if you are going to have the full benefit of what a final court can do to transform society in partnership with the other two branches of government. That's another Lord, Lord Hoffman. And I can go on and on and on. You just have to do the research. This is not magic. It's there. It's not rocket science. You can do the research and you'll find it. The last one, Francis Jacobs, a Privy Councilor and former Advocate General of the European Court of Justice in 2008. Here's what he said that I quote, a Supreme Court of High Calibur has been established in the Caribbean which would be able to take account of local values and develop a modern Caribbean jurisprudence in an international context. It is regrettable that political difficulties have obstructed acceptance of its appellate jurisdiction and that the outdated jurisdiction of the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council survives for many of those states. All possible steps should be taken to encourage the Caribbean states to accept their appellate jurisdiction of their own Supreme Court. That's Francis Jacobs. So I took you from 1830 and brought you to 2008 to hear what the Lords of England, the Lords of the Privy Council themselves are saying, Mr. Speaker, but yet in St. Lucia, we have, for political and other reasons, people who are supposed to be fighting for Caribbean independence and the independence of the Caribbean civilization, of course we'll have our political differences, but they are now telling us that we are not good enough and about being good enough, we have had so much this morning. So I end, Mr. Speaker, by going back to, very briefly, going back to the writings of St. Dennis Byron. And St. Dennis Byron quotes the Right Honourable Telford Judge and the Right Honourable Telford Judge said, a compromise of sovereignty for us to remain, it's a compromise of sovereignty for us to remain wedded to a court which is part of the former colonial hierarchy. And if I may, if I'm allowed to, Mr. Speaker, I will go for another very well respected law professor. Dr. Kenny Anthony, former PM of St. Lucia, puts it this way and I quote, the court has always been about the need for all the people of Caricom to assert their confidence in the integrity, the civilization, and in themselves. No self-respecting nation should allow its sovereignty to be at large, unquote. And I end finally, if I'll be allowed to, I use some words from our own Prime Minister, Honourable Philip J. Pierre, who says all the time, we need to believe in ourselves. We are great as a people. We need to build more self-confidence in ourselves. We need to hold each other and advance our progress, unquote. So Mr. Speaker, on behalf of the people of V4 North, I support this amendment and I say for whatever, to the advancement of the independence of our Caribbean civilization. This is just another step. And I congratulate all those who worked throughout the years to bring us to this point today. And I'm happy that I sit here today with a Prime Minister who has brought it to this stage and with a former Prime Minister who was a signatory of the original agreement. I am not sure, Mr. Speaker, that we understand the value of today. Someone who signed in 2001 in the same party and a Prime Minister who's brought it to this stage. I thank you, Mr. Speaker. A member for Dennery South. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Before I deal with the matter at our disposal now, I would like to express my condolences to three family members in Dennery. One is the Dorin family of Beirut. The second is the Felixia family of Green Mountain. And the third is Ms. Elind's husband. I know him as Backfoot. I want to express my condolences to the family and to wish them strength and courage during the period of bereavement. Mr. Speaker, I stand in support of this bill which focuses on the ascension of the Caribbean court of justice as the final court of appeal in civil and criminal matters for St. Lucia and those countries of the Caribbean community which are parties to the agreement and have acceded to the appellate jurisdiction. Mr. Speaker, why is the ascension to the CCJ from the Privy Council is a historic moment to embrace celebrated and preserved by St. Lucia and all the people of this region? I am mindful that there are many ordinary St. Lucia who are not familiar with the workings of the CCJ. And I'm hoping that in the near future, Mr. Speaker, substantial communication and outreach initiatives in Creole will be made available so the elderly folks in the rural communities will be in a better position to understand and appreciate what we have accomplished here today. Mr. Speaker, I am cognizant that not everyone will embrace and celebrate this achievement today. There are other persons who may have objected to this transition for various reasons. Change is often resisted at first until the works are in motion. Eventually, everyone comes to the realization that there is nothing to fear at all. Mr. Speaker, it is expected that the debate on the ascension to the CCJ will continue long after today. However, I am extremely confident that history will reveal it was the right decision. Clearly, historical events have led us to this juncture. Mr. Speaker, in the 1950s, the UK government granted independence to four islands in the region, namely Jamaica, Barbados, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago. That's what I said. This initiative opened the floodgates, triggering calls for independence in the other remaining British territories. The transition from dependence to independence meant that the islands were now free and in full control of the destiny as they approached institutional frameworks and development for the next generation. To quote Mr. Speaker, Honorable Dr. Kenny Anthony, I quote, the establishment of the CCJ has been one of the major successes of Caricam's collective governance. I don't know if you can remember that, but his statement was delivered on March 10th, 2015, when he engaged young Caribbean minds in a lecture delivered at the Augustine compass of the University of Washington. Do you remember? You can't remember. This message, Mr. Speaker, is clear that we need to take control of our destiny and make our own decisions. Mr. Speaker, as I focus on the ordinary man, the layperson, the farmer, the fisher folks, the elderly, the young people, it is not unreasonable for everyone to ask, what is in this for me? How will the CCJ impact my life or my children? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the CCJ? Mr. Speaker, many regional scholars have clearly articulated some enlightened and passionate arguments, both for and against the transition to the CCJ. For example, people will tell you that we should remain with the previous council because, one, it has been in existence since 1843. They are experienced. They have gotten right on many occasions. They have a good reputation, Mr. Speaker. It is perceived to be objective and impartial since it is remote from the Caribbean and the decisions are made primarily on the law. Foreign investor confidence in the previous council. Judges are highly qualified and experienced. The high financial costs required to set up and run the CCJ. Risk of political appointments of judges. We live in a small state, a small region. Most people would have had some connection or relations. Poor lower-court infrastructure. Delabited billions, air quality issues, et cetera, et cetera. Mr. Speaker, on the other hand, there are those who would prefer the CCJ for the following reasons. The previous council is too far and costly when you consider Fs, accommodation, and legal representation in the UK. It will remove the colonial cloud over our heads. The CCJ will be held in all islands. There is the likelihood that cases will be scheduled and heard in quick time. The overall cost of cases will be cheaper than going to the previous council based on proximity and economic situation in the Caribbean. Under the CCJ, justice is not based on pay-to-play. This means that the average man who may have won his case at the lower courts can now be relieved that his inability to finance the appeals process at the previous council will not work to their disadvantage or against them. Mr. Speaker, within the Caribbean, they are highly trained and experienced Caribbean judicial officers who served in international bodies such as the International Criminal Court and in many Commonwealth countries. The CCJ is required for the Caribbean's single market economy. The original jurisdiction of the CCJ is required for the functioning of the CESME. Mr. Speaker, in my previous employment as a forester, I can recall a number of persons coming to me to discuss land disputes. For example, they have been occupying private lands for a number of years and a landowner would ask them to evict the lands and not offer any form of compensation. Mr. Speaker, now those persons have an opportunity to go to the CCJ and not have to find their way all the way to the UK to deal with matters like this. So I believe, Mr. Speaker, it's a step in the right direction for our government, clearly indicating to the people that what we promise as a government, we will deliver. Mr. Speaker, as I analyze the pros and cons of the arguments in support of or against the ascension to the CCJ, I am mindful that the CCJ mission statement that states providing accessible, fair and efficient justice for the people and states of the Caribbean community, unquote. Mr. Speaker, it can be concluded that the overall objective here is to achieve justice for all. Mr. Speaker, the vision of the CCJ emphasizes what we as a people in this region strive to achieve to be a model of judicial excellence. Mr. Speaker, the values of the court resonate with what we as a people seek to practice and uphold. Integrity, honesty, doing right and standing firm, industry, be diligent and go above and beyond, courtesy and consideration, demonstrate care and respect for all. Excellence, demonstrate the highest quality of service and performance. Mr. Speaker, it is abundantly clear that time has come to move on and chart our own destiny. I stand in firm support of this bill. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Remember for Babano? Mr. Speaker, let me take leave to express my condolences with the family of Wayne Whitfield, owner of Choice and Senior Police Officer Deterville, the family of Officer Deterville, as they mourn the loss of their loved ones. Mr. Speaker, I rise to give my full support to the bill to amend the Constitution of St. Lucia, Cap 1.101 to modify provisions that allow for appeals to Her Majesty in Council and to allow for appeals to the Caribbean Court of Justice, the CCJ. Mr. Speaker, I was wondering if I had anything to say here this afternoon, having listened to the Grand Master, my loaned friend, former Prime Minister, Kennedy Anthony, and having listened to his junior, Bruce Lee, the mighty Karatica, who landed that blow of ensuring that we create history today, Mr. Speaker. And I speak to our Bruce Lee of Honourable Prime Minister who has presented and taken this challenge to bring this bill to the House. Yes, it's Bruce Lee and the Grand Master. And when the opponents saw this alliance, they had no choice but to retrieve to safety. Mr. Speaker, I will make reference to the manifesto on page 28, which the Prime Minister quoted earlier. And what I want to reference in the manifesto is that the quotation said on page 28 under the heading Good Governance, Anti-Corruption, and Constitutional Matters, point number four says, commence the process for the accession to the Caribbean Court of Justice as St. Lucia's final appellate court as the replacement to the Privy Council. The promise was to commence the process. And we are seeing that our mighty Prime Minister is not just commencing, but he is bringing it to fruition. And we will see that ascending into law. Mr. Speaker, I have listened to the Prime Minister and there is one famous statement that resonates with me. And he always said, I have nothing to lose. I will do what I have to do for the people of St. Lucia. And what he is doing today in terms of looking at ascending to the CCJ is basically living up to his statements that he has nothing to lose. Whatever he has to do, he will do it. And it means if he has to change the Constitution, he will change the Constitution. Mr. Speaker, as one who advocates for human rights, having struggled with the trade unions over a decade, promote social justice, I see merit in this bill. Mr. Speaker, the bill that we have passed here in the House has been passed. It has been a bill that has given me satisfaction by all of St. Lucia. Because it has been passed for four years. But it has been passed for 18 years since Kylo just started a place in Kawa'i Bland with St. Lucia for the people of St. Lucia. I am saying, Mr. Speaker, is that it is 44 years since we are independent. And we were there from the start of this CCJ. And it's only now we are actually making that deliberate effort under the leadership of the Prime Minister to be a member and to make it, not a member but to make it our final appeal Mr. Speaker, I know the talk out there. I know the talk on social media because we have to be aware of what's happening in our surroundings. And there are some who chose to march against the amendment to this bill. But Mr. Speaker, I will tell you they came one day too early because march starts tomorrow. So they cannot march today. They cannot march yesterday. They had to wait for tomorrow. So instead of staying in this house and represent the people, the leader of the opposition decided to go out there and spin the debate on a radio station. Our people deserve better than that. And we expected the leader of the opposition to be man enough to sit there and represent the people of St. Lucia. And this is what I'm doing and what my colleagues here are doing that we are representing the people thick and thin whatever it takes. And Mr. Speaker, I was very disappointed with a statement made by the leader of the opposition about his lack of confidence in you as Speaker. I hope he does not come back here because you will still be there as the Speaker. Mr. Speaker, although many of us believe that the Constitution of St. Lucia amendment bill was long in coming, we are nonetheless happy that it is here today. Mr. Speaker, there are many reasons why we have to pass this bill. And these include the legislation and the legislation that we have to pass this bill. Mr. Speaker, there are many reasons why we have to pass this bill. These include one as part of the regional effort to build the capacity of the people in St. Lucia and the Caribbean. Many times we express doubts about our own capabilities and people outside of our jurisdiction celebrate us, but we do not celebrate ourselves. When we clap, we normally clap for others but we do not clap for ourselves. I think today is the day for us to clap for St. Lucia, clap for this government and clap for the future that we are going to create for the next generation. Mr. Speaker, St. Lucia will be proud to join his fellow countries in the region to make the CCJ his final appellate court. We'll be joining Barbados, we'll be joining Belize and Dominica. We are going to say bye-bye to the Privy Council after 44 years of independence. Mr. Speaker, 44 and if we put the 44 in our Creole language 44 means strong. 