Letter and submission from residents of
Ascension Island
This memorandum is submitted by a group representing
a cross section of Ascension Island residents. The group represents
people born on island, those who have lived and worked on island
for a significant number of years, those who have had and raised
children on island, those who have invested in private sector
businesses and former elected representatives. Its aim is to demonstrate
to the Committee that during the course of the last decade, in
relation to Ascension Island, the Foreign and Commonwealth Office
has repeatedly failed to promote democracy, to operate in an open
and transparent manner, to facilitate neither social nor economic
development and to provide an environment conducive to the principals
of good governance.
In the interests of brevity we have not included
all written materials referred to in the main text as most are
documents already in the public domain. However should the committee
have need of any specific documentation then we would be happy
to furnish it.
We hope that the result of this inquiry will
be a strong recommendation to the FCO to promote democracy, good
governance, accountability, social development and economic growth
not only in areas of keen political interest but in its own Overseas
Territories on behalf of British Citizens.
1. Ascension Island was run as a "Company
Town" until the start of this decade. The senior managers
of the main User organisations sat on various committees together
with the island Administrator (paid for by the Users) and they
decided on local issues, from infrastructure to policy agreements.
Workers did not pay any taxes and had no representation or rights
enshrined in legislation. All the island work force living in
accommodation owned by their employers and "tied" to
their employment—many having lived for 30-40 years + on
the island on "short term contracts".
2. At the end of the nineties the Users
expressed a wish to concentrate on their core businesses and to
devolve island administrative powers to an alternative body. In
1999 Robin Cook published a White Paper Partnership for Progress
and Prosperity in the Overseas Territories which seemed to
offer the new way forward for Ascension Island.
3. Various reports and studies were undertaken
and the views of the Ascension Island workers were sought. (Ascension
into the Millenium, Portsmouth Report, Referendum) A decision
was taken by the FCO and HMG to democratise Ascension Island.
Taxation was to be introduced but in return elected representatives
would be asked to form an Island Council and to take forward development
of Ascension Island socially and economically.
4. Businesses and property were advertised
as being for sale or lease and people were encouraged to invest
in the private sector. A new company Ascension Island Commercial
Services was formed and public meetings held to publicise and
inform residents of the privatisation of former government held
assets. Local residents formed and bought several of these businesses.
5. Taxation was duly introduced in April
2002 and the first Island Council elected to office in November
2002. Every single candidate who stood for election did so with
a manifesto outlining the need to bring social change to Ascension
Island. To allow rights of abode, land/property ownership and
to create an infrastructure and environment attractive to inward
investment. This was in no way believed to be wishful thinking.
Indeed in his Christmas Message of 2000 the Governor of Ascension
island stated "We will also be addressing the democratic
deficit to ensure that St Helenians on Ascension Island are given
the right of abode there, the opportunity to own businesses and
a form of local government which gives the residents choice and
a say in the running of their Island". This was followed
by the Administrator in March 2001 who stated during a press interview
that "As for the rest, we know that we are going to need
Land Tenure legislation very soon. This will give people the right
to either purchase or lease property or land. We will also need
legislation to provide for the right of abode on Ascension although
we will have to decide how we are going to provide for the unemployed,
the elderly etc." Given that the 2 most senior representatives
of both the FCO and HMG on the island were publically promoting
these changes it is obvious that local workers believed them to
be true and planned accordingly.
6. Having formed a Council based on the
principles of self determination, rights of abode and property
ownership a five year Strategic Plan was produced and presented
to the then Minister for Overseas Territories, Bill Rammel when
he stopped over at Ascension en route to the Falkland Islands
in November 2003. Following his return to the UK his department
wrote to the Council acknowledging both the visit and the Plan.
It is important to highlight this event as the FCO subsequently
tried to deny this Plan either existed or had been made known
to the FCO and Ministers.
7. Constitutional Advisor, Michael Bradley
visited the Island in September 2003 at the behest and expense
of the FCO to assist in the development of immigration legislation
including the granting of belonger status. Public meetings were
held and were well attended. Mr Bradley drafted basic immigration
policies which he sent to the Ascension Island Council, via the
FCO, for further discussion and public consultation.
8. In December 2003 the Wideawake Agreement
was signed at Secretary of State level allowing for civil aircraft
to use Wideawake airfield. Ian Ramsay from Air Safety Support
International was commissioned to advise on what upgrades would
be necessary to enable commercial flights to use the airfield.
