TCI News

TCI: Press Statement from the Leader of The Opposition – Boomerang Politics

Published

8 years ago

July 25, 2018

Deandrea Hamilton

#Providenciales, July 25, 2018 – Turks and Caicos –

OFFICE OF THE LEADER OF THE OPPOSITION

N.J.S. Francis Building

Pond Street, Grand Turk, Turks and Caicos Islands

Telephone: (649) 338-3706, Email: cwmisick@gov.tc

Providenciales Turks and Caicos Islands – July 24, 2018

Press Statement from the Office of the Leader of the Opposition

Service Charge and Boomerang Politics.

The following opinion by the Leader of the Opposition appeared in Volume 31 No. 26 page 10 of Turks & Caicos Weekly News – see link

https://issuu.com/tcweeklynews/docs/july_1-7__2017_-_all_pages.

Service Charge Debate – Deceit or naivety

The confusion around the equitable distribution of what has become known as ‘service charge’ is caused by a combination of the inexcusable deceit and naivety by some politicians who have misled hospitality workers and the public for their own ends. On this issue, the Premier prevarication is most offensive to a block of voters who she unequivocally pledged to ensure that 100% of the service charge is given. Since it is now clear that she has wised up to the fact that that promise was impractical, and not one that she can deliver – the poetry of campaign must now give way to the prose of governing. That requires a clear policy decision anchored in legislation.

The truth is that today’s ‘service charge’ defined in the Ordinance as ‘Any amount of money charged over and above the price of accommodation in a hotel, or the selling price of a meal or intoxicating liquor or beverage purchased by a customer, for service to a guest or customer, in a hotel or restaurant, but does not include any tax to be paid under any ordinance’ is an amalgamation of two add-ons to the published rates for the provision of hospitality services provided by some establishments prior to January 2004. In any case there were no obligations by establishments to collect or pay neither gratuity nor service charge to employees; and in fact, all-inclusive properties did not collect nor pay gratuity to employees before 2004.

To remove subjectivity from the system the Ordinance made it mandatory that all-inclusive properties levy and pay a 10% service charge to their employees. At the same time, recognizing the practice of other categories of hotels (that levied a 10% charge broken down into a 6% gratuity and a 4% resort fee) it left it to the discretion of management of the individual hotels to collect a service charge. However, the Ordinance does provide that if a service charged is collected 60% must be paid to employees. This reasoning is flawed – unless of course those establishments levy a charge sufficiently above 10% so that the 60% equate to the rate paid by the all-inclusive. Considering that all employers are required to pay the minimum wage whether all-inclusive or otherwise, and assuming parity of wage rates and other benefits across categories of employment obtains those persons working in non-inclusive hotels may very well be at a disadvantage.

The existing legislation is clear that the service charge levied by non-all-inclusive hotels is intended to be shared at minimum in the ratio 60:40 to employees and the business – reflecting the practice of many hotels at the time the ordinance was introduced. Establishments that are not adhering to the law are committing an offence. On the other hand, there is much confusion over the definition of the terminologies: gratuity, service charge and tips.

It is therefore necessary to contextualize the argument and suggest possible solution by defining the terms. Gratuity (tip) “a voluntary payment by patrons to service professionals as an expression of gratefulness for extraordinary service”. Albeit the subjectivity of the judgement of patrons impacts the aggregate amount of gratuity available to be shared among the staff. While a service charge is also additional payment on a service provided by a service professional it is mandatory rather than elective and may or may not deliver additional pay to the service professional who provides the service unless required by law.

In my view, the provision of hospitality services is a profession like any other, and it is right that it should not be left up to the discretion of patrons or hotel operators to, effectively set the pay for hospitality employees. Therefore, the idea of legally establishing an add-on to guests bills ringed fenced for hospitality workers is reasonable. On the other hand, a cover charge to a hospitality service establishment is standard in the industry; additionally, in a high-end tourism destination where customized service is demanded the level of hidden cost to a business is high; Allowance should also be made for non-cash benefits to employees including meals, transportation, uniform and training. Under those circumstances businesses not only earn a legitimate claim to a portion of the service charge but it is necessary for them to compete and prosper. We must remember that our survival depends on our ability to compete.

Finally, the current range of service charge in the TCI varies from 10% to 18% depending on the establishment – with all-inclusive properties pegged at 10% of which 100% goes to the employee. It therefore stands to reason that the amount paid to employees ought to be synchronized at an effective rate of 10% across categories of properties. This effective rate may be achieved through benefits in cash and kind. A commonsense compromise among all stakeholders encourages productivity, improve customer satisfaction and improves the bottom line of the business. Employees should not have to wait until Christmas for the necessary adjustment. The necessary amendment to the legislation to achieve a win-win solution should be done imminently.

