The Governor announced on the evening of 2 November that she is "satisfied that there is no breach of the Ministerial Code of Conduct by Premier Ebanks" over the Government's CI$6.5 million purchase of the former Kiddiewinks preschool, adding that she was "not aware of any direct allegation" of one. The finding rests on a review by the Attorney General, requested by the Premier himself on 28 October, that has not been published. The only account of what it found came later that evening from the man it clears: the Premier said the sellers were not "connected persons" under the Code, so "there was no conflict of interest to declare, and therefore there was no reason for me to recuse myself". The Official Opposition, which wrote to the Governor the same day asking that the purchase be "appropriately investigated" while assuring her that it made "no allegation", has said nothing since a 38-second voice note on 30 October. It did not answer eleven written questions from The Caymanian Journal (TCJ) by a deadline of 15:00 on 2 November, two and a half hours before the Governor's statement, and had not responded to the finding by publication.

The Leader of the Opposition, Joey Hew MP, was in the Cayman Islands on 24 October, the day TCJ's report appeared, as TCJ has established; three days later he told TCJ he was travelling on personal leave, and his office has not said when he returns. The Deputy Leader, Kenneth Bryan MP, did not answer two calls on 29 October, the written questions, or a further call on the evening of 2 November, and Christopher Saunders MP, one of the two independent members on the Opposition side, did not answer calls on 2 November. The other, Dwayne Seymour MP, reached that evening and asked whether a vote of no confidence was on the cards, said: "I'm just a lonely opposition independent guy in the corner. I'm not prepared to comment right now because I don't think it's proper to do so." The Deputy Speaker, Pearlina McGaw-Lumsden MP, who sits with the Opposition, took TCJ's call that evening, said she was on "an emergency call" and would call back, and, asked whether the Opposition would be saying anything that night, replied: "You have to contact the leader of the Opposition. I'm not in a position to say that." She had not called back by the time of publication. TCJ understands Parliament is not due to sit until the week commencing 16 November; no date for the next sitting is stated on parliament.ky.

TCJ reported on 24 October that two of the three valuations put the site at CI$5 million or less and that one of the two sellers had nominated the Premier, André Ebanks MP, for election in 2025; no evidence has been put to TCJ, and none is suggested, that he took any part in choosing the site or setting the price.

What the Governor said

Her statement of 2 November reads: "Notwithstanding the fact that I am not aware of any direct allegation regarding a breach of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, the Attorney General has considered this question at the proactive request of Premier Ebanks last week." He "has provided a full review of this issue, in light of the information available to him and with reference to the relevant sections of the Ministerial Code of Conduct and the Standards in Public Life Act", and "having considered the Attorney General's review, I can now report that I am satisfied that there is no breach".

What the Premier said

The Office of the Premier issued a release the same evening welcoming the finding. "My understanding of the Code and the Act has been confirmed by the Hon. Attorney General," the Premier said. "The vendor was not a connected person, there was no conflict of interest to declare, and therefore there was no reason for me to recuse myself." The release says conflicts under the Code "relate to 'connected persons' as defined in the Standards in Public Life Act", that the Premier "has no family, legal or business arrangement with the vendors", and that the nomination on 3 March 2025 "was a public action" whose record "remains published" by the Elections Office. It says the Chief Valuation Officer negotiated for the Ministry, that the three valuations "ranged from $4.859 million to $6.895 million, but the vendors were not willing to accept less than $6.5 million", and that Government judged the price value for money "based on its location, availability, and comparable government construction projects". It adds that all eleven members of the Government signed a Coalition Agreement on 16 October 2025 committing them to the Code. "With this review complete," the Premier said, "we can now refocus on our priorities."

That is the first answer anyone has given to the question TCJ first put to the Office of the Premier on 18 September, and it answers it in one direction: no declaration of interest was made because, on the Premier's reading, none was required. The release does not say whether the Premier took part in the Cabinet decisions of 29 June and 1 July, which its logic implies he did. Nor does it address the Code's own words that Ministers must avoid "possible or perceived" conflicts, that "appearances and propriety can be as important as an actual conflict", and that Ministers "do not act in isolation from their political, constituency, and community networks", or the fact that the Premier had opened the preschool as Premier ten months before his Government bought it. Whether the Attorney General weighed those words, and how, is in the review that has not been published.

The Attorney General stays out of the spotlight

The review was the Attorney General's, and he has said nothing about it in public. TCJ telephoned his Chambers on the morning of 2 November for an update and was transferred to a line that rang out; on calling back and asking again for the spokesperson, TCJ was told an update would be given by telephone. None came by publication.