The clear intent was to increase the number of civilian passengers
travelling to Ascension with a view to developing a niche tourism
market.
9. During an Island Council meeting held
in 13 May 2004 which was attended by Ralph Jones from the FCO
item 3.15 referred to the ongoing Land Adjudication process and
five infill plots were identified and agreed upon to be marked
and advertised for freehold sale. At a subsequent meeting on 24
September 2004 AIC agreed to purchase two houses from CSO. If
as the FCO contends that all property belongs to the Crown (and
by default Ascension Island Government) and given that no new
laws in respect of this have been written or enacted, why would
the Crown sanction AIG paying for property it already owned?
10. During 2004 the FCO granted AIG £70k
(subsequently raised to £106k) to employ a Legal Adviser
whose terms of reference specifically included aiding the Attorney
General in drafting land tenure and immigration legislation.
11. In December 2004 the FCO hosted meetings
between the Ascension Island Government Fisheries Officer, an
elected Councillor and two companies it had sourced and invited
to investigate the feasibility of a commercial fishery on Ascension
Island. Early indications were that this was potentially a good
source of income and the FCO promised £15K to initiate the
process.
12. In late 2004 a new Attorney General
was appointed and in January 2005 during a council meeting he
produced a timetable for land tenure and right of abode. This
timetable formed part of the minutes and efforts by the FCO to
deny that they had been involved in this timetable are rather
trite as the AG was acting on their current policy in drafting
this and it was authorised by the Governor before being released
to the Council.
13. At a council meeting on 30 May 2005
chaired by HE the Governor, the council was advised that he had
had meetings with FCO officials in London and that these officials
felt that they now had a better appreciation of the needs and
aspirations of Ascension Island. In order to take this forward
a summit had been arranged for September 2005 so that elected
representatives and concerned residents could put forward their
points of view directly to the FCO.
14. In October 2005 a new Economic Feasibility
Study was commissioned by the FCO. The elected representatives
were not invited to comment on the terms of reference although
many other agencies were. (PQ 58744 refers). This Oxford Policy
Management report was paid for by the FCO and one of the main
consultants was a former FCO employee. It is unsurprising that
its findings were somewhat different to those by the independent
consultants who compiled the Portsmouth Report. A case of "He
who pays the piper"?
15. The first council came to the end of
its term and elections were held in October 2005. Once again all
nominees campaigned on the issues of right of abode, property
ownership, self determination and economic development. Prior
to the election the Administrator asked to see all manifestoes
and promised the candidates a face to face summit meeting with
Lord Triesman Minister for Overseas Territories to discuss Ascension
Island's future. This would be in lieu of the promised summit
that did not take place in September.
16. Only 10 days after the election a delegation
of FCO and MoD officials delivered the U-turn announcement to
the newly elected councillors only 1 hour before going public.
There was no discussion or negotiation. The delegation had arrived
on island with a prepared statement that allowed no room for manoeuvre
or flexibility. All development of any kind was to cease and no
rights would be conferred on any persons living and working on
Ascension Island.
17. At the next Council meeting in December
it was announced that FCO were no longer going to fund the Fisheries
research project. They made reference to a desk study that had
been completed in 1990. This study had never been made known to
Councillors. Pre-council, fishing licences for Ascension waters
were being sold by St Helena for over £100k per annum. Furthermore
even the OPM Economic Feasibility Study referred to a possible
viable economy being developed through the fishing industry.
18. There then followed a long period of
non-communication. The Adminstrator made absolutely no attempt
to meet and discuss the implications of this change in FCO policy.
When Councillors requested that the promised summit with Lord
Triesman be honoured so that they could make their case directly
to him they were told that it was not going to happen as there
was nothing to discuss.
19. Councillors became frustrated in their
efforts to engage officials in debate. The Administrator remained
remote and withdrawn and the only way to prompt responses to questions
was to have them asked as formal Parliamentary Questions by MPs
in the UK. The replies to these questions were at best often inaccurate
and at times they appeared deliberately obstructive. Frequent
requests from the Councillors for FCO officials to meet and hold
crisis talks were denied. Instead the rhetoric from King Charles
Street became quite dark, accusing the people of Ascension of
being confused, and misled and of not understanding the real issues.
20. Finally in August 2006 Frank Savage
FCO OT Advisor) was engaged to meet with elected representatives
to see if dialogue could be re-established. Council made him aware
of the inability of the Administrator to engage with elected representatives
and their frustration at the lack of interest from the FCO.