Stifling of debate by the majority on issues it deliberately misrepresented does not of itself dispose of the problem, especially one that relates to the life-blood of the economy and the livelihood of people they purport to represent. Tourism and the welfare of hospitality workers should never be treated as a game of cricket. While I understand that the Premier faced batting from a self-inflected sticky wicket it is disappointing that she pulled up her stumps instead of defending her wicket.

Boomerang Politics

Fast forward to July 2018 the Premier created a smoke screen to walk back her ridiculous promise when in fact little will change for the hospitality worker, except now the discretion levy a service charge is remove and replaced with a legal obligation to do so. There will be no real appreciable change in the take home pay of an employee. The share of the service charge paid to employees by an establishment now applying a service charge of 15% to its bills, the proceeds of which is split 60:40 equates to 9% of the total bill; by the same token, an establishment charging 18% service charge pays its employees 10.8% of the total bill. Under the government’s proposal employees in the 15% scenario gets an uplift of 1% and employees in the 18% scenario losses 4/5^th of 1%

The decision by the Government to cast in legislation a common rate for participation by all hospitality workers adapts my opinion in July 2017 and is the right thing to do. The bill is otherwise unnecessarily intrusive and in principle interferes with the invisible hands of the free market to the extent that it seeks to restrict what individual operators can charge for adding extraordinary value to their service delivery. This makes the assumption that service quality is homogeneous and it encourages the commoditization of the service that otherwise thrive on differentiation.

Without making the poacher the game-keeper, the Government having waited this long should take seriously the advice of all stakeholders including operators, customers and workers to ensure unintended design flaws do not negatively impact the industry causing another boomerang effect.

News

50 Years of Ministerial Government: Cabinet Moves to Mark Milestone Rooted in 1976 Constitution

Published

3 days ago

March 30, 2026

Deandrea Hamilton

Turks and Caicos, March 30, 2026 – The Turks and Caicos Islands is preparing to mark a major political milestone, with Cabinet approving the establishment of a National Commemorative Committee to celebrate 50 years of ministerial government, a system first introduced under the 1976 Constitution.

The decision, confirmed in the February 10 Post Cabinet statement, signals a year of reflection on a governance model that fundamentally reshaped how the country is run — shifting from direct colonial administration toward locally led political leadership.

That shift was formalized in the Turks and Caicos Islands Constitution Order 1976, which laid the legal foundation for ministerial government and introduced a structured Executive and Legislative system.

At its core, the 1976 Constitution established an Executive Council, bringing together:

a Governor,
a Chief Minister elected by members of the Legislative Council,
and Ministers appointed to assist in governing the Islands.

A Very Different Government Back Then

If today’s Cabinet feels crowded, the 1976 version would have seemed almost unbelievable. There were just three Ministers serving alongside the Chief Minister — a tight, compact leadership team responsible for the affairs of an entire country. No sprawling list of ministries, no long roster of portfolios — just a handful of individuals carrying the weight of governance.

Becoming a Minister wasn’t a direct vote of the people either. You first had to win a seat in the Legislative Council, and from there, the Chief Minister would recommend who should serve. The Governor then made the appointments. In other words, political trust and alignment mattered just as much as public support — and ultimate authority still rested above the local leadership.

And as for job security? There wasn’t much of it. Ministers served without fixed terms and could be removed if they lost their seat, resigned, or if the Governor revoked their appointment. Even the Chief Minister could be ousted through a vote of no confidence. Add to that the basic requirements — being at least 21, a British subject, and meeting residency rules — and it’s clear that ministerial government in 1976 was not only smaller, but far more tightly controlled.

This marked the first time elected representatives were formally given defined roles in the administration of national affairs.

Under the Constitution, the Governor retained overarching authority, but was required in many instances to act on the advice of the Executive Council, particularly in shaping policy and overseeing government operations.

The Chief Minister, meanwhile, was positioned as the central political leader, responsible for directing government business and advising on the appointment of Ministers.

Importantly, the Constitution also allowed for the assignment of responsibilities to Ministers, giving them oversight of specific areas of government — a structure that remains at the heart of today’s Cabinet system.

Section 13 of the Order made clear that Ministers could be assigned responsibility for the administration of departments or government business, embedding accountability and functional governance into the system.

The Legislative Council, established alongside the Executive, provided the law-making body, with elected and appointed members participating in debates, passing legislation, and representing the interests of the Islands.

Together, these provisions created the framework for what is now recognized as ministerial government — a hybrid system balancing local political leadership with constitutional oversight by the Governor.

