Submitted by Yardbroom
Prime Minister David Thompson’s recent cabinet reshuffle; has been remarked upon with some vigour by the opposition party. I could be less charitable and say it was severely criticized, the question which follows was the criticism justified? It is the duty of the opposition to oppose but it is for the electorate to determine if that criticism is substantiated by fact or reasonable.
One criticism was that after only about ten months in office, a cabinet reshuffle should not have been necessary. “Bold” is the Prime Minister who takes decisive action when it is required and does not allow “drift” for the sake of appearance or saving face. It is true that it would not have been necessary to experience drift or save face if the correct decision was made in the first instance.
It would be extremely cavalier of me to suggest that at times oppositions can be seen: “like a cat who loves to soil all that is pure”…I am sure that is not the case here – I will therefore desist from any such suggestion.
A shadow minister can display a high level of expertise and a sureness of touch whilst in opposition but that light of illumination can often offer only a flicker in the red hot furnace of ministerial office and responsibility. Caught in the full public glare of having to make important decisions, the neophyte cabinet minister will return to the Prime Minister repeatedly for support and advice; other ministers will return when the task set has been satisfactorily completed. The latter frees up the Prime Minister’s time for important matters of state, and is quickly seen as a “safe pair of hands”.
I am not of the school of thought which believes repeated criticism make people better…it often does not. A Prime Minister with his finger on the pulse can quickly ascertain which ministers are performing well and therefore the best suited to specific ministries. It is therefore incumbent upon him to act sooner rather than later and take decisive action to “fine tune” his administration.
Unfortunately the opposition at this moment is fighting the last general election, this is a serious tactical mistake. The election has been lost, accept that and put structures in place for the next one; make the case why you should be in Government and not why the DLP should not be…there is a difference, the negative factor.
On another blog a very well informed person has made the case for the opposition, there is some merit in what they had to say but it was repeated criticism of a kind which could so easily be turned on their tenure in office…they would disagree.
Common sense dictates that all said in opposition cannot be instantly achieved In Government. It could also be argued that a different approach and perhaps more dissemination of information might allay specific concerns with this Administration, but I see no reason to doubt the capabilities of this Government.
The only negative factor I see in the future is the issue of “illegal immigration” – it must be solved – they (this Government) might not have caused the present problem but they will get the blame…Governments always do. In an “instant” all they have achieved can disappear; be bold Prime Minister the “responsibility” is yours.
The blogmaster invites you to join and add value to the discussion.