44 means strong. That means we are strong and stronger. We have West Indies crickets. We have the University of the West Indies. We have the CCJ. We have Nobel Prize winners. We have Lavon Spencer. We have Julian Alfred. We have Darren Summing. They said Sean Edwards. We have Honourable Julian Alhont who headed the Cricket West Indies Cricket Board at the same time and Summing was captain of the West Indies. That was a trio and that was a top in the region. We have the Kenny D. Anthony constitutional lawyer and today he had a field day in the house and we have the little boy that came from Masha who is our Prime Minister today. Mr. Speaker, St. Lucia is the home for many regional bodies like the OECS headquarters. We have Ectel. We have Karelek. We have Kawasa. We have the Caribbean Union of Teachers and for your information, Mr. Speaker, we had a regional office for Education International of which your humble servant was the one that introduced this office in this country. And when we speak of Education International, we are talking about an organization that represented 34 million members worldwide and your humble servant was the regional coordinator in the North America Caribbean region and the regional headquarters was located right here in St. Lucia. So some of you are Mr. Speaker, learning of a guy at Setlici, Munkota. Setlici is an example by Les Takawai-Blan. If you speak of CCJ, I will tell you when you will be able to match CCJ. The CCJ that we are talking about is for the ordinary man to get access to justice in this country. The CCJ that we are talking about is for the people of the world to get access to justice in this country. But before that, you will be able to go to England and pay $100,000 to get access to justice. You will be able to get access to money because you don't have money. With justice, you don't have money. It's either a right or a wrong. It's either a right or a wrong. And many people have suffered injustices because they cannot afford it. And this is not what this government is promoting. That government is promoting the rights of all. Whether you are rich, whether you are poor, regardless of class, color, religion or creed. And that is why I am here to support this bill that we can give our people access to justice, access to defend their rights and to enjoy the freedom. Mr. Speaker, turning to the CCJ is part of the decolonization process. For many years, this country was around the shackles of colonialism. We have sought our independence. And that we are actually charting our way. Independence is not a one-day affair. It is a process. And looking for our own court of justice to ensure that our people get their rights, their rights are protected. This is what we are speaking to. Mr. Speaker, for your information, and I like to speak to these issues, we have over 300, about 341 inmates at Bodleley who are on remand. They haven't had their day in court to decide their fate. And I understood there is one inmate who has appeared before the court for 30 times and he has not had a judgment. So with the CCJ coming closer even to the field of justice we will see the wheel of justice turning faster. And I recall I asked that question of the president of the CCJ to ask what support will the CCJ give our local justice system here? And he said the possibility exists. They can give support. They can give guidance. They can give training so that our justice system moves a little faster. So I applaud our decision to move closer to the CCJ. It is an institution that we have been making contribution to ways and we have not been making full use of it. And by going across now to make it our final court of appeal more St. Lucians will benefit from the services of this institution. Mr. Seeker I regard this move as reinforcing the philosophy of a caring government putting our people first. A caring government that wants to ensure that all St. Lucians have equal access to justice. As I said not for the rich only but for all. Whether you are rich whether you are poor regardless of your color regardless of your status regardless of where you live in St. Lucia this government is creating that opportunity for our people. And Mr. Seeker as a caring government we want to dispel the view held by some of our people that justice is for the rich among us and not for the poor and the marginalized. With the government we want to protect the people who work in St. Lucia and the people who work in St. Lucia and the farmers and the people who work in the fields and the people who work in the fields and the people who work in the fields and therefore we have to ensure to protect them and to protect them. Mr. Seeker I have no choice but to represent the interests of those who place their confidence in me. My duty is to give them the level of representation they duly deserve. I pledge my full support to the constitutional amendment to make the CCJ the final court of appeal for St. Lucia. I thank you Mr. Seeker for giving me your listening aid. I rest my case. Remember for Castery Central I rest your case lawyers lawyers Mr. Seeker I rise in expressing my unequivocal support for this amendment to our constitution permitting the entrance of the CCJ as our ultimate appellate court. Before my relatively brief contribution Mr. Seeker one which I have committed surgery on I want to be mindful of not diluting what was an incisive well informed extremely elucidating contribution made by the member from Viewford South. Today Mr. Seeker an extremely historic moment as it sees only the second amendment to our 44 year old constitution. As I usually do Mr. Seeker I feel the pulse of our people listen to their concerns on any issue and seek to either ensure that their concerns are put to rest or where necessary amplify those concerns. I could not help but have access to social media and more particularly Mr. Seeker the Facebook page of the leader of the opposition. A page which I believe must be considered to be the repository of blatant allies calculated on truths and a masterpiece in relation to a manifested intention of attempting to fool our people. But you know Mr. Seeker the well-known adage keeps springing to mind as you can fool the people once or twice but you cannot keep fooling all the people all the time. It was that very effort Mr. Seeker which worked some time ago where a march for a non-existent $6.80 on every gallon of gas was the focus. Having won the elections and served the longest period as a tune in the history of this country up to now up to now that $6.80 remains a myth. It never existed. I watch a handful of UWP supporters Mr. Seeker chanting no referendum no CCG and it bothered me. It really did. Why? Because I liken the situation to that of a starving individual and individually starving you bring him or her a healthy meal but because he or she cannot identify that meal and equate it to what an impoverished meal ought to be and what they've grown accustomed to they throw away your healthy meal not appreciating it at all. And guess what? They remain in starvation. The starving individual simply does not know better. The handful of UWP supporters Mr. Seeker as I saw this morning outside this August chamber simply do not know better. When he speaks they listen without applying their own analytical ability to what is being said. Now you know Mr. Seeker when they chant no referendum no CCG I looked at them I looked at them in total amazement because one of the utterances of Jesus Christ came to mind Father forgive them cause they know not what they do in this instance I would say Father forgive them cause they know not what they say Ask them what's the CCG Ask them what is the previous council Ask them what are we doing It is just that Mr. Seeker persons find an opportunity to parade on the altar of political loyalty If you ask them what are the advantages and disadvantages they cannot even engage you in any meaningful discourse All they know what to do Mr. Seeker is to march So Mr. Seeker that in my view epitomizes what heightened stupidity is all about and it is defined a referendum is defined as a vote by the electorate on an issue that's basically what a referendum is a vote by the electorate on an issue the biggest and most meaningful most engaging referendum any country could have is a general election So there was indeed a referendum on July 26, 2021 and the people voted overwhelmingly Not only Mr. Seeker that they voted to remove the most corrupt government of all times but they also voted based on the undertakings that this government had given them through its manifesto and it spoke loudly and clearly of a manifested intention to replace our highest appellate court which up to this point remains the previous council with the CCG So the question Mr. Seeker is who is the leader of opposition to demand that this government conducts a referendum prior to doing what it promised the people it will do before the election and on which the people have already voted I was wondering whether he was the same person that told the government of today when they were in opposition that they had lost the right to speak I wonder if it's the same person who once told them that they had lost their right to advise You see Mr. Speaker we need to stop attempting to fool the people we need to stop taking them as tools to be used to get where we want to get we want global notoriety we want power and we use those people unsuspecting people when we get there we forget who they are You know, I looked at the group following the leader of the opposition and that group shrinks on a daily basis it's getting smaller and smaller every day but you know all of us like him when we do things like that to others in our own quiet moment you do some reflection you do some internalization and we question our consciences to them I say that he will love you today so as much as he can use you but loyalty ends where the benefit stops in this current context Mr. Speaker we need to take a brief look at our history and how far we have come as a country for it was Bob Marley who once said that a man without knowledge of his history is like a tree without roots as recent as a hundred I heard my friend go way back to 1801 or there about but as recent as 185 years ago Mr. Speaker our ancestors were slaves yes they were slaves right here in this country they were treated as property the property of white slave owners Mr. Speaker even as more recent as 71 years ago the right to vote was confined to the few you needed to have been of a certain color to vote you needed to have had certain property to vote Mr. Speaker and this was kicked out of the window in 1952 where universal adult suffrage was introduced into this country and every citizen from the age of 18 had the right to vote this was the kind of treatment that was meted out to us right here in this country we probably don't know our great-grandfathers but they were slaves we probably do not know them when they could not have voted but there was a time when they could not have voted that was the treatment Mr. Speaker that our ancestors were given in those days and you know Mr. Speaker today some of those audacious descendants of the white slave owners want to remind us of our solid past they want to rub it in our faces and look at us blatantly and say to us colonialism had a conscience that is what they remind us of this our slave past that your grandfather and great-grandfather was the property of my great-grandfather he remind us of that Mr. Speaker so Mr. Speaker we moved from being slaves we got promoted to being indentured servants we needed property to vote of be of a certain color and in 1952 after getting another promotion we all acquired the right to vote and from then Mr. Speaker our country was being run on autopilot until 1979 in 1979 this country got a further promotion a further promotion to deliberate regulate its own affairs right here in St. Lucia but after 1979 Mr. Speaker there were two strings two strings of colonialism still attached to this country that of our highest appellate court being lodged in London and our colonial head being a representative of the Queen today Mr. Speaker at this historic moment and sitting we are severing ties with our colonial masters in yet another way living one left which I envisage that in the not to distant future it will be placed on the cards and this great country of ours will no longer be represented by a colonial master we have to be a republic in this country Mr. Speaker let us completely not partially do away with our colonial past because colonialism had no conscience Mr. Speaker one of the aridges of the old adage of justice delayed is justice denied it's not irrational but it is not the only way that leads to the denial of justice accessibility to justice may amount to a denial since the CCJ was formed in 2005 Mr. Speaker only 18 cases between 17 and 18 outriders have been heard by the Privy Council that is about one case a year as the Prime Minister indicated but Mr. Speaker we need to ask ourselves what