THE EDITOR, Madam:
I WOULD be very grateful if somebody would explain two burning issues for me, and I believe, for many other laymen like myself.
The first has to do with the bickering over whether or not a CCJ should be established without it being put to a referendum. From what I gather by law the government is not compelled to hold a referendum on this issue. If this is the case, why the bickering when there have been so many other things being imposed upon us without a referendum?
Like for example, whether we should have a West Indies Cricket team, whether we should have a Caribbean Examinations Council (CXC) why we should not have casino gambling or even whether we should be independent.
Suffice it to say the call from the various groups necessitates the holding of a referendum, to what end, and to prove what? What is confusing is that these groups are predicting all manner of ills associated with the establishment of a CCJ. They want the issue put to a referendum. Do they know which way the electorate will decide? If the vote is in favour of CCJ it would stand to reason that the people's wish be carried out. Would that automatically be a panacea for the envisioned ills?
Finally, if there is such a great concern over the establishment of this court, where will the people of the region turn whenever the UK Privy Council decides, as it ultimately will in the future, that it cannot accommodate any more of our appeals? We need some answers please.
My second issue has to do with the whole business of electronic voting. Should our already over-taxed people be asked to purchase into a system which is manipulatable? In light of the 'yo-yo' type situation resulting from the US. Presidential Elections the mighty US one has to ask "is electronic voting any better than the old system for us and if so in what ways?
I am, etc.,
STEVE W. REID
Cross Keys P.O.
Manchester
