The Importance Of Integrity In Public Life, Moving to Stage II

Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart

There is a rising concern about the level of integrity demonstrated by people in high office in Barbados. Such concern is usually targeted at government officials. Not since the late Rt. Hon. J.M.G.M “Tom” Adams, Q.C., M.P failed to enact integrity legislation in the 70s  have we had a Prime Minister who has demonstrated the testicular fortitude to put Transparency Legislation on the statute books.  The Honourable Prime Minister Fruendel Stuart Q.C, M.P maybe the man to do it.

When the Prime Minister announced recently that the Prevention Against Corruption Bill is coming, it caused the political cynics to snigger. BU believes Stuart is serious about delivering the legislation. This is a man who exudes honesty and integrity when compared to his parliamentary colleagues.  He appears to be the type of man who will do what is right and let the chips fall way they may. His biggest challenge maybe within his own team and he will therefore have to drag a few kicking and screaming to the party.

If Stuart can operationalize Transparency Legislation in Barbados – win, lose or draw come general election time, he will command a special place when political history is recorded. However, there is another matter which he needs to put to bed to reinforce the perception that he is a man of integrity. He must inflict Stage II on the Alexandra matter.

Now that the hysteria associated with the Alexandra impasse has subsided, it is time for rational analysis to rise to the fore. BU was chastised for sitting on the fence when we did not throw full support behind headmaster Jeff Broomes. Our position is simple, as headmaster responsible for the administration of the school he did not ‘manage’ the situation effectively. Consequently under his stewardship the reputation of the St. Peter  institution was dented.

There is the the flip side of the issue.

On BU we pride ourselves in distilling issues especially the legal component. There is a strong view in the legal fraternity that no legitimate industrial action should have been taken by the BSTU because Jeff Broomes did not violate the terms of employment of the teachers and therefore there was no grounds for industrial action.

The BSTU took strike action on the grounds that it wanted Broomes removed which, unless Mr Broome had broken the terms of his own employment, did not make sense. In summary if Broomes had not broken his own terms of employment or the terms of employment of the teachers the BSTU was not within its rights to take industrial action. The teachers by striking were the ones to breach.

The legal argument however does not negate the sympathy which many have for the teachers in what turned out to be a black eye for the school. Barbadians continue to wait for Prime Minister Stuart to put the icing on the Alexandra cake. It is a matter of integrity.

  • Observing (not to be confused with Observer)

    @David
    The DLP hasn’t used the words “transparency legislation” and FS was pointed in mentioning PoC and IL as opposed to the additional FoI. I’m curious as to whether they intend to bring both… Did the original PoC bill mention anything about FoI??

    Like

  • @BU.David: “Maybe wrongly so but whenever mention is made of ‘transparency legislation’ it is meant to include both FOI and I’ll.

    Careful David. You are dealing with lawyers here, who are artists with language…

    Please remember that the fundamental point of Freedom of Information is everything produced using public funds should be publicly known.

    Every “first world” democracy has a form of FOI.

    Barbados claims to be a democracy, and aspires to be “first world”.

    Thus, I would argue there is something a bit weird about the fact that Barbados does not yet have a FOIA on the books….

    Like

  • @Observing

    The comment was in the context of BU commentary on the matter.

    @Chris

    Agree with you. The obvious corporate governance deficit exposed by CLICO makes transparency legislation (PoC and FOI a priority. What harm can it do? We cannot have business as usual.

    Like

  • Observing (not to be confused with Observer)

    @David
    noted

    A lot is riding on its implementation though. Going to election without it would be political suicide. Well, more than has already been committed.

    Like

  • @BU.David: “What harm can it do?

    To the electorate, none. In fact, there can only be upside.

    To those who “feed at the trough”, on the other hand, it can change “business as usual”.

    Want to guess who are in control of passing such legislation?

    Like

  • Can,t wait to see some heads roll when the FOI is implemented.

    Like

  • Random Thoughts

    Chris Halsall asked “Want to guess who are in control of passing such legislation?”

    My response: Those who feed greedily at the public trough?

    Like

  • a special place what… please … he is killing us with his non-performance adacemic nonsense … please …. It is possible to be so smart you end up stupid.

    Like

Join in the discussion, you never know how expressing your view may make a difference.

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s