percentage of the totality of our cases is one case a year what percentage does that represent and although I don't have the empirical evidence before me I can say from a standpoint of knowledge as one who practice at the bar that one case per year does not represent one percent it does not represent one percent it is below one percent Mr. Speaker so Mr. Speaker the argument is over 99.9 percent of our cases are settled within our locality over 99.99 cases are settled without having to resort to the Privy Council they all are determined by local jurists so if Mr. Speaker our local jurists are sufficiently renowned to deal with such a great percentage of our cases why can they deal with all what is the difference Mr. Speaker and further, further cost on average 130,000 one of my colleagues echoed that sentiment over 130,000 dollars for a litigant to access the Privy Council and that is what we colloquially refer to been represented by a Lapu lawyer if you go for top shelf lawyer there is absolutely no way Mr. Speaker that your bill would be anything close to 130 it will be much higher so Mr. Speaker there are those like I said who are worried what are they worried about what are they worried about why should mistrust or distrust step in when as I said over 99 percent of our cases are dealt with here less than one percent are decided by the Privy Council less than one percent if we were to take a similar percentage it would mean Mr. Speaker that less than one percent maybe be decided by the CCG what are we worried about when only at 99.9 percent are decided by locally so you know Mr. Speaker again stupidity at is higher squared stupidity and I'm hearing less much less much less much you know Mr. Speaker even the Bible even the Bible supports this move some may have known some may not have known Mr. Speaker but I will ask you in your spare time to read Deuteronomy chapter 16 verses 18 to 20 and it is a biblical prophecy Deuteronomy chapter 16 verses 18 18 to 20 let me take the liberty of reading it right here Mr. Speaker it says and I quote appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes in every town the Lord is giving you according to your tribes and they shall represent the people with righteous judgments it is in the Bible appoint judges and officials for each of your tribes according to your tribe and they shall give the people righteous judgment so even the Bible Mr. Speaker is asking us to appoint judges from amongst ourselves sadly some people don't belong to ourselves so they don't want us to appoint judges from ourselves but it's not my fault they are from different selves it's no fault of mine Mr. Speaker or different tribe but you see Mr. Speaker you know when they don't even understand what we as a government what we are trying to achieve we are actually bringing justice to them to their doorsteps making it cheaper making it more accessible and they tell you know they certainly see singing singing singing singing singing singing you know You know, and you have a man asking some people who don't know any of the things that are going on in the world, and you have a man asking some people who don't know any of the things that are going on in the world, you know, and you have a man asking some people who don't know any better to come and match, come and match. You know what? All of them should have had high court cases that need to go to the privy council, ask him to foot the bill. You know, Mr. Speaker, one of the rights that we as mankind should enjoy and appreciate is the rights of human equality. Human equality. But sadly, we seemingly suffer from an inferiority complex. That is the harsh reality. When a man who said to us that colonialism as a conscience and is trying desperately to cause us to remain with our colonial past, with our colonial masters, one has no choice but to question his motive. Justice is now being brought to the doorstep of the reasonable man, the man on the Clapham-Umne bus, cheaply, quickly, and with a group of men and women whose credentials, credibility, and integrity we have been plastered with by the member from Viewfort South. The replacement of the privy council, Mr. Speaker, by our final appellate court by the CCJ, sorry, could not be more timely. As we swim in the ocean of independence, we have been successful in taking care of ourselves and severing ourselves from our colonial past. As we sever one of the two remaining strings, as I said earlier, I look forward to the day when our colonial history will be something of the past. And like I said, Mr. Speaker, you know, in closing, let me just say this. On the St. Jude matter, we had four persons who sat in here as prime ministers, or is still prime minister. Three went in one direction, one stood alone. In this matter, Mr. Speaker, we have a recurrence of the very same thing. Three prime ministers are moving in one direction, but another wants to move in an opposite direction. You know, I now understand why the children always say, and the cheese stands alone, but there is no cheese. That cheese is not for cheese, Mr. Speaker. And I want to take this opportunity to thank Dr. Kenny Anthony, who spearheaded what we're doing today, and also to thank the honorable prime minister, who in his budget address indicated that he will continue with that battle, like I did with the battle really, and bring this ship to show. I want to thank you very much for that, and I do know that the people of this country will feel the positive impact of very good stewardship as leaders of you both. Mr. Speaker, let me just say, let us keep shaping our destiny. Thank you. Remember Vaca Estri's north? What's that? No, not really. Mr. Speaker, before I delve into the business of this meeting, I want to take this opportunity to express to the family of Mr. Valens Alexander, Aka Trini, a member of staff of the Department of Infrastructure, the Potholen Unit. Mr. Alexander Trini, as he's called, was a resident of Wavin-Shabbat castries, who dedicated the last four years plus of his life to the ministry. He was a reliable worker who demonstrated great attention to detail and knowledge to the job. He worked well with his team and always participated in activities and initiatives of the department. Yesterday, Mr. Speaker, while attempting to fulfill the mission of the Ministry of Infrastructure and satisfying the wishes of the people, and in some cases the demands of the people, two of workers from the Potholen Unit were along the West Coast Road in the vicinity of Canaries, attempting to bring relief to the people of St. Lucia, while we prepare for the implementation of the Commencement, rather, of the UK-funded West Coast Road, which should commence next month, when a vehicle disobeyed and violated the traffic signs and overtook a line of traffic and hit Mr. Alexander, and before he could reach hospital, he was dead. Mr. Speaker, I want to extend to his family and immediate family and friends on behalf of the Department of Infrastructure and the Government and people of St. Lucia, our sincere condolences. Today, Mr. Speaker, the staff of the department are certainly traumatised and have been undergoing counselling throughout the day, particularly his immediate colleagues. However, Mr. Speaker, on a more or rather on a joyful moment or note, permit me to extend to our outstanding athlete, Julian Alfred, on her recent successes and look forward to even more. Mr. Speaker, I think today we here in this house came feeling very proud, first and foremost, of our achievement and recognition and observance of our 44th year of independence after a very successful programme last week. But significantly, we all thought that it was a historic moment for a number of reasons. One, that we are coming here to institute a second amendment to our constitution. The first having done some time ago in 1979, there about, and you heard the contribution, 1980 sorry, and you heard the contribution from the Parliamentary Representative for Vieux-South. Quite a significant historic moment and today that to the CCJ, that to the constitution. And I must just say how informative, how succinct, how detailed this presentation was and how proud I felt at today's sitting earlier this morning, particularly in the presence of law students who I'm sure gathered quite a bit of wisdom, knowledge and understanding from the former Prime Minister and one who initiated the process towards today's session. But Mr Speaker, while we were proud of today's session and we felt that it was a moment for us to have intelligent debate between government and opposition. Opposition often absents themselves from important occasions, whether it is independence, anniversary activities, occasions to bring our people together at ecumenical services or even here in this honourable house, they disappear and run away. You know Mr Speaker, I have been in elective politics for 35 years now, 25 of which in this Parliament, 28 rather than this Parliament as elected or in the Senate, three years in the Senate, 25 years here. Never once Mr Speaker have I walked out for any reason whatsoever. Not that I'm saying a Parliamentarian may not want to protest a particular issue but for you to walk out at every sitting of Parliament in the last 18 months is an indictment on you just because you didn't have your way. And people must understand that. We must come here and later on I'll just give some historical perspective, I'm not going to be very long. You must come here as a bold soldier, as a brave soldier to fight for your people. Not to parade on the sidewalk with a handful of people who don't understand what you're doing and all they're doing is reciting and echoing the nonsense that you propagate with the hope that you'll be able to raise yourself to a pedestal for consideration of leadership in the organisation. But you come here in this moment of history, 44 years after independence and you rattle without compass in every direction attempting to gain points, cheap political points in the presence of strangers, luminaries like our former justice and students embarrassing this Parliament. I will, I will on his behalf, on the people's behalf, apologize to the students and those who came visiting us here today. It's an embarrassment and that is why after such embarrassment there was nothing else to say to him when he got up. Take your ball and leave. But Mr Speaker, let us move on. Today's session I must also take the opportunity to commend the Prime Minister on having fulfilled his promise in his statement, policy statement of bringing to this Parliament this amendment to the Constitution. Now any serious opposition, Mr Speaker, any serious opposition would have taken the liberty of a statement made in the policy statement a year ago and would have commenced their work, beat research, beat communications, town hall meetings etc. But you wait now to try and do what you want. I want to commend the Prime Minister on this initiative today to bring this matter before the Parliament. And so Mr Speaker, I want to take a slightly different angle and I want you to bear with me to show the relevance of today's initiative, to show the relevance of today's initiative and you know historically when you go down the corridors of history in this Parliament we have had the occasions of debates and banter etc. We've had occasions when there were reasons for parliamentarians to walk out but you see Mr Speaker, the organisation that I came from when I joined it was an organisation of decency, an organisation of decency no matter what one may think. And so I reflect, Mr Speaker, on St Lucia's independence on February 22nd, 1979. This deceased Sir John Compton in his speech on that night as a young man on Independence Wharf, he said today the lamp of our freedom has been lit and it will continue to burn its untiring flame while our seeking and our stirring and our striving continues. Our seeking will continue Mr Speaker because we still seek a St Lucia content within a West Indian identity and that is the most important thing. That we still seek a St Lucia content within a West Indian identity. So even in the moment of independence he speaks of a West Indian identity. He went on to say, our stirring will continue because the personality of the nation must change and grow. The inequities of our past must be removed. It is all about what we have said today. All about what Dr Anthony said, parliamentary representative for VFOR South. The Honourable Richard Ferdrick and others, the Prime Minister said it is... None of the castes know. I have been extremely lenient with the name, calling, members that have been referred to by the constituencies. Yes, I attempted to correct myself. All the members have been referring to other members by name. So let's stick to the rules please. My apologies, that's why I slipped and mentioned the name and then said the parliamentary representative for VFOR South. So it is the inequities of our past which must be removed. And then he went on to say, as an independent nation we shall seek no foreign alliances. We have and shall remain a member of the Commonwealth, recognising the emergency as head of state and queen of the Commonwealth and we shall strengthen our ties with our curriculum neighbours. The most important part of this statement, Mr Speaker, is that and we shall strengthen our ties with our curriculum neighbours. This is what we're doing here today. Strengthening our ties in the institutions of curriculum while recognising that we are part of a developing world whose problems may be similar to our own and whose experiences can assist us in providing appropriate solutions our human resources are too slender and our material needs are too great to become involved in posturing and polemics. Mr Speaker, those are strong statements made by the father of independence and basically what he is saying here, Mr Speaker, is that even while we proceeded to independence we will be part of a regional organisation to begin to build our democracy moving forward. But he said that in the full flush of our joy and the attainment of independence we must not lose sight of our goal we must not in our exuberance pull up our draw bridges and retreat into little fortresses of