Every Minister who has answered questions about the Government's CI$6.5 million purchase of a West Bay preschool has cited the Cabinet oath and declined to say what happened when the purchase was approved. After The Caymanian Journal (TCJ) reported on 24 October that the Government paid CI$6.5 million for a site that two of its three valuations put at CI$5 million or less, and that one of the two sellers had nominated the Premier, André Ebanks MP, for election, the Premier has asked the Attorney General to consider whether the matter should be formally referred to the Governor, and the Official Opposition has written to the Governor asking for an investigation.

McKeeva Bush, the first person to hold the office of Premier of the Cayman Islands, says the country "is not a banana republic" and that, if he were Premier today, he would "pull the group together" and "open our books". Mr Bush, who was sworn in as the first Premier on 6 November 2009 when the present Constitution took effect and held the office until December 2012, and who did not retain his West Bay West seat at the 2025 General Election, spoke to TCJ by telephone on 29 October.

Where the matter now stands

On 28 October the Premier published a statement on the Government's website. "Questions have been raised in the media and by Members of the Opposition related to the acquisition of Kiddiewinks preschool announced in August as additional classroom space for Sir John A Cumber Primary School," it said. "As Premier and leader of the NCFC Government, I hold myself to high levels of transparency and accountability. Therefore, in the interest of accountability and to lead by example, I have taken the proactive initiative this morning to ask the Honourable Attorney General to consider in keeping with paragraph 2.8 of the Ministerial Code of Conduct, whether there should be a formal referral of this matter to Her Excellency the Governor. This step was relayed to Her Excellency the Governor and Ministers during Cabinet today. I will provide further updates once the Attorney General's review is complete."

Paragraph 2.8 of the Code, approved by Cabinet on 27 July 2021, provides that "the Attorney General will, as soon as practicable, refer any allegation that the Premier has breached the Code to the Governor". The statement does not refer to the valuations, the price, the sellers, the nomination, or to any declaration of interest.

TCJ had written to every member of the Cabinet who was recorded as present when the purchase was confirmed on 1 July, and to the Attorney General, the Governor's Office, the Cabinet Office, the Deputy Governor, the Commission for Standards in Public Life, the Office of the Auditor General and Franz Manderson, who acted as Governor at that meeting, in the early hours of 28 October, before the Premier's statement was issued. The Governor's Office replied on 29 October, pointing to the Premier's statement and adding: "The Governor will consider the Attorney General's advice on this issue in due course." Asked later that day whether the Governor wished to say more, the Office confirmed that those words were its response. TCJ has verified that the Governor replied to the Leader of the Opposition on 29 October, acknowledging receipt of his letter. That acknowledgement does not say whether any referral from the Attorney General had reached the Governor by that date.

On 28 October, the day of the Premier's statement, the Official Opposition issued a statement under the heading "Official Opposition Calls for Transparency and Accountability Over Government's Purchase of West Bay School Property". It said the Leader of the Opposition, Joey Hew MP, "has written to Her Excellency the Governor, expressing our concerns and requesting that the circumstances surrounding the acquisition of the KiddieWinks Preschool be appropriately investigated". The letter, it said, "seeks clarification regarding the valuation and approval processes, the safeguards applied to identify and manage any actual or perceived conflicts of interest, and whether the transaction complied with the relevant procurement requirements governing public expenditure and the acquisition of property". The statement added: "We emphasise that raising these concerns does not constitute an allegation or finding of wrongdoing against any individual." It does not name the Premier, the sellers or the Code, and does not give the date of the letter.

What the oversight bodies say

The Office of the Auditor General told TCJ on 28 October that the transaction "falls within the scope of the audit of the Ministry of Education and Training's 2026 financial statements, which is currently underway", and that it "cannot comment further on this matter, including the questions you raised, until the audit is complete". The Commission for Standards in Public Life said on 29 October, through its Chairman, that it "is aware of the reports in the public domain concerning this matter" and that "while it is unable to comment at this time, this is a matter the Commission will continue to monitor".

What the Ministers said

The published summary of Cabinet's meeting of 1 July records that Cabinet confirmed approval, granted by circulation on 29 June, of two supplementary funding requests for the Ministry of Education and Training, which the Ministry has told TCJ was the approval of the acquisition. It records that the Minister for Caymanian Employment and Immigration was absent with permission and that "all other Ministers and Members of Cabinet were present". It does not record whether any Minister declared an interest or left the room for the item, and the Cabinet Office's published policy is that "Cabinet discussions will not be disclosed".

TCJ asked each Minister whether the paper circulated on 29 June identified the property and the sellers, whether they knew when they approved it that one of the sellers had nominated the Premier, whether the Premier took part and was in the room, and whether anyone declared an interest or withdrew.

