Premier criticises Marine Association’s letter as disingenuous
Premier Dr Natalio Wheatley has dismissed the Marine Association’s claims regarding government consultations on proposed marine legislation affecting the local charter industry as ”disingenuous.”
Appearing on the Talking Points radio programme on ZBVI recently, Dr Wheatley responded to a letter from Marine Association President Andrew Ball, which criticised the government’s handling of consultations and accused it of implementing measures to restrict US Virgin Islands (USVI) charter boats from operating in BVI waters.
“I was somewhat disappointed in the letter from the President of the Marine Association, Mr Andrew Ball. I think [it was] disingenuous in certain ways,” Premier Wheatley said.
Ball’s letter alleged that the government failed to conduct proper consultations with the marine industry and suggested that fear of victimisation deterred open feedback. Dr Wheatley strongly rejected these claims.
“We had heavy consultation, and the industry requested more consultation, and we did more consultation. We had a series of meetings. As a result of those meetings, we made many changes to the proposed legislation, all in combination with local industry,” the Premier explained.
No victimisation
Addressing suggestions of victimisation, Dr Wheatley stated, “The environment in the BVI is… amazing sometimes—some of the actions which persons take in the BVI and flagrant acts of disrespect towards leadership. It’s not an environment where anybody seems fearful of quote-unquote victimisation.”
The Marine Association’s letter further suggested that the new legislation was primarily designed to keep USVI boats out of BVI waters rather than improve the regulatory structure. Dr Wheatley dismissed this interpretation, stating that the legislation aimed to create a fair system that distinguished between local and foreign-based operators.
“The legislation is really designed to… create a local regime versus a foreign regime. The old legislation didn’t do that, and [it is] to ensure that persons are not quote-unquote gaming the system,” he explained.
Dr Wheatley underscored the government’s desire to maintain strong business relationships with USVI operators. “We like the business that comes from the USVI. We don’t want to stop it from coming. That is certainly not my goal.”
Operational efficiency
In response to concerns about operational efficiency, Dr Wheatley acknowledged the need for improvements and said the government is working to digitise the licensing process. “We are actually taking steps to do that. We have payment gateway that we were doing through Banco Popular. We’re going to continue along that vein,” he stated.
The Premier also noted that other Marine Association members had distanced themselves from Ball’s letter. “We’ve had several persons from the Marine Association, in fact, that have written a letter saying that Mr Ball’s views don’t reflect their views,” he said.
The government has pledged to finalise the legislation by this summer. Dr Wheatley confirmed plans to meet with local stakeholders before the bill’s final readings in the House of Assembly.
“We intend to pass this legislation by June,” he said. “Before we go back to first, second, and third readings, we will have a meeting with our local industry.”
Copyright 2025 BVI News, Media Expressions Limited. All Rights Reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or distributed.
Is that Fahie the criminal that keeps whispering in his ear?
The person who you mention thinks he is the spokesman for the entire marine community. His ego is out of control.
That’s what we elected him for!
This is what we elected him to do. This is what he has been instructed to do.
“Lodger” YOU AGAIN, GET YOUR OWN NAME AND STOP USING MINE.
The association did extensive consultation with all of its members to write this letter. The association’s board of directors wrote that letter wholly, on the basis of the feedback they were given. Mr. Ball is simply a signatory on our behalf. To attack the individual is in poor form.
While it is imprudent to attribute every disagreement to racial prejudice, one must also avoid naivety. A segment of the expatriate community harbors the perception that all elected officials in the British Virgin Islands are incompetent, believing that only the United Kingdom can administer affairs efficiently. Admittedly, challenges exist; however, they are akin to those faced by both the UK and the USA. The BVI possesses a wealth of talent—balanced, intelligent, and educated individuals capable of effective execution. The expat community must recognize this and change their mindset.
Responsibility does not rest solely with expatriates. We, too, can become defensive too quickly, suffer from hubris, and neglect to consider valuable ideas from external sources. Nevertheless, allowances are made for these traits, for this is our homeland. Therefore, I propose that the expatriate community employ respect, persuasion, and influence to effect change, yielding mutual benefits. There will be thumbs down from both side of this acknowledgement but therein lies the issue a failure of self awareness from all involved.
The fact that his birthplace is relevant in your tiny head just shows how racist you are. I am not a fan of Mr Ball but on this occasion, he has my support. Mr Ball is the voice of the Marine Association and his letter relayed both facts and the views of the Association members, it was not a personal attack on the Premier or anyone else. The Premier however has shown far less respect in his response.
His birthplace possibly determines his mindset. Looks like my tiny head hit a nerve . Perhaps if you and yours got that condescension and entitlement out of your attitude the Premier would respond differently. It is rather strange that it is not the content of the statement but the fact that his birthplace is mentioned that offends you. But I can bet that you are a huge Trump supporter and his entire governance starts and ends with birthplace. I guess he has a tiny head.
A segment of the expatriate community and all Virgin Islanders except for our corrupt leaders harbors the perception that all elected officials in the British Virgin Islands are incompetent, believing that only the United Kingdom can administer affairs efficiently.