The explanatory note of the 1976 Order describes it as introducing “new provisions for the Government of the Turks and Caicos Islands,” including the creation of a Legislative Council with elected members and Ministers appointed on the advice of the Chief Minister.

Fifty years on, that structure has evolved through subsequent constitutional changes, but its foundation remains rooted in the 1976 framework.

Cabinet’s decision to establish a commemorative committee suggests that the anniversary will not only celebrate political progress, but also invite reflection on how effectively the system has delivered on its promise of representation, accountability, and governance.

As the Islands approach this Golden Jubilee, attention is likely to turn not only to the achievements of ministerial government, but also to the ongoing question of how the system continues to serve a modern and rapidly developing Turks and Caicos Islands.

Developed by Deandrea Hamilton • with ChatGPT (AI) • edited by Magnetic Media.

News

Government Moves to Amend Destination Management Fee Law

Published

3 days ago

March 30, 2026

Deandrea Hamilton

Turks and Caicos, March 30, 2026 – The Turks and Caicos Islands Government has signaled changes to its tourism funding framework, with Cabinet approving draft amendments to the Destination Management Fee Act 2023.

The decision was confirmed in the Post Cabinet statement following the February 5 meeting, chaired by Governor Dileeni Daniel-Selvaratnam, where members agreed to move forward with revisions to the law governing the collection and administration of the fee.

The Destination Management Fee, introduced in 2023, is applied to travelers entering the country and is embedded within the cost of travel. The charge was designed to support tourism-related development, including marketing, infrastructure, and sustainability initiatives.

At the time of its introduction, the fee was linked to the establishment of a Destination Management and Marketing Organisation (DMMO), which was expected to coordinate tourism strategy and enhance the visitor experience.

However, recent developments have shifted that landscape.

The DMMO has since been discontinued, raising new questions about how funds generated through the fee are being managed and what structure will now guide tourism development efforts.

The Cabinet note does not outline what specific changes are being proposed under the amended legislation.

It also does not indicate whether adjustments will be made to:

who pays the fee,
how it is collected, or
how the revenue is allocated and overseen.

The move to amend the law comes amid broader government efforts to strengthen revenue collection and compliance, including updates provided to Cabinet on the work of the Drag-Net Steering Committee — a multi-agency initiative focused on improving government revenue systems.

The lack of detail surrounding the amendments leaves several key questions unanswered, particularly given the fee’s direct impact on both visitors and residents and its role in supporting the country’s tourism economy.

Any changes to the Act would require further legislative steps, including presentation to the House of Assembly, before taking effect.

For now, the Cabinet’s approval signals that the government is moving to revise a policy that is already in force — but without yet disclosing how those revisions will alter the current system.

As tourism remains the backbone of the Turks and Caicos Islands economy, clarity on the future of the Destination Management Fee — and the framework it supports — is expected to be closely watched in the weeks ahead.

Developed by Deandrea Hamilton • with ChatGPT (AI) • edited by Magnetic Media.

Photo Credit: TCIAA

News

Flow TCI Empowers Local Communities with ‘Project EmpowerHER’

Published

3 days ago

March 30, 2026

Deandrea Hamilton

Turks and Caicos Islands (March 30, 2026) – Leading telecoms provider Flow has strengthened its commitment to community welfare with a substantial donation of personal care and self-care items to the Turks and Caicos Islands Red Cross, marking a significant contribution in support of International Women’s Month.

The donations, collected throughout March under the theme ‘Give to Gain’, were driven by Flow’s internal initiative, ‘ProjectEmpowerHER’ where employees across the business contributed essential feminine items, underscoring the company’s continued dedication to supporting the health, dignity, and well-being of women and girls across the Turks and Caicos Islands.

“International Women’s Month serves as a powerful reminder of the work still required to support women in our communities,” said Joanne Missick, Country Manager, Flow Turks and Caicos.

“Through ‘ProjectEmpowerHER’, our team wanted to take meaningful action and the ‘Give to Gain’ theme highlights that when we support others, we strengthen the entire community. I am incredibly proud of the generosity shown by our staff, and equally proud that Flow can play a part in creating safer, more supportive environments for women across our islands.”

The handover ceremony, held this week at the Red Cross headquarters, represents an important component of Flow’s corporate social responsibility agenda.

“We are extremely grateful for this contribution from Flow,” said Tuvol Higgs, Office Manager, Turks and Caicos Islands Red Cross.

“Partnerships like this reinforce the strength of our community network, and Flow’s support allows us to extend our reach even further. Their generosity will make an immediate and meaningful difference in the lives of the women we serve.”