isolation hoping that the storms of the world's problems will pass us by rather than this should be an occasion when we really dedicate ourselves to the goal of the West Indian unity against speaking of unity we must realise our newly minted independence can best be preserved within the environment of inter-independence the framework of which we have already created in the Khaykhom Treaty of Sagaramas. Mr Speaker, this is deep 44 years ago the father of independence said it he said we have the framework of which we have already created in the Khaykhom Treaty. So what we are doing here, Mr Speaker, we are continuing the process which was started we are continuing the process which was started through independence by saying that we as a people must move forward and present to our people the true independence within an interdependent region he said the government of St. Lucia stands willing to initiate support and devise propositions intended to advance our purpose time is pressing upon us in the Caribbean we have wasted too much time posturing in seductive rhetoric and semantics without positive follow-up action unless we adopt common policies to meet external challenges both economic and political we shall be sucked into the whirlpool of intrigues and become objects of neocolonialism from which status we have struggled so long and so valiantly to escape. Mr Speaker, I have read this to show you that we on our own independence determined that we needed to come together as a region to ensure that we put in place the institutions of our people the institutions of our people to be able to advance in our democracy. So Mr Speaker, what is the point? What is the point if you truly believe in an institution or an organization that you say that is the correct organization for the country yet still you're moving at a tangent and forgetting the principles of the organization. Mr Speaker, what are the concerns? What are the concerns? We have demonstrated ever since independence and even at the moment of independence we were recording our first Nobel laureate recognized by the world demonstrating confidence in our people we went on to produce too and you heard from other parliamentarians the number of outstanding St. Lucians and West Endians from the Leeward Islands and other countries in the Caribbean from Justice Byron and others who have been recognized by the international community. So what is the concern Mr Speaker? Some may say that well we don't trust those who may rise to the high offices but Mr Speaker, we have demonstrated in the region we have been able to handle our own affairs we have been able to handle our own affairs it has been demonstrated that from this region international organizations have recruited our own people whether it's at the United Nations or any other international body whether they are St. Lucians or Antigones or Bajons we have proven that we can stand our own. But I think Mr Speaker what this amendment has shown and has been articulated throughout and it's not my intention to go into the details and to the mechanics of the bill I believe the member for VA for South certainly did an excellent job in doing this What this is about Mr Speaker is to show our people the manner in which we can bring justice to the death steps and I am saying this piece of this amendment to the legislation is doing one simple thing one simple thing and that is bringing justice to the doorsteps of the people of the Caribbean and the doorsteps of the people of St. Lucia and so there is no need Mr Speaker to even go into the details while it is important there are no needs when you listen Mr Speaker and you understand the cost of going to the Privy Council at any given time $130,000 $130,000 Mr Speaker the ordinary man on the street who is begging for justice who believes that he or she has been oppressed one way or the other if he doesn't have confidence at the lower cost the Magistrates Court etc all he is looking for is an opportunity for him to be able to take his matter to the highest court and the highest court as it exists now is not only far in physical distance but is far in financial ability so what this is doing Mr Speaker is to say to the ordinary man that we are bringing justice to your doorstep to allow you an opportunity if you feel grieved to the extent that you like the highest court to conceive to be able to take it there to be resolved in a matter of expediency and and and based on the information given your filing fees can be waived what more do you want parading on the streets and those you parade with will not be able to help you to go to the previous council or to pass this legislation and no there is an opportunity one to be able to have a far a reduced fee or the filing fees can be waived so Mr Speaker I am proud of this moment to join my colleague members in full support of this amendment which I believe which I believe will not only make us proud but will make the entire country proud as we move forward and so Mr Speaker I endorse this amendment to the constitution of St Lucia 200% I thank you Mr Speaker in support of the constitutional amendment bill but Mr Speaker before I proceed any further I would like to take this opportunity to thank my constituents of Ancelere Canaries for their participation in the independence battle relay and their participation in the independence battle relay and the various activities in which they took part to celebrate our 44th independence it was yet another opportunity Mr Speaker to demonstrate that we are greater than our misfortunes Mr Speaker justice is one of the most important ideals of any society it is necessary to create a fair and just society Mr Speaker the notion coming out of the opposition is really not surprising it is a very leader of the opposition who at one point indicated that I had no pedigree the leader of the opposition has demonstrated that he does not believe in anything local anything original or in some instances anything international and now it is clear his lack of faith in our jurisprudence Mr Speaker we have had the legal basis we have heard the moral basis we have heard the philosophical basis and to tie it all together we just heard the biblical basis Mr Speaker I believe in the jurisprudence coming out of this region and I therefore without any doubt support our ascension to the CCG Mr Speaker the member for Castro is not indicated that for the last 18 months the leader of the opposition has for one reason or another left the chambers when it was time to debate the business of the people Mr Speaker it is to show the contempt that he has for us the contempt he has of the people who we represent and the contempt he has for the viewers and the people of this country Mr Speaker today was a clear indication of the philosophical difference between the United Workers Party well the old United Workers Party and the solution Labour Party our Prime Minister the member for Castro's East has given his word to serve the people of Central Asia he has given his word and his commitment in our manifesto that we will be exceeding to the CCG today it has become a reality for that I would like to thank the Prime Minister the former Prime Minister and our other members who were present I would be quite honest with you I'm a very young chap so I can't remember all of the debate I can't remember all of the debate but I was very grateful for the exercise at the time at the time but Mr Speaker I was very grateful for the education today from the member from V4 South it is for that reason Mr Speaker that I am proud to be a member of the Central Labour Party we need to pledge we are very in support to my Prime Minister my cabinet colleagues and my government I thank you Mr Speaker Prime Minister Mr Speaker let me first of all thank my colleagues particularly the member for Großelé who had to be summoned back to capital on his birthday rendezvous I want to thank him for putting country first he being a young politician a young minister could not see himself missing such an opportunity to speak to take part in this historic moment of our House Mr Speaker as I sit and reflect on my time in politics and I sit and reflect on what has transpired where I've been what has happened to me how I've progressed from a nothing in politics from someone who could never win the seat someone who could never ever ever be in parliament someone who would never ever ever be minister not even a Prime Minister and I see how this process has developed and I remember the pain of election losses I remember the pain of defeat and the glory of victory I remember that day in 1997 when when the member for Vivert South and 16 others this historic 16-1 victory when all of us were motivated and led by Kenny Anthony to this historic victory and I see where we are today and where I am today I have a lot to thank God for I have to thank God I have to thank my parents I have to thank my colleagues I have to thank the members of the St. Lucia Labour Party and more particularly I have to thank the men and women of this cabinet but Mr Speaker I am perturbed by what I see developing in the politics of St Lucia here we have a debate unarguably one of the most important moves in St Lucia's history a constitutionally based on removing St Lucia from the shackles of the previous council to the Caribbean call of justice a regional institution Mr Speaker and the level of debate that I see and am meeting from the opposition is painful it's a debate of character assassination the names of serious jurists the names of global figures the name of a former president of the Caribbean call of justice the name of someone who's got involved at the highest level of jurisprudence has been dragged into the gutter of Facebook by the united workers party accusing him of bidding to the Labour Party Mr Speaker what example do we give to our children when we cannot when we cannot go above we cannot rise to the moment we cannot meet destiny face to face when these important things are happening when I see another man who has got himself into opposition because he is the president of the OECS bar association being dragged again into the gutters being called all kinds of names being being defamed on Facebook just because he happens to be an associate or friend of somebody in the Labour Party Mr Speaker it's a real sad day and I think our society should reject it I think our civil society to speak against these things Mr Speaker because I sit and I say not about me but it's about the example that we are setting to our children the example we are setting to the young people of Saint Lucia Mr Speaker when we get involved in that level of of nastiness Mr Speaker what has the Caribbean got to do with somebody who is a friend to somebody in the Labour Party what has the previcons got to do Mr Speaker who has a case in front of the previcons now why are we setting ourselves short Mr Speaker when what we are doing is connecting to our destiny taking ourselves away from one position and going to another Mr Speaker why do we have so little faith in ourselves as a people Mr Speaker that we as Bob Marley said liberate ourselves from mental slavery why aren't we confident in ourselves Mr Speaker we've got the best this generation Mr Speaker or this civilization always in this civilization has turned out some of the best Mr Speaker some of the best artists some of the best academics Rex, Nettleford and Kyve Thomas thanks for George's some of the best Mr Speaker some of the best have come out of our region but we have no faith in it we attack it we condemn it and refuse to see that the time has come when we can no longer hang on to our colonial past Mr Speaker but how could we think different when a former Prime Minister can say that colonialism has a conscience what do we expect from his followers if that's the example that he sets Mr Speaker so instead of really baiting or instead of trying to educate our people as to why is going to be cheaper why is it going to be better why is it going to be more accessible for us to be able to get justice the justice that we claim that we want through the Privy Council the Caribbean Court of Justice we want to soil it with propaganda and we want to soil it with politics Mr Speaker but Mr Speaker I'm heartened I'm heartened because when I see the reaction of the young people who were there today when I see the reaction when I see how they sat and they absorbed the discussion and the presentation I remember from view of what saw of Mr Speaker when I saw the thirst the anxiousness in their eyes to absorb the knowledge that was coming from the members of you what saw I'm heartened Mr Speaker I'm heartened because I know that the young people of this country the young people of this country Mr Speaker they know very well what is right and what is wrong Mr Speaker I want to quote by Martin Luther King when he said injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere we are caught in an inescapable network of brutality tied in a single government of destiny whenever affects one directly affects all in direct committee Speaker and that is why it's important that justice is accessible to everyone and that is what this kind of justice will do will do Mr Speaker we heard we heard that even the filing feel sometimes will be free how many people who are demonstrating this afternoon can find 2,500 pounds just to begin a process in the preview council just to begin a process not just to begin it 2,500 pounds how many of them out there can afford it Mr Speaker but the thing then leader will tell them that because he can afford it because he can afford it he will not tell them that they will never be able to afford it and will not tell them that possibly the relatives who may be at bodily who may be there because they are on remand because they cannot meet bill who may be there may be they are innocently may be Mrs Speaker with the Kaiban Court of Justice when the process continues has gone through they may be able to get justice through the Caribbean Court of Justice which they could never afford to get in the preview council never they could never be able to afford it Mr Speaker but Mr Speaker that is what we are not telling the people of this country we are not