Councillor Lelon Saul’s AI-generated drivel

Dear Editor,
Kindly permit me space to respond to Councillor Lelon Saul’s letter dated March 29, 2025.
I’d like to begin with perhaps the most revealing aspect of his missive – Councillor Saul could not even be bothered to write it himself. Instead, he outsourced his argument to AI. In other words, his supposed heartfelt plea about economic suffering and ethical governance was outsourced to a chatbot. It is perhaps why his missive reads like a shallow imitation of genuine civic concern and is completely divorced from anything resembling legal reality or administrative competence. If you are going to criticise policy publicly, at the very least, have the decency – and the spine – to write your own arguments. But perhaps it is fitting: a synthetic letter for a synthetic argument.
Saul begins by arguing that the situation is “…much more nuanced and the M&CC’s decision was ethically right…” Editor, how can it ever be ethical to seize powers the law never gave you? For one to claim integrity or justice when grasping for powers not entrusted to them in the law is the very definition of hypocrisy. Chapter 28:01 (The Municipal and District Councils Act) unequivocally states that the Council is required to seek ministerial approval before taking steps such as waiving interest on rates. This is not a question of nuance – it is a question of transparency and accountability.
Councillor Saul’s moral grandstanding notwithstanding, it is important to be clear: Georgetown is not in the midst of a humanitarian catastrophe – residents are not being dragged out of their homes or forced to shutter businesses en masse because of unpaid general rates. Saul’s grandstanding, therefore, is a strawman built to justify lawlessness. The Council could have applied for ministerial approval for a waiver program, as provided for in law. Instead, they opted for political theatre – choosing to use the citizens of Georgetown as pawns in their ill-conceived scheme.
Saul goes on to cite international examples of tax relief – as if that somehow justifies the M&CC’s illegal actions. But this is a false equivalency. It is true – many governments around the world, including ours, offer relief, but those programs are designed and implemented within a legal framework. What Councillor Saul is proposing is akin to a bank teller deciding to forgive loans, and then claiming alignment with ‘best practices in the finance industry.’ It is delusional.
Editor, I am convinced that the goal here was not to protect the most vulnerable – it was to score political points. No amount of AI-generated drivel can justify their blatant disregard for transparency and accountability. Georgetown deserves leadership with courage, yes – but also with competence, legality and the humility to follow due process.

Sincerely,
Alfonso De Armas
PPP/C Councillor