The record of the office, as TCJ set out on 22 September in Cayman's Longest-Serving Attorney General to Step Down in August 2027, is one of conclusions reached out of public view and questions left unanswered. A CI$925,995.58 confiscation order against Canover Watson, made in February 2018 and due in August 2018, remains uncollected; the Anti-Corruption Commission's outgoing chairman called the delay "unacceptable" in October 2025, and Samuel Bulgin told Parliament on 5 November 2025 that "there is really no timeline within which to conclude these matters". He chaired the Anti-Money Laundering Steering Group through the 2019 evaluation that rated Cayman's confiscation effectiveness "moderate" and the two and a half years of Financial Action Task Force monitoring that followed. In Operation Tempura his Chambers conceded the 2008 arrest of Justice Alexander Henderson was unlawful and the Government settled for CI$1.275 million; two men prosecuted were acquitted. When the two-tier driver's licence fee was put to Finance Committee on 17 November 2025, Mr Bulgin told members there was a "presumption of legality" once legislation was enacted; when TCJ asked his Chambers in July for the legal basis of the fee, a member of staff said TCJ could take it that the Attorney General had declined to comment, and the fee was revised on 31 August without the reasoning ever being published. A presumption in place of an explanation then; a conclusion in place of a review now. Nine questions emailed in September went unanswered. Mr Bulgin has held the office since July 2003 and retires in August 2027. Under paragraph 2.8 of the Code he is the gatekeeper for any allegation against the Premier, and here he has been gatekeeper and reviewer both. An office with that record, which will not say how it reached a conclusion clearing the head of Government, asks the public to take it on trust.

What the Opposition has said, in full

The 28 October statement said Mr Hew MP had asked that the acquisition be "appropriately investigated", citing "the valuation and approval processes" and "any actual or perceived conflicts of interest", and that "raising these concerns does not constitute an allegation or finding of wrongdoing against any individual". It names nobody and does not say what the Opposition wants done.

Two days later the Progressives emailed a four-sentence recording of Mr Hew MP: "Questions surrounding the Government's purchase of the former Kiddiewinks property are very serious, and the Caymanian people deserve answers. We have already raised our concerns directly with Her Excellency the Governor, and we continue to call for this matter to be dealt with, and dealt with without any unnecessary delays." The process, he added, "must be fair, independent and free from any actual or perceived conflicts of interest". It was the Opposition's last public word before the Governor's finding. If any member of the Opposition responds, the online version of this article will be updated.

What the public has been given

The public has the outcome of the review and nothing of the review: not which sections were applied, what was examined, or whether the Cabinet record of 29 June and 1 July or the Opposition's letter was before the Attorney General. The question TCJ first put to the Office of the Premier on 18 September, whether any declaration of interest was recorded, now has the Premier's answer, that none was needed, and no one else's. The review cannot be forced into the open: section 17(1)(a) of the Freedom of Information Act exempts any record "privileged from production in legal proceedings on the ground of legal professional privilege", and section 17 is outside the public-interest override in section 26. It can be released by choice. Privilege belongs to the person advised and can be waived; the Premier sought the review "in the interest of accountability and to lead by example". Whether it will be is a decision for the Governor, the Attorney General and the Premier, and none of the three has said. What the public has from the Governor and the Attorney General, then, is not evidence or an explanation but an assessment, and the only account of its reasoning has come from the man it clears. The assessment is from an office whose record on following through, on TCJ's reporting, is the Watson order unrecovered for eight years, a "moderate" confiscation rating followed by two and a half years of international monitoring, and a habit of not answering. A finding of no breach, without reasons and uncontested by the party that sought it, leaves the public with two assurances and no facts.

Showing the working

Elsewhere, a head of government cleared under a code is cleared in public. When the UK Prime Minister's independent adviser found on 28 May 2021 that Boris Johnson had not breached the Ministerial Code over the funding of his Downing Street flat, the report was published the same day, reasons and all, including the adviser's finding that the Prime Minister had acted "unwisely". When Jamaica's Integrity Commission ruled out charges against Prime Minister Andrew Holness in September 2024 over his statutory declarations, its report was laid in Parliament, with the findings he disputed in it for the public to read. Neither outcome differed from Cayman's this week; the difference is that they showed their working. McKeeva Bush, the first person to hold the office of Premier, from November 2009 until his Government fell to a motion of no confidence in December 2012, told TCJ on 29 October: "We are not a banana republic. And so don't try to show us that we are." A finding that clears the head of Government without a published reason invites the comparison he rejected, and the cure is in the hands of the three people who hold the review.