speaking the truth to them Mr Speaker we talk about judges are going to be appointed by politicians there is no way there is nothing in the agreement it is almost impossible for a politician to choose a judge but we listen to CNN every night and may have our Trump judges and Biden judges and we accept it we accept Trump judges and we accept Biden judges we think it's right for the Americans to be able to say that judges were appointed directly by politicians so much so that the opinions and the judgments that he will give will come directly from the philosophies of the Republican Party we are proud and we say that's the developed civilization because we have they are from America and they have Trump judges we can sit and we can observe that in the Supreme Court the highest court in the United States people can see that judgments will come from one set of judges because they are conservative judges and the other judges are liberal judges so when an issue like what's happening now the issue of student loans in front of the Supreme Court people can predict that the liberal judges will go one way and the conservative judges will go another way but we can never in the Caribbean Court of Justice ever see that one judge is liberal or one judge is conservative never because all of them are chosen because for other reasons not by votes, direct votes by politicians we can accept that we can accept it because it comes from North America we can accept it, that's good but we can tell our people here that because the people that will that will choose as judges people we know people who look like us people who went to the same schools as us we can say they are not suitable where there is no evidence that a politician will choose them there is no evidence absolutely no evidence but don't accept them, don't trust them because they are chosen like by people they are people that we know they are going to the same school with us they are people who went to the same universities as us don't trust them, don't trust them but we can trust Trump judges and Biden judges Mr. Speaker that is where we are and it's very sad it is very sad Mr. Speaker so Mr. Speaker as I said earlier when I when I introduced this bill I said that this process started with a member of view for itself outlined it Mr. Speaker and he in his own style Mr. Speaker made some significant points, some significant contribution on the process the historical process Mr. Speaker and I want to read a letter from the right from the right honourable P.J. Palazin the former prime minister of of Jamaica Mr. Speaker the most his exact title is Mr. Speaker the most honourable P.J. Palazin and he on a letter written me on the 5th of February Mr. Speaker he said to me trust that you will have a straight forward passage to the legislature but please remember the vital importance of a concurrent public information program so that the electorate is fully locked in and he further said Mr. Speaker fortunately Kenny was the chair responsible for the creation of the CCJ and has all the background material necessary to answer any questions which might arise should there remain any area which requires a sharing of the unique Jamaican experience that can be readily supplied on request continuing best wishes for successful passage Mr. Speaker when I get to work tomorrow I will write the right honourable P.J. Palazin and tell him Kenny did give us a lot of his knowledge and we will pass the bill this afternoon so Mr. Speaker we today this afternoon or this evening we are part of history and the history books will record that on the 28th of February Saint Lucia broke from one of the shackles of colonialism Mr. Speaker and I am sure and hopefully the other shackle the other shackle Mr. Speaker we will also liberate ourselves from the other shackle very very very short limit because our civilization our country deserves it Mr. Speaker our people deserve it Mr. Speaker the next stage Mr. Speaker is in the process we will write the British Government and tell them what transpired as I said in the letter and all the cases that are now in the Privy Council they will continue all the cases that are now there at this moment so all the propaganda is not true that they will continue Mr. Speaker and then any new cases new cases will proudly march to the Caribbean court of justice where we are going to be judged by people who know us where we are going to be judged by people who know the Caribbean experience Mr. Speaker because I am not a lawyer but law is a product of the society and the lawyers know what's happening and the judges are people who live in the society they understand this understand the nuances of our society Mr. Speaker so Mr. Speaker I want to thank you I want to thank the members of this parliament Mr. Speaker it's a pity Mr. Speaker it's a sad day that a former prime minister is not in this honorable house to debate such constitutional amendment Mr. Speaker it's very sad it shows you the contempt and the scorn that he has for the people of this country that if I am not there if I am not the boss I take my ball and I go because I must be the boss I must be the boss Mr. Speaker somebody told me that there was a discussion in New York where the gentleman said if there was somebody who could run the country he would resign you want to believe that if they could find somebody who could run the country he would resign so there is no body there is no body in St. Lucia who can run this country so he must be even though people kick him he must be Mr. Speaker I thank you Mr. Speaker I thank Dr. Kennedy the member for Microsoft my apologies my apologies my apologies again my apologies again Mr. Speaker I thank the member for Microsoft but Johnny as I said he signed the document in 2001 and where we are today this Labour Party is a stream it flows and now it's our turn to bring it to the end to its end Mr. Speaker so Mr. Speaker let us enjoy this moment let us reflect on the seriousness of this moment let us reflect on the significance of this moment Mr. Speaker let us say to ourselves we trust our people we trust our judges Mr. Speaker and together this St. Lucia and West Indian Civilization will survive will survive and will take our people to higher and better heights I thank you Mr. Speaker honourable members the question is that the constitutionals in Lucia amendment bill be read a second time and I'll put the question as many as of that opinion as many as of a country opinion say no a division a division has been called for honourable Virginia Albert Poyotte how do you vote honourable Dr. Kenny Anthony how do you vote honourable Alva Baptiste how do you vote hi honourable Kenson Kazeme how do you vote hi honourable Sean Edwards how do you vote honourable Richard Frederick how do you vote honourable Wayne Girard how do you vote honourable Joachim Henry how do you vote hi honourable Emma Hippolyte how do you vote hi honourable Moses Jabatis how do you vote hi honourable Stevenson King how do you vote hi honourable Philip JP how do you vote hi honourable Alfred Prosby how do you vote hi honourable members I beg to report that following the division 13 members have voted hi no member has voted no and no member has abstained let the record reflect that the 13 members represent the fulfilment section 41 subsection 2 of the constitution of St Lucia which requires a three quarter vote of the composition of the House of Assembly and in keeping with it's ironic that we are debating the CCJ in keeping with the most recent CCJ judgment on the matter of what constitutes a majority three quarters of 17 is 12.75 since there is no 75% of a person it has to go into the 13 which means the 13 meets the requirement of section 41.2 of the constitution an act to amend the constitution of St Lucia cap 1.01 whereas under section 41.1 of the constitution of St Lucia cap 1.01 parliament may alter any of the provisions of the constitution and whereas under section 41.2 of the constitution of St Lucia cap 1.01 a bill to alter section 41 schedule 1 to the constitution or any of the provisions of the constitution specified in part 1 of the schedule shall not be regarded as being passed by the House unless its final reading in the House the bill is supported by the votes of not less than three quarters of all the members of the House and whereas the provision of the constitution of St Lucia cap 1.01 are being altered by this act clause 2 interpretation clause 2 stands part of the bill clause 3 amendment of section 16 clause 3 stands part of the bill clause 4 amendment of section 18 clause 4 stands part of the bill clause 5 amendment of section 41 clause 5 stands part of the bill clause 6 amendment of section 73 amendment of section 41 clause 5 stands part of the bill clause 6 amendment of section 73 amendment of section 73 Section 173. Close six, stands part of the bill. Aye. Close seven. Amendment of section 106. Close seven, stands part of the bill. Aye. Close eight. Substitution of section 108. Close eight, stands part of the bill. Aye. Close nine. Insertion of new section 108A. Close nine, stands part of the bill. Aye. Close 10. Amendment of section 124. Close 10, stands part of the bill. Aye. Close one. Short title. Close one, stands part of the bill. Aye. Honourable members, the question is that the committee rises and the bill be reported. And now put the question as many as of that opinion. Say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion. Say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Honourable members, I beg to report that the Constitution of St. Lucia Amendment Bill went to committee stage with no amendments. Prime Minister. Mr Speaker, I move that the report of the committee be adopted and the bill be passed. Be read a third time and passed. Honourable members, the question is that the report of the committee be adopted and that the Constitution of St. Lucia Amendment Bill be read a third time and passed. And now put the question as many as of that opinion. Say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion. Say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Be it enacted by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the House of Assembly and the Senate of St. Lucia, and by the authority of the same as follows. This act may be cited as the Constitution of St. Lucia Amendment Act 2023. Prime Minister, Minister of Finance. Mr Speaker, I beg to present for first reading a bill short-term title, Money Laundering Prevention Amendments. Money Laundering Prevention Amendments. Mr Speaker, I beg to move for the suspension of St. Louis Order No. 48-2 to allow this bill to go for the remaining stages at this sitting. Honourable members, the question is that St. Louis Order 48-2 be suspended in order to allow the Prime Minister to proceed with the remaining stages of the bill at this sitting. And I'll put a question as many as their opinion. Say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion. Say no. I think the ayes have it. Leave is granted. Proceed, Prime Minister. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, the bill amends the Money Laundering Prevention Act, Chapter 20, which consolidates the law governing money-laundering and related matters, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, these days we hear quite a bit of discussion on money-laundering, on financial crime, as such, Mr Speaker. And on many situations, Mr Speaker, our islands are... The playing field is not level, Mr Speaker. It's not level at all in that what we are called to do sometimes, our rich and better and bigger neighbors in the North, Mr Speaker, not have to follow the same stringent laws, Mr Speaker. But, Mr Speaker, as they say, when you're small, you say in Patua, you are Huavet Duvapul. So, since you are Huavet Duvapul, Mr Speaker, you must follow all the rules. You must follow all the regulations, Mr Speaker. If not, you are going to get blacklisted. If not, you're going to be put on all kinds of lists, green lists, black lists, all kinds of lists, Mr Speaker. And your whole financial infrastructure is going to be damaged. In fact, Mr Speaker, one of the biggest threats that faces the small islands is the threat of the risk scheme, where we will not be able, if we do not follow all these rules and regulations, we will not be able to use the international check-clearing system. And that would mean our whole enterprise. It means you will not be able to use your credit cards. It means you will not be able to send money through the SWIF system if we do not ensure that all these rules and regulations that is set for us, we meet them, Mr Speaker. Sometimes at great costs, sometimes at great expense, and sometimes at great inconvenience, Mr Speaker, because as we speak about this bill, it's so difficult for some boy to open a bank account in St. Lucia, Mr Speaker. The banks, because of the fear of the risk scheme, they ask for so many, so many steps before bank account can be opened, Mr Speaker. And young people, regular people, cannot, they suffer because it's very difficult to open a bank account in St. Lucia because the banks fear the risk scheme and because of all the money laundering situations that may exist, Mr Speaker. So this bill, Mr Speaker, this amendment to this bill is for us to meet the request or the financial action task force, Mr Speaker. The financial action task force is an intergovernmental body that sets international standards that aim to prevent money-laundering, terrorist financing, financing other criminal conduct, Mr Speaker. The financial action task force reviews money-laundering and terrorist financing techniques and continuously strengthens the standards to address new risks. As such recommendations, the FATF promotes a coordinated global response to prevent activities that threaten the integrity of the international financial system, Mr Speaker. And St. Lucia is a member of the Caribbean financial action task force, which is an organization of states and territories of the Caribbean basin that promotes the implementation of the financial action task force, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, in St. Lucia, the National Anti-Money Laundering Oversight Committee, which is called