Nickolas DaCosta MP, Minister for District Administration and Home Affairs, replied on 29 October. "As a Member of Cabinet, I have sworn the Oath of a Cabinet Member, which expressly states that I 'will not directly or indirectly reveal such matters as shall be debated in the Cabinet and committed to my secrecy'," he wrote. "This solemn obligation is further reinforced by the Cabinet Manual and the Ministerial Code of Conduct. Accordingly, I am unable to comment on Cabinet papers, deliberations, or the participation of individual members in Cabinet decisions. I acknowledge the Premier's public statement on 28 October 2026 concerning this matter and believe it is important that any questions regarding compliance with the Ministerial Code be addressed through the appropriate processes, without prejudging the outcome. My commitment to good governance, transparency and accountability remains unwavering. These principles must apply consistently to all who hold public office."

Johany Ebanks MP, Minister for Planning, Lands, Agriculture, Housing and Infrastructure, whose Lands and Survey Department arranged the valuations and led the negotiation, replied the same day through his Ministry's communications office in words identical to Mr DaCosta's, from the oath to the final sentence. Both asked that the response be attributed to them personally.

Mr Manderson, who was Deputy Governor and acted as Governor on 1 July, replied on 29 October: "I am unable to comment on the deliberations of Cabinet. When I was sworn in as a member of Cabinet, I swore that I would not directly or indirectly reveal such matters as shall be debated in the Cabinet and committed to my secrecy. The Cabinet Code of Conduct also requires confidentiality in all matters relating to Cabinet. To comment on what took place in Cabinet would therefore itself be a breach of that oath and that Code. I must therefore decline to comment on this matter."

Rolston Anglin MP, the Minister for Education and Training and Minister for Finance and Economic Development, Isaac Rankine MP, Katherine Ebanks-Wilks MP, the Attorney General, the Cabinet Secretary and the Deputy Governor, Gloria McField-Nixon, had not responded by the 14:00 deadline on 29 October. An automatic reply from the Deputy Premier, Gary Rutty MP, said he was on leave until 3 November. The question TCJ first put to the Office of the Premier on 18 September, whether any declaration of interest was recorded when Cabinet considered the purchase, remains unanswered by anyone, and the question of whether the Premier withdrew from the room on 1 July, or took part in the circulation decision of 29 June, is no nearer an answer than it was a week ago.

The Minister who attended the opening

Two of the Ministers who approved the purchase had been to the preschool before it was sold. The Premier cut the ribbon at the official opening of the Kiddiewinks Garden Playschool in West Bay on 8 August 2025, at a ceremony also attended by Ms Ebanks-Wilks MP, the Minister for Health, Environment and Sustainability and the elected member for West Bay Central, according to a report published five days later. That report names Jennifer Stein and her sister as the founders of the school, quotes Ms Stein, and captions one of its photographs as the Premier talking with the two founders alongside Ms Ebanks-Wilks MP. Ten months later Cabinet approved the Government's purchase of the site from Ms Stein and Carolyn Chaloner, whom the Ministry of Education and Training named to TCJ as the sellers on 19 October. TCJ asked Ms Ebanks-Wilks MP on 28 October in what capacity she attended, whether she was acquainted with Ms Stein or aware of her role in the preschool, and whether she recognised the property when the funding request was circulated. She had not replied by the deadline. TCJ asked the Premier on 28 October whether he was aware, when the request was circulated on 29 June, that Ms Stein was one of the sellers; he had not replied by the deadline.

What the Code asks, and what it does not say

The Code requires Ministers to ensure that "no possible or perceived conflicts exist or appear to exist between their personal interests and their public duty", states that "appearances and propriety can be as important as an actual conflict of interest", and provides that a declaration of interest made at Cabinet "will be recorded" and that conflicts "should be recorded by the Cabinet Office in a register". Its definition of a "connected person", borrowed from the Standards in Public Life Act, covers family, agents, business partners and controlled companies; it does not mention election nominators. But the Code also states that Ministers "do not act in isolation from their political, constituency, and community networks", and one strand of those networks is already on the public record. The Elections Act requires every candidate to be nominated on a signed paper by at least two registered electors of the constituency, and the Elections Office publishes the nominators' names; a nomination is a political connection the law itself places on the record. The Elections Office's list of 2025 candidates and nominators records Ms Stein as one of the Premier's two nominators, received on Nomination Day, 3 March 2025, five months before he opened the preschool. Section 10 of the Standards in Public Life Act (2021 Revision) requires a person in public life with "a possible or perceived conflict of interest" in a matter before a body of which he is a member to declare it and withdraw, with the declaration and absence recorded in the minutes. The Act, enacted in 2014, was brought into force in its entirety on 1 March 2020 by a commencement order gazetted on 27 February 2020. Neither the Code nor the Act fixes a penalty for a Minister who fails to identify a perceived conflict. No allegation that the Code was breached has been made by TCJ, by the Opposition or, on his own statement, by the Premier, who has asked the Attorney General to consider whether a referral is warranted.

