No bigworks project gets done without the approval of the prime minister.
A few days ago Dr. Ronnie Yearwood fresh from being reelected President of the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) posted a provocative tweet. To be expected his tweet generated the usual 7-day public discussion.
It is useful Yearwood decided to play his hand on what is regarded as a contentious matter. It is obvious he has been advised to develop a more aggressive perspective on the issues to improve resonance with a politically ‘tone deaf’ public. A different approach by the DLP to entice support from an apathetic and cynical public is required from a DLP struggling for relevance, Yearwood must employ superior leadership qualities to repurpose a political party clinging to the tattered coattail of Errol Barrow as well as surviving in a space where the political oxygen is being controlled by Prime Minister Mottley.
The Yearwood generated discussion about establishing performance metrics for members of parliament is useful. Especially at a time the Parliamentary Reform Commission is soliciting feedback from the public to inform changes. Here is an opportunity for the public to package concerns via a channel created by our form of a democratic system. The issue of determining pension eligibility for members of parliament and remuneration requires dispassionate debate at a time social justice matters have risen to the fore.
It is not surprising the issue about remuneration for members of parliament would have become mired in political rhetoric. Especially with the matter raised by a leader of an opposition struggling for a foothold in the political landscape. No bigworks project gets done without the approval of the prime minister, no important issue gets debated in the country unless sponsored by a member of the political class. It is we culture.
There must be a happy medium for civil society to agree on a satisfactory salary point for members of parliament in a local context. The type of democracy inherited and touted by local talking heads suggest members of parliament should be prioritizing a willingness to serve the public first and foremost. However, if one is careful to listen to messages being sent by the hierarchy of the political class, there is a culture of how local MPs do the job that requires a certain salary to be paid. A retired politician who sits on the Parliamentary Reform Commission described MPs as ‘sugar daddies’. Such an approach to determine a happy medium for MP salaries is flawed.
A more practical approach has to be creating a salary scale for members of parliament that mirrors senior public servant’s given the nexus of roles and responsibilities for achieving good government. The country needs good policy making from members of parliament and good execution by public servants in the interest of a public both are mandated to serve.
The other consideration is that we live in times where a man made political system will be under threat from corrupt players. We should not fool ourselves that avarice is no longer a deadly sin. There is an argument to be made for members of parliament and other key public servants having salaries loaded by an x factor to an agreed salary point. Such an approach would attempt to reduce the risk of members of parliament and top public servants being bribed by succumbing to greed. The approach should be supported by strong enforcement re: fines and imprisonment. A strong message must be sent to the population by our leadership that public servants must be willing to hold themselves accountable.
The idea of establishing KPIs to measure MP performance sounds good in theory but an MP’s job performance is in the main greatly impacted by party support.
Accountability is one of the bedrocks of representative Government, as it provides a check on individuals, once elected, betraying the promises they made during the campaign. An accountable political system is one where both the government and the elected members of parliament are responsible to their constituents to the highest degree possible. On the broader canvas, voters must be able to influence the shape of the government, either by altering the coalition of parties in power or by throwing out of office a single party, which has failed to deliver.
ACE
Dr. Yearwood you have made a decent start to your second campaign, you must keep it up.
The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.