NAMLOC, which comprises the Tony General's chambers, the Financial Intelligence Authority, the Authority and other stakeholders, manages Caribbean financial action task force reviews and matters, and is responsible for coordinating national anti-money laundering and counter-terrorism financing activities. The CFATF, in collaboration with other stakeholders, including NAMLOC, undertook an assessment to determine the degree to which St. Lucia complied to FATF recommendations, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, and after this evaluation, Mr Speaker, it shows that there are some deficiencies and there's a lack of specific provisions regarding the treatment of a person's own proceeds of criminal conduct, self-wondering, and verifying customer identity. As a result, the Money Laundering Prevention Amendment Act of No. 16 of 2021 was passed to address these deficiencies. However, Mr Speaker, in a continuing effort to satisfy the recommendations and particularly the deficiencies highlighted above, the Authority submitted instructions for further amendments to the Act by Memorandum 9th and 4th of February 2023 and 6th and 4th of January 2023 and 19th December 2022 and 4th of November 2022 and 22nd of June 2022 and these are the recommendations that these are the amendments, the amendments we are making today, Mr Speaker. Mr Speaker, the bill amends the Act to modify existing definitions and introduce new definitions for terms used in the bill. The bill also substitutes the definition of applicant for business to correct a spelling error. The Act is amended by the bill to address the adequacy of the sanctions. As a result, the bill increases the penalty for financial institution or personal engagement or the business activity which fails to comply for the direction given under the Act. Further, the bill also increases the penalty of a financial institution that fails to comply with specific sections of the Act. So you see, Mr Speaker, that is why the banks are creating so much difficulty for people if they want to do, when they want to do some of their legitimate business, Mr Speaker. The bill strengthens the customer identity measures under the Act by requiring verification of customer identity for transactions of less than 10,000 United States dollars or its Caribbean dollar equivalent. I mean, Mr Speaker, I want to make that clear. The Act says that once you are depositing less than 10,000 US dollars, the bank should accept it, Mr Speaker. 10,000 US dollars, that is the law. The banks cannot be masters of creating their own laws, Mr Speaker, to further put pressure on local people, Mr Speaker. 10,000 US dollars or 27,000 each dollars, Mr Speaker, can be deposited in the bank without any identity or without any source of funds, Mr Speaker. That is what the law says. The law says so. The law also serves to protect the banks, Mr Speaker, but the law must be observed. The bill extends the scope of responsibility of financial institution and the person engaged in the business activity, Mr Speaker, under the Act to reporting a suspicious transaction or attempted suspicious transaction within the terrorist financing and profligation financing, Mr Speaker. For the meeting, the scope of the Act is extended in the bill to the immersion area of virtual asset business, which is recognized globally and fully the enactment of the Virtual Asset Business Act No. 24 of 2022 as an area that is susceptible to money laundering. As a result, a virtual asset business is required to conduct customer due diligence with respect to certain specified financial transactions, Mr Speaker. For the mitigation of risks, the bill amends the Act to require that a financial institution or person engaged in other business activity must undertake additional measures with respect to politically exposed persons. And that's we inside it, Mr Speaker. We inside it. We are called politically exposed persons. Peck. And, Mr Speaker, you know we and our spouses, Mr Speaker. You know, sometimes you're gonna put $5 the bank. That's where you get the $5 from. Mr Speaker, it is sometimes, I know why people don't get involved in politics because you led your life all the time. You made your money, you win your business, but all of a sudden, because you go for elections, you become a pep. Not a pep. A politically exposed person, Mr Speaker. And if you want to get a loan, you are scrutinized. If you want to, anything you do, you are scrutinized. You are scrutinized plus the fact you have to deal with propaganda and lies from the opposition. First of all, Mr Speaker. So, but that is the law and that is the law. That is how we have to follow, Mr Speaker. So there are further measures to deal with what they call politically exposed persons, Mr Speaker. The Bill and Men's Act to specifically address the matter of self-wondering. As a result, a person is prohibited from handling property, from handling property, representing his or criminal conduct, Mr Speaker. Yes, because the Bill and Men's Act to empower the authority to provide mutual legal assistance with respect to terrorist financing and profilation financing. The Bill and Men's Act to provide that the authorities exempt from the payment of taxes, et cetera, Mr Speaker. So, Mr Speaker, this is the amendments to the Bill that we are proposing, Mr Speaker. All to avoid Senushevam being blacklisted, Mr Speaker. To avoid our banks, to help avoid our banks from being, from experiencing the risk, Mr Speaker. And whereas we know, we know that the playing field is not level, Mr Speaker. As I said before, we are we are a very duval pool. We are a very duval pool. And these organizations, these bodies, they want more and more from us every step of the way, Mr Speaker. And every time we try to liberate ourselves by doing something that will give us some level of income, some level of revenue, Mr Speaker, they are blocking, there is blocking, Mr Speaker. In a citizens by investment program, they are major, major, all we've said to all in century, come and see what we're doing. Come and see what we're doing, Mr Speaker. But the problem's arising, Mr Speaker. So, Mr Speaker, we are trying, we will comply with all the regulations. We will comply with all the amendments that are required, Mr Speaker, because we want to protect our financial system, we want to protect our payment system, Mr Speaker, so we will comply. But I urge the banks to find ways and means, Mr Speaker, of making it easier for the customers, particularly when it comes to the setting up of accounts, Mr Speaker. If you want to open account, it is too difficult in this environment, Mr Speaker. And also, on that same note, Mr Speaker, I want to say to the people of Senutia, these restrictions that seem to be imposed upon them are not of our own doing. We have to follow international financial architecture. If not, we're going to be blacklisted and our whole financial system be collapsed. And that has happened in the region. This is not new. This may happen. It's happened to some countries in the region that we remain unnamed, Mr Speaker. There is a certain country in the region where its whole payment system collapsed one day. It was closed, the whole payment system. And for the country to meet its debts, money had to be put in a helicopter and brought over to the United States to pay the debts, Mr Speaker, because the payment system was disrupted. From Mr Speaker, I urge members to support this amendment, Mr Speaker, because it's basically to keep us in the financial, international financial architecture. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Honour, remember, the question is that the Money Laundering Prevention Amendment will be read a second time. The member for View for South? I'm going to be very, very brief. And my comments are more by way of notice of troubling issues when it comes to this kind of legislation. And I fully understand what the member for Castro is saying, that we have been compelled to enact such legislation to avoid, of course, being blacklisted. Let me say at the outset, I welcome the fact that there's a categorical undertaking that persons who are depositing funds from up to 10,000 U.S. that they will be immune from the usual scrutiny and that they will be allowed to deposit their funds without a letter of hindrance. I think this is certainly very welcome and would certainly help business activity as a whole. But my two troubling areas. The first is that we continue to allow this concept of politically exposed persons to go unchallenged. I have long resisted the suggestion that the legislation singling out politically, so-called politically exposed persons, is justified legislation, is reasonably required legislation. My instinct tells me that this legislation is highly discriminatory. And at some point, it has to be challenged. The absurdity that we are going to, in respect of politically exposed persons, really tells us how easily abused that these provisions can be. I want to give honorable members a simple example which I have quoted before, not necessarily in this house, but in the public. I had a niece who went to insure a vehicle with Massey insurance some months back. And lo and behold, she went to Massey with her money, cash, to pay for her insurance, and was told by the agent working for Massey that she must fill out a declaration to say where she got the money for her vehicle insurance because her uncle, meaning me, is in politics and she's a politically exposed person. Now, any of you around the table, how can you justify that she has been denied insurance for her vehicle because she doesn't work and sign a document to say where she got money to pay insurance for her vehicle? And I don't know how many other persons have had that kind of experience. When she called me on a matter, I said, you go and tell Massey, go to hell, go and get another insurance company and go and insure your vehicle. In that the official of the employee of Massey was guided as to what the requirements are. But I just want to alert honorable members how easy it is for this legislation in the hands of the wrong persons to be abused. And that this notion that all politicians are correct and therefore should be swept as a whole in legislation like that, I reject it and I resent it and I repudiate it. How politicians work corrupt. You can't take, you can't paint all politicians in the same way by using such a broad brush. No, Mr. Speaker, it is for this reason that I just want to say to the House that the time is fast approaching when the financial action task force and others can't have their way in just telling these governments what they must enact and these governments must blindly follow whatever they say that has to be done. Because I resent the fact that I'm discriminated against. I resent the fact that I have to go to a bank and when I go to a bank I'm told I must do X, Y and Z because I happen to be a politician. I resent it. And for reasons like that, I frankly feel that this form of legislation ought to receive greater scrutiny. The second point I want to make, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this House enacted legislation to create a financial authority in the institution. At the time, and I still do, I supported the legislation. I think it's necessary. Necessary that we acquire financial intelligence and what is happening where who is moving millions of dollars or thousands of dollars from one account to the next. But I'll tell you what, Mr. Speaker. I don't see them going after the big people in this country, you know, Mr. Speaker. I don't see them going after the big people. You know who they go after? Those whom they believe are in the drug trade and those whom ordinary fishermen, ordinary sentlosions flying up and down the place. These are the people they're going after. And I see it in my practice because my form has had to be representing individuals. My problem, Mr. Speaker, is this. That if we are going to give these authorities the immense powers that they have we then have to strengthen the remedies to protect citizens from abuse by these individuals. And that is why I think you will find, Mr. Speaker, increasing challenges to how these authorities utilize the powers that have been made available to them through acts of parliament. No, don't get me wrong, Mr. Speaker. Please don't get me wrong. I'm not suggesting that there aren't individuals who are applying their trade, the client business connected to the drug trade using fishing boats in this business. And I'm not denying that I accept that. But what I'm saying is that it seems to me that what is happening is that the powers that have been entrusted have been used to harass individuals like that. And those who are really guilty of committing the offenses for somehow they seem to be immune from prosecution under this legislation. This is Khabira, but have also seen a situation where the remedies that are available to individuals to contest these acts seem to be rather inadequate, seem almost nonexistence. So lawyers then have to resort to finding sanctuary. And that's the importance of constitution under the provisions of the constitution. That should not be, that really should not be. And I accept that perhaps we need to rethink and ensure that when we enact such legislation with such drastic and such immense powers that we also consider what remedies are available to persons who are aggrieved. You cannot tell me that a sentence of St. Lucia for what reason or the other happened to be traveling some country and has in his pocket over $10,000 or whatever the case is. You see the $10,000, but then you don't give him sufficient opportunity to contest the seizure to determine whether he is guilty or not. Those things can be right. Those things can never ever be right. And these are things, Mr. Speaker, I'm just saying at this stage and I'm not opposing this legislation, I support the amendment. I'm just saying that we need to put on notice that these are things we need to have a look at to ensure that we also protect the rights of the citizens of our country and the law is applied fairly. That's all I'm saying. I thank you very much. Member for Lavrey, six months, yeah? Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I wish to support the passage of the Money Laundering Prevention Amendment Bill 2023. Mr. Speaker, this bill, as well as the next bill on the other paper, the Money Services Business Bill, emanate from recommendations coming out of St. Lucia's Mutual Evaluation Report conducted by the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force to strengthen anti-money laundering and counter-terrorist financing measures. Mr. Speaker, St. Lucia has established the National Anti-Money Laundering Oversight Committee as Prime Minister indicated known as NAMLOC to strengthen the capacity of the country to combat money laundering, terrorists and proliferation financing. In this regard, one of the mandates of NAMLOC is to review St. Lucia's legislative framework in relation to money laundering and propose the necessary amendments to existing legislation. And in some cases, the enactment of new legislation, Mr. Speaker, to close gaps in our legislative framework. Mr. Speaker, the Caribbean Financial Action Task Force ensures that member states like St. Lucia comply with the 40 recommendations of the Financial Action Task Force, a body established by the G8 countries in 1989. These guidelines are agreed international guidelines to combat money laundering, terrorists financing and the financing of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. The 40 recommendations provide best practices for a number of areas and entities in this country. The Caribbean Financial Action Task Force conducts peer reviews of member countries called mutual evaluations. St. Lucia received its mutual evaluation report in January of 2021. This report summarizes the AML slash CFT measures in place as at the date of the onsite visit in September 2019. In particular, this report identified the shortcomings in St. Lucia as it relates to anti-money laundering, counter-terrorist and proliferation financing, and submitted 40 recommendations in that regard. In this regard, Mr. Speaker, NAMLOK has been established as the oversight committee to implement the recommendations coming out of the mutual evaluation report. NAMLOK is an intersectoral committee established by cabinet to actively monitor and mitigate the risk posed to the various sectors within St. Lucia by money laundering, terrorists and proliferation financing. St. Lucia is currently under the rating of enhanced follow-up, and NAMLOK is working assiduously to apply for a re-rating of St. Lucia towards the end of the year to be removed from enhanced follow-up. St. Lucia has been cited as falling short on some of the 40 standard set-up by the Financial Action Task Force and was partially compliant in 28th and non-compliant in eighth of the standards. One recommendation, Mr. Speaker, coming out of the report is that St. Lucia must be able to sufficiently identify its money laundering and terrorist financing risk and to allocate sufficient resources in those areas. It is to be noted, Mr. Speaker, that though compliance to the FATF standard is voluntary, the economic ramifications for deliberate non-compliance can be catastrophic with countries facing being either gray or blacklisted or even losing corresponding banking privileges as articulated by Prime Minister and Minister for Finance. The amendment to the Money Laundering Prevention Act and the Money Services Business Act will contribute to the suite of measures required by St. Lucia to close the gaps identified in the Mutual Evaluation Report and to support St. Lucia's application to be removed from enhanced follow-up. I would therefore like to fully support the passage of the Money Laundering Prevention Bill, Mr. Speaker, so that St. Lucia can address certain deficiencies to avoid being graylisted or blacklisted to suffer the consequences that we have seen before. You see, we have a lot of people and all the time we have to deal with certain issues, not withstanding the external shocks that we are still trying to reel from. So, Mr. Speaker, it is an attempt for us to be compliant to create an improved framework for St. Lucia not to be graylisted or blacklisted. I yield the floor, Mr. Speaker. Minister of Finance. I think more I could say, Mr. Speaker, the remarks by the member from Microsoft are very relevant, Mr. Speaker. For view for itself, Mr. Speaker, we're very relevant on the civil sciences, the hardships and the discrimination against political people who are perceived in political exposed persons. And it's even worse, Mr. Speaker, even relatives of political exposed persons are under scrutiny. And it is something that someday, I suspect, it have to be handled in the courts. Someday, I think somebody will have a civil matter as it is so, this issue, Mr. Speaker. So, Mr. Speaker, I thank the member for his clarification and I ask that member support the amendment. I want to remember the question is that the Money Laundering Prevention Amendment Bill be read a second time. And I'll put the question as many as of that opinion. Say aye. As many as of a country opinion. Say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. And act to amend the Money Laundering Prevention Act cap 12.20. Clause 2. Interpretation. Clause 2 stands part of the bill. Clause 3. Amendment of Section 2. Clause 3 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 4. Amendment of Section 6B. Clause 4 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 5. Amendment of Section 14H. Clause 5 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 6. Amendment of Section 15H. Clause 6 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 7. Amendment of Section 16H. Clause 7 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 8. Amendment of Section 17H. Clause 8 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 9. Substitution of section 18. Close nine stands for the bill. Aye. Close 10. Amendment of section 28. Close 10 stands for the bill. Aye. Close 11. Amendment of section 34. Close 11 stands for the bill. Aye. Close 12. Insertion of new section 41. Close 12 stands for the bill. Aye. Close 13. Amendment of schedule two. Close 13 stands for the bill. Aye. Close one. Short title. Close one stands for the bill. Aye. One of the members, the question is that the committee rises and the bill be reported. I now put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. Aye. As many as of our country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. One of the members, I beg to report that the money laundering prevention amendment bill went through committee stage without amendments. Mr. Faraynans? I move that the report of the committee be adopted and the bill be read a third time and passed. One of the members, the question is that the report of the committee be adopted and that the money laundering amendment bill be read a third time and passed. And I'll put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. Aye. As many as of our country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Be it enacted by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the House of Assembly and the Senate of St. Lucia and by the authority of the same as follows. This act may be cited as the money laundering prevention amendment act 2023. Mr. Faraynans? Mr. Speaker, I beg to present for first reading a bill shortly entitled money services business amendment. Money services business amendment. Mr. Speaker, I beg to move for suspension of standing order 48-2 to allow the bill to go through all the stages at this sitting. One of the members, the question is that standing order 48-2 be suspended in order to allow Prime Minister to proceed to the remaining stages of the bill at this sitting. And I'll put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it. The ayes have it. Leave is granted. Please proceed. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, same as they say, same khaki pants. Another move, another amendment we have to make so as to be compliant to the financial action task force requirements on money launching, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, this one is to deal with the businesses called the money services businesses, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, at the forefront of the mutual evaluation review, Mr. Speaker, we found that Celusia had no proactive measures to identify a natural legal person that carry on money and value transfer services, MVTS without a license, and to apply sanctions to such persons. That means Celusia received a partially compliant written for recommendation 14. So, Mr. Speaker, this bill amendments section 40 of the money services business act to offer rise the financial services regulatory authority to monitor and to license money services businesses and to take actions against individuals carrying on money services businesses without a license in Celusia. So this means, Mr. Speaker, that all the people in money services, Mr. Speaker, people who transact money, who send money in, who provide loans, these payday loans, Mr. Speaker, payday loans, micro lending, moving money, they have to get license, Mr. Speaker. I mean, speaking about payday loans, Mr. Speaker, I think whereas we are passing these rules, these regulations to protect international bodies, we need also to encourage and educate our people, Mr. Speaker, in budgeting and using finance, Mr. Speaker, it's money, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, these payday loans are very attractive. But I don't think that when we take them, we ever check the rate of interest that we pay on these loans, Mr. Speaker. Sometimes these in that interest on these loans as a has 30 percent. So, Mr. Speaker, we need to have a process of education, financial literacy to tell people how to use their credit cards. There are some people, Mr. Speaker, who use credit cards to pay credit cards, who take loans from these payday, payday loan areas to pay credit cards, Mr. Speaker. So, because the interest on the credit cards on them is over 20 percent, 25 percent, 29 percent, Mr. Speaker. So, whereas we are doing all these things to protect, to first to be compliant with international regulations, we need to educate our own people. Our own people need to use, need to look at other means of doing the financial transactions so they cannot fall prey to these creditors as such, Mr. Speaker. So, I think it's a very simple amendment called FSRE to license and to regulate these businesses. But our people must be careful in the way they use these businesses and in the way they use their finances, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I ask members to approve this amendment. All of the questions, all of the members, the question is that the Money Services Business Amendment will be read a second time. Prime Minister? I thank members very much as a Dismantlement and I move that we proceed. I now put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. As many as of our country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. An act to amend the Money Services Business Act, cap 12.22. Close two. Amendment of section 40. Close two stands part of the bill. Close one. Short title. Close one stands part of the bill. One of the members, the question is that the committee rises and the bill be reported. I now put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. As many as of our country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. On the members, I beg to report that the Money Services Business Amendment Bill went through committee stage without amendments. Prime Minister? Mr. Speaker, I move that the report of the committee be adopted and the bill be read a third time and passed. On the members, the question is that the report of the committee be adopted and that the Money Services Business Amendment Bill be read a third time and passed. I now put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. As many as of our country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Be it enacted by the king's most excellent majesty by and with the advice and consent of the House of Assembly and the Senate of St. Lucia and by the authority of the same as follows. This act may be cited as the Money Services Business Amendment Act 2023. Minister for Agriculture? Mr. Speaker, I beg to present for first reading a bill shortly entitled Fisheries Amendment. Fisheries Amendment. Minister? Mr. Speaker, I beg to move for the suspension of Standing Order 48-2 to allow the bill to go through its remaining stages at this sitting. On the members, the question is that Standing Order 48-2 be suspended in order to allow the member for agriculture, fisheries, food security and rural development to proceed with the remaining stages of the bill at this sitting. And I now put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. As many as of our country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Leave is granted. Please proceed, Minister. Mr. Speaker, I beg to present for second reading a bill shortly entitled Fisheries Amendment. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, the purpose of this bill is to amend the Fisheries Act 715 to include two new sections to the bill. In 1994, the SMMBA was established to serve as the institutional and technical framework for the management of coastal resources in the Sufra area, which were areas under conflict due to diverse use of resources by users. The SMMBA was initially authorized to manage 11 kilometers of coastline in the Sufra area, which includes marine reserves, fishing priority areas, multiple use areas, recreational areas and yachts moorings. In 1995, the SMMBA under the Fisheries Act was designated as a local fisheries management authority. However, the areas of responsibility for the SMMBA includes fishing in addition to scuba diving, snorkeling, yacht moorings and other approved activities. This designation, Mr. Speaker, solely as a local fisheries authority has hampered the operations of the SMMBA as it lacks the legislative framework to effectively manage the other aforementioned services within the SMMBA boundaries. This lack of legislation, Mr. Speaker, has resulted in the inability of the Association to enforce protection and conservation measures within the designated area and to collect associated fees for services related to entry fees, snorkeling and swimming, dive permits and yacht moorings. Therefore, the proposed amendment, Mr. Speaker, to the Fisheries Act intends to remedy the situation and bring some measure of normalcy to the operations of the SMMBA as now there will be stronger alignment between the role of the SMMBA and the legal authority. The bill also makes provision firstly for the amendment to allow the minister to designate a local marine cooperative or association and then further allows for the designated marine management authority to make its bylaws for the conduct and regulation of its affairs. Mr. Speaker, the amendment would allow the minister to also proceed with the designation of the SMMBA as a marine management authority that would contribute to resolving the longstanding issues of challenges by users regarding the SMMBA authority to collect user fees and to regulate the activities within its boundaries. In addition, Mr. Speaker, breaches to the bylaws would now be constituted as an offense and on summary conviction, a related fine not exceeding $10,000 can be charged. So basically, Mr. Speaker, the SMMBA has been operating as a local authority, but it did not have the legislative framework to be able to allow it to collect user fees and for persons who know the significance of the marine environment in the super area, its whole involvement in tourism and so on, Mr. Speaker. It was necessary for us to make that amendment so it would give the SMMBA the authority to collect fees from the divers, the boat owners and so the sustainability of the SMMBA would be on a positive footing. So what it does to the bill, Mr. Speaker, is to include two new sections. Section one would be 22A, which gives it the authority for the establishment of the marine management authority and 22B, Mr. Speaker, would be establishing the bylaws of the marine management authority. So basically, it's inserting those two new sections to the bill. This matter of the SMMBA, Mr. Speaker, has been a very long, outstanding one and I know on numerous occasions, the member for Super Force Jacques has been very concerned about the sustainability of the SMMBA and as a result, we saw it necessary fitting and fitting for us to make the amendment to this bill. Mr. Speaker, I want to also take time to thank the cabinet of ministers for approving our long awaited fisheries policy last year in 2022 and this was a real a bold step to advance government policy direction for the fisheries sub-sector. Mr. Speaker, the fisheries policy provides a roadmap towards sustained growth and development of the fisheries and aquaculture sub-sectors as it integrates other national policies existing or emerging particularly where they have implications for fisheries value chain actors and the marine environment, Mr. Speaker. So the approval of this policy by the cabinet, Mr. Speaker, is in line with what is happening in terms of our amendment to the fisheries bill and to give the SMMBA more legislative power to be able to collect fees and to keep or maintain the SMMBA on a sustainable path. This is basically what it entails, Mr. Speaker, and I ask for the support of the honourable members towards this bill. Honourable members, the question is that the fisheries amendment bill be read a second time. Member for Ancillary Candidates. Mr. Speaker, thank you. I rise to support my colleague from Dennery on the amendment of the Fisheries Act. Mr. Speaker, I will only point to two specific points made by the member. He has, without fault, neglected to mention the Canaries Ancillary Marine Management Area. Mr. Speaker, we have been told repeatedly that we are the poorest community, a definition which I reject entirely, but given we have been told repeatedly that we are the poorest constituency in the country, this piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker, will then allow me to have a conversation with the member for Soufre, so we could begin to collaborate on those fees, member for Soufre and member for Dennery, because it is very important to my constituency. I think it is also important, Mr. Speaker, to recognise in the regulating of conduct it is important to involve local communities in the management and decision making. As we know, Mr. Speaker, in Ang Caution, there is a significant conflict, a regular conflict, and I am hoping that with this piece of legislation, Mr. Speaker, we could begin to deal with some of those disputes. But I do support this amendment, Mr. Speaker, and I look forward to receiving some well-earned revenue for the people of Ancillary Candidates. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Member for Soufre for Seja. Thank you, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Fisheries Amendment Bill, tabled by the member for Dennery South. And as the member presented, this is a long-standing troublesome issue for the Soufre Marine Management Authority. And today I want to say that what we are doing today is in response to the cry of the chairman of the SMMA and the board members of the SMMA. Because as the member for Dennery South clearly articulated, the SMMA is playing a critical role in the management of the Soufre Bay. But it lacked the legal authority for collection of fees. And some members of the board and users of the Bay were aware of this and have been using the services of the SMMA and have been very reluctant to pay. So we needed this piece of legislation to give the SMMA the teeth that it requires to collect the fees. I welcome the intervention by the honorable member for Ansari countries because what he has presented is correct. That there is the entire Bay, you have the Soufre Bay, you have the Ancestne Bay, you have the SMMA and the fishers from countries and Soufre actually use this entire Bay. And it is the certain areas designated for fishing and became their fishing priority areas. But at the same time it is the area where there is significant conflict, snorkeling, diving, yachting. So this Bay rarely requires law and order. And the SMMA has the responsibility to do so. The fees collected would add in terms of some of the other services that are needed in the Soufre Bay. The employment of rangers for example, most persons would understand that we've had several unsavory acts in the Soufre Bay and we've had to request support from in some cases the Minister for Finance and in some cases the Soufre Regional Development Foundation have actually provided much support to SMMA. So today I think is a very important day for us in Soufre. I particularly welcome the inclusion of 22B, especially sections 2A, B and C. And I want to mention, Mr Speaker, that as I could see the penalty in section C is not 10 but actually $15,000. So that I want to articulate this so that our users are aware of the penalties and to put them on guard that at the moment when we'll finish with this piece of amendments we need to see some order in the disorder, Mr Speaker. So this evening I want to thank the board, staff of the SMMA, I want to thank the staff of the AG's office we've collaborated and worked with us in terms of putting these amendments together and also the staff of the Ministry of Agriculture and Fisheries. I support these amendments and it is going to excuse the cabinet. I want to support all the Prime Minister and the members, my colleagues in the cabinet for supporting this. Thank you. Minister of Agriculture. Mr Speaker, I want to thank the member for Uncillary Countries for his concern regarding his constituency. And what I want to tell him is that I will definitely be engaging the technical staff of the Fisheries Department to have a discussion as to how we can do this matter. I want to also thank the member for Souffre for the correction because I had $10,000 but it's actually $15,000. Mr Speaker, so I want to thank you for the support to the bill and let's hope that we can get the process completed. Thank you Mr Speaker. One of the members, the question is that the Fisheries Amendment Bill be read a second time. And I'll put the question as many as of their opinion say aye. Aye. As many as the country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. An act to amend the Fisheries Act cap 7.15. Clause 2. Insertion of new sections 22A and 22B. Clause 2 stands part of the bill. Aye. Clause 1. Short title. Clause 1 stands part of the bill. Aye. I'll remember the question is that the committee rises and the bill be reported. And I'll put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Honourable members, I beg to report that the Fisheries Amendment Bill went through committee stage without amendments. Minister of Agriculture. Mr Speaker, I move that the report of the committee be adopted and the bill be read a full time and passed. Honourable members, the question is that the report of the committee be adopted and that the Fisheries Amendment Bill be read a third time and passed. And I'll put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. Aye. As many as of a country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Be it enacted by the king's most excellent majesty, by and with the advice and consent of the House of Assembly and the Senate of St. Lucia and by the authority of the same as follows. This act may be cited as the Fisheries Amendment Act 2023. Member for Henry North. Mr Speaker, I move that the House turn a June, send it aye. Send it aye and you have a date. Honourable members, before I put the question I wish to advise that I did receive a note from the member for Suzele Saltibus when we broke that note came in while we were sitting. So I wish I've already instructed the clock to amend the hand side to reflect the member as being absent with permission. Honourable members, the question is that this House turn a June, send it aye. I now put the question as many as of that opinion say aye. Aye. As many as the country opinion say no. I think the ayes have it, the ayes have it. Sitting adjourned. Sitting has been adjourned, the motion for the adjournment of the sitting has just been moved in the past. Today, three bills went through all their stages. The Money Laundering Prevention Amendment, the Money Services Business Amendment, billed by the Ministry of Agriculture, Fisheries, Food Security and Rural Development, Fisheries Amendment, that also went through all its stages. And the more important one today by the Prime Minister, Minister of Finance, Economic Development, Youth Economy, Justice and National Security, the Constitution Amendment went through all its stages. This has been a historic day, February the 20th, 2023 in the judicial history of St Lucia. Today, we listen attentively and I encourage you to do that to the presentations made by Prime Minister Philip J. Pierre on his contribution to St Lucia's ascension to the CCJ and also encourage you and impress upon you to listen to a lecture I will say delivered here in the Parliament by the Member for Villefort South, former Prime Minister Kenny D. Anthony on, like I said, the amendment to the Constitution of St Lucia commencing the process for the ascension to the Caribbean Court of Justice as St Lucia's final propelling code as the replacement to the previous Council. In closing this broadcast, before I pass you over to my colleague here, Mr. Michael Gasper, I would like to leave you with this from the philosopher Socrates who once said, when the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of losers. And the Native American proverb which says you should never follow a leader who is more in love with power. than in love with the people. Michael. Thank you, Mr. Winston. With Mr. Winston Doe, this is the end of the session. I think it was very, very, very interesting today. Interesting because it was a child's story that was made today. There is a change made in the Constitution of St Lucia. To change the last call, the last call, that is the audience, that is the world of justice, that is how it is. The last call, that is how it is. It is the last call, that is how it is. It is the last call, that is how it is. So there is a lot of discussion, but it was, all the people who spoke there, the Prime Minister who spoke well, but Dr. Kenyans, who points to what you are saying, he points to the flag because he details exactly how it all started and how many years have passed. He himself said everything about it. It was a moment that was very, very simple. And finally, this year, he said, he is a mum. He can't treat a mum. He can't finish the work. He has a lot of work, but on the other side to go, I said, that is Senate, excuse me, Senate, that he made discussion, even if it was still, and after that, he went to Governor-General, who decided. There are a lot of people who discussed, but what I said is the most important, it was that, that was the last 6 days, the last call. Well, from the Sidusha House of Assembly, on behalf of the staff of the National Television Network, and on behalf of my colleague here, Michael Gasper, we say goodnight to you. Chance would not want to allow them to reach the highest levels of intellectual, of scientific, of political levels in this country, who believe that they are not capable, who believe that we have to only go to our colonial masters, who believe that what exists outside in Canada is better than what exists in Senusha, who are ashamed to say that they are products of Senusha, but instead they are products of Canada, Mr Speaker. I'm happy that the young people of Senusha are listening, Mr Speaker. And this giant step, and as I said before, this giant step started by Kenny Anthony, and continuing with us, Mr Speaker, that is how we are, we are a river, we flow, we are a stream, Mr Speaker. It starts one end and ends somewhere else, Mr Speaker. And today, this government, this Labour Party government is enforcing and showing its confidence after following all the constitutional and consultative requirements. We are proud to say that we are going to ask this House to finally remove us from the shackles of colonialism and sung them for a time, but we can say to them, we thank you, but our time has come to go. We love you, but we can't stay with you any longer. Thank you, Mr Speaker. Remember for view for South America.