21. In November 2006, Ascension Island was
represented at the OTCC and the delegate gave warning to the FCO
and Lord Triesman in both public and private fora that the population
of Ascension were becoming weary of their treatment at the hands
of Government Officials and it was likely that the youngest democracy
in the world was about to fail in its infancy. Despite protestations
from FCO officials and Lord Triesman that they would do all they
could to prevent this, there continued to be no real dialogue
between the two sides or a willingness by the FCO to meet half
way on any issue.
22. Lord Triesman was supposed to have visited
Ascension Island en route to the Falklands but due to bad weather
changed his flight plan and bypassed Ascension altogether. This
was not the first time Ascension had been missed off an official's
itinerary. During the tenure of the first Island Council, not
one official government representative of any standing visited
Ascension for the purpose of meeting with island representatives.
Some were encouraged when using the island as a staging post en
route to the Falkland Islands or St Helena to take some time to
meet the council but no trips were ever arranged for the express
purpose of working with the council. During the second Council's
tenure it became de rigueur to send officials out shortly before
they moved onto other departments, which certainly led to suspicion
as to how seriously the FCO took the democratic process on Ascension
Island.
23. Finally after more than 12 months of
silence a group of Overseas Territories officials visited for
a two day summit with Councillors. Even this was dismissive of
the local representatives. A request to the delegation that if
possible one of the days could be a weekend to allow for maximum
attendance of councillors was flatly refused on the grounds that
FCO staff do not work weekends. Then when the officials did arrive
half a day was taken up by sight seeing and the first evening
was an FCO only dinner at the Residency to which no local representatives
were invited. In this way valuable time for discussion was lost
and meetings became more charged due to the added pressure to
accomplish everything in a short time. All Councillors held other
full time employment and generally gave up free time to perform
council duties for no remuneration. In actuality, attendance by
Councillors at various seminars and Overseas Territories Councils
(OTCC, Economic Development ?? for example) entailed Councillors
using up personal leave entitlements and subsidising some of the
costs themselves.
24. The result was the meeting was brought
to a premature end when the head of the FCO delegation, Hugh Philpott,
made it clear that whilst there was no intention to return Ascension
to a Company Town, at least not publically, there was to be no
development in any other area thus condemning the island to a
state of limbo. He was dismissive of the councillors and their
efforts and wanted to minimise the level at which they could operate.
25. Subsequently the majority of the Councillors
(five out of six) resigned in the next few days (one had resigned
a week earlier in frustration as he could not obtain leave from
work to attend the meetings and was left with no way to participate).
It was clear that effective representation had been nullified.
The governor called a General Election but only two candidates
came forward due to the whole island realising the futility of
the process. There being no elected body the Governor then appointed
people to form an Advisory Body. Most of the invited persons are
the Senior Managers of the main User companies, a definite hark
back to Company Town days. The Advisory Body meets in secret.
No minutes are published and no information is released to the
public as to the issues discussed or outcomes of the discussions.
26. There was no movement from either the
Governor or Administrator to engage with the taxpayers for almost
six months except for an announcement that a council may be considered
again in 12 months time. Meanwhile the workers of Ascension were
expected to be content with a dictatorship.
27. Eventually the Governor, whilst transiting
from St Helena, held a public meeting on Ascension Island. However
the purpose of the meeting was to allow trainers that had been
on St Helena the opportunity to give a presentation on politics.
There was virtually no notice given and many people on island
were unaware that the meeting was taking place. The few that did
go requested that the Governor take back the message to the FCO
that the residents on Ascension still wanted to have a dialogue
with the UK and to move on. However this could not be achieved
when local officials were uncommunicative and if there is to be
no flexibility in approach. The Governor agreed at the meeting
that the current Advisory Body set up was not democratic.
28. The FCO's handling of Ascension Island
since 2000 has been shameless and unprofessional. There has been
no clarity of purpose or effective communication. The elected
Council has been used to legitimise an illegitimate system that
has never been a true democracy and, it seems, was never intended
to be. The hypocrisy of the FCO and HMG has left the taxpayers
of Ascension disenfranchised, disillusioned and disgusted with
UK government tactics. It has also set the framework for future
problems as more people become unsettled and leave and employers
are faced with increasing recruitment problems. Also by stagnating
Ascension's economy the burden to replace and improve the outdated
infrastructure will increasingly fall to the workers rather than
the employers or the UK yet they will have no stake in the future
of the island. It is inconceivable and undeniably sad that Britain
in the 21st century has allowed one of her Overseas Territories
to be denied basic democratic freedoms, and taxation without representation.