What BVI government competence might you be referring to in your allegation that a section of expats harbors the perception that all elected officials in the British Virgin Islands are incompetent?
It’s easy to see bad infrastructure (roads, water, garbage, electricity, education etc.). Every project the government has been involved in has gone well over budget and over time. Administrations have wasted more millions on airline projects, Prospect Reef, building walls around schools, and an ineffective NHI system. It’s not any single event as much as it is that these things keep on happening. Cronyism and corruption have run unchecked with no consequence in these islands, and politicians here are in it for personal gain more than they are in it to improve the lot of the people who elected them, besides a bush cutting contract or two, or perhaps a segment of wall to build around a school.
You speak of the BVIs “wealth of talent—balanced, intelligent, and educated individuals capable of effective execution”. Who and where are they? Why don’t we hear more from them? Why do they continue to tolerate the same old same old of the last 40 years?
Lastly, it’s nothing but hyperbole to claim that a segment of the expatriate community believes that only the United Kingdom can administer affairs efficiently.
The fact that you ask where is the local talent in the BVI says it all.You think exactly as I stated . If it is so bad why are you still there? You all act as if your homeland is a beacon of perfection , there is more corruption there than any of the BVI. You had your COI , where are the examples of this rampant corruption> Where are the indictments?
Do you even know what this news article is about or even know what the Maine Association is, or are you on here commenting just because he is white? Please crawl back under the f**king rock you came from. If you were really interested in the topic presented in this article you might have made a constructive comment, but no, you are too interested in the color of the man skin. SMH!
Ball is a blowhard, not even sure why he is even President of anything. Sure he may have some qualifications and experience in the field, but he is just a bunch of hot air!
@Rubbish
Yes, what you said is exactly that… Rubbish.
Sadly there is nothing that you can say to refute what has been said. The guy is an overrated opportunistic, egotistical blowhard! I agree with the Premier for taking the stance that he has taken.
Because nobody else wants that role. The last president had been in the role for many many years, it is not a nice role to have. However Mr Ball is the only one who likes to inflate his own ego enough so he is the only one who would put himself forward for the role with no opposition when voting. His actions over the last few weeks have certainly not represented all members of the marine association.
““We had heavy consultation, and the industry requested more consultation, and we did more consultation. We had a series of meetings. As a result of those meetings, we made many changes to the proposed legislation, all in combination with local industry,”
With whom have you consulted and had a series of meetings with?
Was it with the marine association?
Asking for the marine society.
This statement by the premier is pure BS. He and his VIP colleagues ignored the BVIMA and chose to consult with inexperienced persons known as cronies. So premier please tell the public the names of all the persons at your ‘heavy consultation’ meetings and the minutes of those alleged meetings with the time, date and location by the end of this week.
The main fault I find in the proposed Commercial Recreational Vessels Licensing Act amendments are more along the lines of the entire thing being terribly disorganised. As it is written now, it is a disservice even to the elected members of the House.
Instead of offering up an amending act, one which requires the users to flip from a 33-years old act to the new one and back again, the Attorney General’s Chambers should have instead written an act to replace behold one. Much more sensible.And the act ought to be reorganised into the various sections of the marine industry that it affects – bareboats, crewed charter yachts, water taxis, day sailors, and dive operators.
Finally, the amending act only serves to double or triple the burden of red tape for the various parties. As usual, we find the government foisting their responsibilities back onto the private sector. This is unacceptable.
I think everyone is getting distracted from the underlying issue here, the USVI threatening to respond in kind to the BVI’s intended increase in marine licensing fees for US charter boat operators. Suggest we keep the lid on things and look at the possible consequences of fee increases. Currently, each tourist arriving on a US operated day charter pays circa $70 dollars to the BVI government representing various fees for a one day visit, should that visit extend to further says, the tourist pays a further circa $16 dollars for each day in BVI waters. This $70 dollars is additional to the cost of the day charter, fuel usage, and, monies spent in the territory for entertainment etc. Now, it goes without saying that any charter boat fee increases will surely br passed onto the tourist, thereby increasing the $70 dollars currently paid.
There are numerous reactions we should be ready for:
(a) The US day charter boats and their clients suck it up and continue to visit.
(b) The US day charter boats / Tourists cease to come.
(c) We see a reduction in the sector and corresponding daily spend.
(d) The nuclear option: the USVI government charges none US citizens / residents a circa $70 dollar landing tax / fee.
Has everyone thought this through.
So let me get this straight… while suggesting that nobody should fear victimization, dear leader victimizes the individual elected to represent a large group of economic stakeholders for representing them? Their letter was explicit about the process of consultation taken by the association and its board of directors to prepare the letter, and it was authenticated by the board secretary.
Hopefully he doesn’t intend to rely on great support from one of the largest employment groups in the territory. This exhibited poor attitude spells a poor outlook for much needed inward investment.
Dear leader is not being honest with us. Hopefully the raw text of the letter will be made public for all to see as proof. Dear leader’s actions are surely proof enough meanwhile.