"Show me where I'm wrong"

Mr Bush's position is that the questions are legitimate and the conclusions are not yet available. "People have a knack in making accusations without proof. Going public without proof. I would not have done that, and I have never done that. If I had to fight something, I waited until I had proof. Then if I didn't get an answer from within the mechanisms in government, then I took it to Parliament," he said.

Of the Opposition's letter to the Governor he said its concerns "doesn't seem to have a basis other than smoke", and: "Looking at the whole thing, you say, that's a lot of money, right? But outside of that, what evidence is there of wrongdoing?"

TCJ reached out by telephone to the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Kenneth Bryan MP, on the evening of 29 October to put Mr Bush's questions to the Opposition: where it is going with its letter to the Governor, what it is asking to be done, and his view that its concerns do not appear to have "a basis other than smoke". No response had been received at the time of publication. If the Opposition contacts TCJ, the online version of this article will be updated.

Asked what he would do if he were Premier today, in the same position, regardless of guilt or innocence, Mr Bush said: "I would certainly pull the group together and say, hey, let's sit down here around this table. Let's open our books. Let's talk about this matter."

He returned repeatedly to the standing of the country. "I think something that they're talking about removing a Premier. What is that? That shows some sort of uneasiness in the country," he said. "That's the sort of thing that I worry about for our country. We are not a banana republic. And so don't try to show us that we are." And: "Not to say they don't have a right as an Opposition. Where do they plan to go with it? Is the law broken?"

Mr Bush was himself removed from office after the Legislative Assembly passed a motion of no confidence in his Government on 18 December 2012, and in October 2014 a Grand Court jury found him not guilty on all 11 charges of misconduct in public office and breach of trust that he had faced; he drew the comparison himself. "I was accused. And I hope you write this. I said, what evidence? Bring the evidence. I am not going to resign over something that I did not do." Asked whether the Premier should resign if the Attorney General referred the matter to the Governor and a breach were found, he said: "That's a personal question. If he knows that he didn't do anything wrong, in his heart of hearts, then no, he should not resign. And of course that comes right back down to this, that the Opposition and whomever else feels that yes, there was something, so there would be a motion in the House."

Asked about talk that a successor might emerge if the Premier were to resign, Mr Bush did not name a successor, but said he had described Mr Anglin MP as "a strong leader", adding: "So is Jay Ebanks," a reference to Johany Ebanks MP.

When told that private firms had prepared all three valuations, two of which put the site's value at about CI$4.9 million and CI$5 million compared with the CI$6.5 million paid, he said: "I don't know what happened there."

What the public still does not know

Ten days of questions to the Government have established the price, the three valuations, the sellers' asking price, the dates of the Cabinet decisions, the funding line and the names of the sellers. They have not established whether the Cabinet paper named the sellers, whether any Minister knew of the nomination when the paper was approved, whether the Premier, who had opened the preschool ten months earlier, declared an interest or withdrew, or whether the Cabinet Office's register of conflicts holds any entry. What the purchase was measured against is only partly established. The Ministry told TCJ on 19 October that it had looked at building new classrooms on or beside the existing campus, that the "cost for new build was not yet determined" when it chose to buy, that no other site was considered and that the purchase was negotiated rather than advertised; on 21 October it said its value-for-money judgement rested on "recent construction projects undertaken by the Ministry and the cost estimates for projects presently being researched". Mr Anglin MP said on air on 29 October that a project manager's assessment within the Ministry had put the cost of building the same facility at "somewhere around 9, 10, 11 million dollars"; no document has been produced for that figure, and the Ministry has not said when the assessment was made. Those are the questions the Attorney General has now been asked to consider, that the Governor has said she will consider on his advice, that the Auditor General says fall within an audit already under way, and that the Commission says it will monitor. Mr Bush's answer to all of them was the same: "Show me, tell me, tell me, show me."

TCJ's requests of 28 October to the Premier and to Mr Anglin MP, which asked whether the Premier knew Ms Stein was a seller, whether he declared an interest or withdrew, whether he had any contact with her about the sale, and whether Mr Anglin MP took part or made any declaration, were not answered by the 14:00 deadline on 29 October.