I have always parroted the notion that ‘a picture is worth a thousand words’. I guess I never had reason to question the adage until last week when two sworn enemies were seen in warm embrace. I consulted a few people to get their take on the imagery, and interestingly each individual dismissed the contrived photo as “foolishness”, “a set up’ or “mere politicking”.
Of course I refer here to the photograph of Opposition Leader Mia Mottley and then estranged BLP Parliamentarian, Owen Arthur hugging each other at a Barbados Labour Party meeting two Sundays ago. This was then followed by their sharing a public political platform one week later.
Of course, the question has been asked in recent times why it is that I have been focusing on the obvious and known feud between these two, rather than promoting the policies of the government. The answer is simple. The Prime Minister of Barbados has developed a relationship with the people of Barbados where he speaks with them directly. He does not need a third person to communicate his thoughts and feelings to the Barbadian public.
Prime Minister Thompson has established a format for quarterly live press conferences and occasional post-Cabinet press briefings. Additionally, he is probably one of the most media-accessible Prime Ministers in the world. Every cub reporter in Barbados has Mr. Thompson’s email address, home number, office number and cell phone number. Also, he is a text-a-holic. So anybody who wants to know anything about what is going on in government or indeed in the country, needs only to text or email the Prime Minister and he deals with them direct.
The Prime Minister is also an excellent communicator. Therefore when he speaks, the average man understands clearly what is intended. Whether you agree with Mr. Thompson or not, you know where he stands on issues. Therefore, mine is not the task of regurgitating his every utterance. The same can be said for most ministers in the current Democratic Labour Party administration. They are growing in their respective jobs and have been doing a fantastic job of briefing the country on the goings on in their varied and various fields of endeavour.
What I see as crucial at this time, is the need to interpret and explain some of the not so lucid happenings and manoeuvres on the political scene.
The Democratic Labour Party is in office and is clearly consumed at this time with managing the affairs of state. They have been dealt a rather challenging hand and therefore all resources are cued in on the need to steady and navigate the social and economic ship of state.
The time will come for politically driven manoeuvres, but at this point the focus is on managing the affairs of state to one’s best ability, under the very trying circumstances.
This hiatus in inter-party political activity gives one the glorious opportunity to observe and reflect on the goings on elsewhere and that explains the seeming fixation with what is going on in the Barbados Labour Party. It brings us back therefore to the question of that choreographed photograph. Some readers recall my suggesting the strategic merit in such a few weeks ago, but I honestly do not take credit. I believe praise is due to former BLP stalwarts Lionel Craig and Clyde Griffith.
Their intervention and rather terse remarks in relation to Owen Arthur and his diminished standing in the Barbados Labour Party would have served as the proverbial wake up call for the St. Peter M.P to recognize the failings of his game plan. Arthur has for the past six months been signalling his intention to make a political comeback. He went public with his views as they relate to the suitability of Mia Mottley to lead the BLP and the country. I believed then, as I do now, that Arthur was speaking from the heart. He echoed the views of thousands of Barbadians and many credited him for his honesty and forthrightness.
The problem is that this public “dressing down” did not go down well with many party insiders. It was fundamentally at variance with how they perceive such internal party matters ought to be handled. Therefore, while what Arthur said about the leadership of Mottley resonated across the country, it did not sit well with the movers and shakers of the party. That uneasiness was articulated by Craig and Griffith.
Arthur clearly got the message. He therefore changed his game plan. While he has ‘crossed the rubicon’ in respect of his attitude to the leadership of Mia Mottley, he has found it necessary nonetheless, to worm his way back into the hearts and the consideration of the party hierarchy, and that explains his recent public posturing in terms of turning up and speaking his heart out for and behalf of the party.
Note carefully that Arthur has not once retracted anything he said in relation to the leadership of Mia Mottley. What he is saying now is that the party has to rally as one to oust the incumbent administration.
It is important also that he has gotten involved in the candidate selection process. Mottley was craftily sneaking a number of “Mia boys” and “Mia girls” onto the slate of candidates but now we see the re-emergence of Arthur’s hand and influence in that process. It explains the resurrection of Kerrie Symmonds, the seeming shift in allegiance of Santia Bradshaw and the nomination of Joseph Atherley in St. Michael West. It will also explain a few other interesting political developments in the weeks ahead.
Worthy of note also is that Mottley was given six months to “strut her stuff, politically” or face another vote of confidence. That six month probationary period is drawing nigh. Thus she has to portray an image of unity and a common sense of purpose. And that explains the furor over the alleged incident in the precincts of parliament. They know that is a non issue. For as long as I have been going to the House of Assembly, and that now is close to 30 years, Members on both sides of the chamber have been carrying their little leather clutches, or their ankle and waist holsters. If we are saying the time is right for us to review this freedom, then let us do it. There is no partisan divide on that. But I have a difficulty with this constant hypocrisy of setting oneself up as holier than thou.
I however understand the need to create and sustain an issue that has the potential for at least optically uniting the opposition. If Mia Mottley cannot get Arthur to support her leadership then at least, I get the impression she is willing to settle for him coming on board to support her call for the banning of firearms in Parliament. Similarly, Arthur needs this opportunity to worm his way back into the good books of the party’s hierarchy so that down the road, in about nine months, when he makes his move for the leadership, dissenting voices would be but few.
I am sorry, Dear Reader, but this is politics. It has a way of making strange bedfellows and very often, in this business, as you would have just discovered, a picture is sometimes worth much, much more than a thousand words.
Hartley Henry is a Regional Political Strategist. He can be reached at hartleyhenry@gmail.com
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.