29. In conclusion we ask that the following
recommendations be considered. That democracy be immediately instigated
on Ascension Island. Clear commitment by the FCO to facilitate
democracy and to engage in meaningful and productive dialogue
with the people of Ascension Island and their elected representatives,
perhaps with the assistance of professional mediators if necessary.
30. A brief history of key dates is contained
in appendix 1.
31. A freehold agreement is contained in
appendix 2.[83]
The owner has asked that his name being blanked at this time.
Special attention should be drawn to sub-para (g) in which provision
is made for future onward sale of the property indicating a clear
policy of private sale of property and/or land.
ASCENSION ISLAND TIMELINE
| May 1997 | :
| Users pull out of Government indicating that they will concentrate on core business and no longer want to be involved with management of the island and it's infrastructure.
|
| June 1999 | : | White paper Partnership for Progress and Prosperity in the Overseas Territories published by Robin Cook.
|
| April 1999 | : | HMG produces Ascension Into The New Millennium—a Public Consultation Paper.
|
| July 2000 | : | Portsmouth Report suggests Right of Abode as viable way forward.
|
| July 2001 | : | Ascension Island Commercial Services initiates the selling of businesses.
|
| September 2001 | : | UK OT Environment Charter signed by Ascension representative.
|
| July 2002 | : | Steering Group Formed to canvass public opinion on appropriate Government model.
|
| April 2002 | : | Taxation introduced.
|
| August 2002 | : | Referendum on preferred Government Model—98% in favour of Ascension model of Island Council that has fiscal control and non-voting rights for appointed members.
|
| October 2002 | : | Island Council (Ascension) Ordinance Enacted, 4 October.
|
| November 2002 | : | First Island Council elected.
|
| September 2003 | : | Michael Bradley on island from 22 to 27 September to draft immigration and belonger status legislation.
|
| November 2003 | : | Bill Rammell (Head of OT) visits the island and Strategic Plan presented to him (Letter of acknowledgement dated 7 April 2004)).
|
| December 2003 | : | Wideawake Agreement concerning the use of the Airfield by Civil Aircraft presented to Parliament.
|
| December 2004 | : | FCO host meeting to gather expressions of interest for Fisheries.
|
| January 2005 | : | Attorney General gives timetable for Land Tenure and Right of Abode Legislation.
|
| October 2005 | : | Councillor Henry at OTTC told by Lord Triesman there will be no U-turn. (Lord Triesman had sent a letter out on 3 October 2005 re Good Governance).
|
| October 2005 | : | The Oxford Policy Management (OPM) Economic Study of Ascension published, 10 October.
|
| November 2005 | : | Second Island Council elected, 18 November.
|
| November 2005 | : | U-turn decision by OT Minister conveyed by Tony Crombie (FCO) on 30 November.
|
| December 2005 | : | FCO refuses to fund Fisheries Research Project after tenders had been sought to undertake the desk study—conveyed at Council meeting 15 December.
|
| January 2006 | : | Lord Trieman writes to councillors stating there will be no right of abode on Ascension Island.
|
| January 2006 | : | Councillors request advice regarding funding for legal advice regarding right of abode.
|
| February 2006 | : | Open letter to Lord Triesman from Ascension Elected Members expressing their disappointment.
|
| April 2006 | : | Denise Holt responds denying all knowledge of the Strategic Plan presented to Bill Rammell.
|
| August 2006 | : | Frank Savage visit (FCO OT Advisor).
|
| November 2006 | : | Councillor Yon attends OTTC.
|
| February 2007 | : | The Ascension Island Fisheries Report (paid for by AIG) received. Recommends management of Ascension Island's waters.
|
| March 2007 | : | Majority of councillors resign following meeting with FCO delegates headed by Hugh Philpott.
|
| May 2007 | : | Lack of nominees for new council signifies the collapse of Britains youngest democracy.
|
| June 2007 | : | Pre-selected residents are invited by the Governor to form the Island Advisory Group.
|
| September 2007 | : | Public meeting with UK National School of Government. Governor once again informed that Ascension Island taxpayers were unhappy with the lack of democracy and lack of any real effort by FCO to redress this.
|
| To Present | : | No contact from FCO concerning collapse of the Council and restoration of democracy.
|
12 October 2007
|
| |
83
Not published. Back
| 
