Recently Prime Minister David Thompson held a meeting at Sherbourne where he gathered all of the CEOs and others appointed to Statutory Corporations. One of the key messages he stressed to those gathered was to appreciate that as political appointees they should make their resignations available to any new government entering office. This argument has gained currency in light of the Thompson led government having to dislodge some appointees to Statutory Boards on ascending office in January 2008. Off the top we can recall that Al Gilkes at the Natural Cultural Foundation was hesitant to tender his resignation along with a few others.
Historically as governments change they would insert their loyal party members to Statutory Boards and quasi-statutory jobs. The debate continues whether this is a smart move or is it self-defeating if we consider the national interest i.e. the country not accessing the best available resources. There was a time the BU household felt that the party hacks should be rewarded for their support. Increasingly of late we are siding with the view that all government appointees should resign but the government of the day should consider reappointing those who are generally felt to have done a good job, whether B or D.
The Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley has been quick to condemn the move by Prime Minister Thompson to ask political appointees to submit their resignation when a new government enters office. Here is a press release issued by Miss Mottley which outlines her position:
PRESS STATEMENT BY THE HON. MIA AMOR MOTTLEY
Leader of the Opposition
Political Leader, Barbados Labour Party
Earlier this week, Prime Minister, the Honourable David Thompson indicated that all new contracts to CEOs of statutory corporations in his Government would be bound by a clause to resign within 3 months of a change of Government.
We oppose this policy as self-defeating. This is a backward step particularly given the Prime Minister’s comments on January 20th, 2008 at Kensington Oval. On that occasion, he declared that there would be no night of long knives and that the country should rise above partisan politics and should unite.
Firstly, this move reduces the pool of competent Barbadians who will come forward and be willing to serve as there is no security for them given the flexibility our system affords for the calling of a General Election.
Secondly, there is the risk of labeling persons who are appointed for their competence and qualifications as automatically supporting the Political Party in Government who appointed them.
Thirdly, this is a dangerous precedent that achieves nothing more than the polarization of politics in Barbados in a way that has not been part of our culture and in a way that will have consequences that will reinforce political tribalism. In this instance, Barbados and Barbadians will be the loser.
I would like on behalf of the Barbados Labour Party to state categorically that we will not support any such policy. Further, that we do not believe that persons who have been appointed by a previous administration should be dismissed other than for cause. Any future BLP Government will not seek to dismiss other than for cause and will appoint persons in these positions based on qualifications, experience, record and potential.
In any event, I fundamentally believe to dismiss someone because of whom they support politically is wrong. I have never supported this type of action since coming into public life. It runs counter to the Constitutional right afforded to Barbadians for freedom of association. It is also for this reason that we have consistently over the last few months spoken out against the numerous unwarranted dismissals that have taken on the character of a Witch Hunt.
We call on Barbadians to publicly reject this policy and to let the Prime Minister know that he ought to be securing the rights of individuals, not seeking to restrict their employment opportunities.
26th July, 2008
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.