Fish or cut bait

The Opposition's letter and the Premier's referral went to the same person on the same day. Paragraph 2.8 of the Code routes any allegation against the Premier through the Attorney General to the Governor; the Premier took that route himself, and the Opposition wrote to the Governor at the end of it while disclaiming any allegation. The Governor has now said in terms what the Opposition's release said: that no allegation was before her. That line is the hinge of her statement, and the Opposition supplied it. An Opposition that asks for an investigation while alleging nothing has, on her account, given her nothing to find, and the finding of no breach rests on exactly that. The record since 28 October is of an Opposition that raised a question and then declined every occasion to stand behind it: it disclaimed an allegation in the same breath as it asked for an inquiry, kept its letter to itself, said in 38 seconds what its statement had already said, sent its Leader abroad, left eleven questions unanswered, and, on the night the finding came, had one member decline to comment because it was not "proper", another refer TCJ to a Leader who is not here, and the rest not pick up. That is not caution. Set it beside the conduct of the people the Opposition's letter was aimed at. The Premier, whose conduct was in question, stayed on the Islands to face it and sent a Minister to the Commonwealth in his place. His Parliamentary Secretary took TCJ's call on the night and gave his answer in his own name. The former Premier who was once removed by a vote of no confidence and later acquitted of every charge took the call too, and said what he thought. The party that asked for all of this to be examined has, since 30 October, been represented by an answering machine. Conviction in politics is measured by what a party is prepared to put its name to, and on this matter the Opposition has put its name to nothing but a request that somebody else look. The choice now is the Opposition's: put an allegation on the record, with evidence, in the House where it has privilege and a vote, or accept the finding it did not contest. It cannot go on doing neither.

What the House could do

The House is not in recess; Standing Order 15 bars sittings only from July to early September, and Standing Order 13 lets the Government seek an earlier sitting, lets the Presiding Officer summon one on "urgent necessity", and obliges him to on a requisition signed by ten Members, two more than the Opposition has. The Public Accounts Committee, chaired by Opposition member Roy McTaggart MP and including Mr Bryan MP and Mr Saunders MP, sits in public on 4 and 5 November; Kiddiewinks is not on its agenda, but the Deputy Leader will be in the House, on camera, two days from now. Mr Bush put the question to TCJ on 29 October: "Where are those that are making the complaint, where are they headed with it? What are they asking to be done?"

The Premier at home, and the arithmetic of confidence

The Premier is not at this week's Commonwealth Heads of Government Meeting in Antigua and Barbuda. The Government said on 30 October that Johany Ebanks MP would lead the delegation, quoting the Premier that "duties at home keep me from travelling this week", without saying what they are; last year Juliana O'Connor-Connolly MP, then Premier, went to Samoa in person. A Premier who stays home from a heads-of-government summit in the week his conduct is under review, while his Employment Minister, Michael Myles MP, posts a statement rejecting "calls to shift power whether inside or outside of government", is a Premier attending to his position.

The Code is not the only route. Under section 51(1) of the Constitution the Governor must revoke the Premier's appointment if a motion of no confidence carries two-thirds of the elected members, 13 of 19, as TCJ set out on 1 November in Four Ways the Kiddiewinks Referral Could End, and What the Constitution Allows. Eleven sit with the Government and eight with the Opposition, so a motion needs every Opposition vote and five from the Government side, and only when the House sits, which TCJ understands will be the week of 16 November. On the Government side, Parliamentary Secretary Wayne Panton MP, reached by telephone on the evening of 2 November before he had seen the Governor's statement, told TCJ that "the Premier has always maintained my confidence" and that "this should settle this issue and we move on". Asked whether the public could understand some cynicism at a conclusion delivered without a report or explanation from the Attorney General's Chambers, he said: "What has been stated publicly is that this would be considered by the AG and by the Governor. They have done that. They have expressed their position, their conclusion. That settles it as far as I'm concerned." Asked about reports of a meeting of MPs at a property of his at the weekend, he said the information was "completely wrong". Whether the Opposition would move a motion is among the questions it has not answered. Every eye that was on the Governor now turns to a party that has said nothing for three days.

How oppositions elsewhere have used the moment

In August 2011 Ed Miliband MP, then UK Leader of the Opposition, broke off his holiday and was in Peckham, London the morning after rioting there, before the Prime Minister was back from Italy; in August 2021 Sir Keir Starmer, then Leader of the Opposition, demanded on the day Kabul fell that "we need Parliament recalled", and it was, three days later. Those were emergencies a property purchase is not; the comparison is that each answered a serious moment by being present and using Parliament. Cayman's Opposition called this one "very serious", and its Leader left the Islands within three days of TCJ's report.