IN THE the midst of the most tragic criminal act on Barbadian soil in my lifetime, the absence of the Prime Minister’s voice and face sent a cold message of reality that speaks to the frailty of man.
There is perhaps nothing more appealing to the politician than the moment, and when the moment is allowed to pass without being grabbed, it signals either failure or lack of appetite.
It is inconceivable to even contemplate of a healthy David Thompson not using such an opportunity to empathise, not by way of a bland Press release, but through a visual expression of sorrow transmitting compassion, sympathy and regret.
These are some of the qualities that define leaders in moments of tragedy.
That much maligned United States president George Bush best demonstrated those particular qualities on September 14, 2001, when he took to Ground Zero with a bullhorn in the aftermath of the worst terrorist act on American soil and seized a moment which touched a raw nerve among an angry people.
President Bush: I want you all to know – it [bullhorn] can’t go any louder – I want you all to know that America today, America today is on bended knee, in prayer for the people whose lives were lost here, for the workers who work here, for the families who mourn. The nation stands with the good people of New York City and New Jersey and Connecticut as we mourn the loss of thousands of our citizens . . . .
Rescue Worker: I can’t hear you!
President Bush: I can hear you! I can hear you! The rest of the world hears you! And the people – and the people who knocked these buildings down will hear all of us soon!
One commentator, admiring Bush’s rhetoric, observed: “At the moment he says ‘I can hear you’, he seems to ignite patriotic passions in the hearts of the onlookers, kick-starting an outpouring of emotion. Seizing the moment, Bush repeats the phrase and then expands on it, rising to a climax as he vows revenge against the perpetrators. That sparks off a frenzy of baying from the crowd.”
In an emotionally charged atmosphere, Attorney General Freundel Stuart spoke of the values of Barbadians being threatened, which seemed a thoroughly inappropriate philosophical response to a heartfelt matter of unprecedented proportions.
Indeed, it took the passionate words of former Prime Minister Owen Arthur to capture the magnitude of a widespread grief that swept the nation and a fitting call for a day of mourning.
This was followed by the Prime Minister’s request, and seeming reaction, to all Barbadians to observe three minutes of silence at midday last Friday.
The failure to address this tragedy immediately, and in person, raised serious concerns about the true state of the Prime Minister’s health as it was a prime opportunity for him to demonstrate that he was truly back and “in charge”.
It was subsequently learnt that the Prime Minister might have been having some health challenges at the time, which demanded an urgent return to the United States within less than four days of the Tudor Street tragedy.
This goes to the sensitive issue that the position of Prime Minister demands a state of readiness that is betrayed if the health of the holder of the post is compromised.
As expected, this most recent episode raised issues that Barbadians are quietly concerned about but as a self-described Christian people find some difficulty in expressing becauseof their fear of repercussions.
In the circumstances, media practitioners are put on tenterhooks as genuine inquiries into the health of the Prime Minister and, by extension the state of his Cabinet, may be seen as an intrusion into his privacy.
Thus far, the handling of the entire trying journey has been a public relations disaster as an outpouring of concern, affection and goodwill is in serious danger of changing in a heartbeat to anxiety and outrage.
If the public thought that Thompson was back and “in charge”, it immediately doubted the assertion once he did not lend at least his voice to the recent tragedy.
It is said that nature abhors a vacuum and as such it is not surprising that Barbadians have been filling the vacuum left by the poor public relations with their versions of recent events.
This Government, almost nightly, has been using the state-run CBC TV as another arm of the ruling Democratic Labour Party (DLP), and one is therefore left to wonder why the Prime Minister chose not to control his message in his recent call from the United States.
The use of the Government radio station – instead of the privately-owned Starcom Network – would have allowed him to control his message and at the same time avoid having to pass on the responsibility to speak to his health to his doctor.
It once again appeared evasive.
No one can, or should, question whether Thompson cares about his people, but he is seriously compromised as his state of health does not allow him to be truly back and “in charge”.
It may be hard for him to accept, but it is best for him to accept that reality.
There is an old Barbadian saying that “it is best to work out rather than rust out” – but this does not apply to the job of Prime Minister which is loaded with physical, intellectual and stress demands, the last of which may be the greatest.
It is an extraordinary job that requires extraordinary health.
In his most recent public discourse, the Prime Minister suggested there is a fear that revelationof his health status could have implications for the social, economic and political fabric of the country.
While this may most certainly be so, it is equally true that the treatment of his health status may have already had implications, which if not quickly addressed could be lasting.
The country is said to be in its worst recession, and to this day, the voice of a genuine Minister of Finance has not been heard.
If it is truly the worst recession, then it is reasonable to expect timely leadership of the economy as it is equally true that “good men cannot sleep while Rome burns”.
No one should doubt that Prime Minister Thompson has good intentions, but the time is quickly approaching when he may have to ask the very difficult question: am I in the condition to give the country the full attention it desires in these very trying times?
The answer will require him to search his soul in putting country before self. It is a difficult period with which we all can empathise.
In every sense, the road ahead is going to be difficult and it is compounded by the tremendous uncertainty surrounding the Prime Minister’s health.
Whether he reveals the nature of his illness is not as critical as the impact of his illness on his capacity to do the job of Prime Minister.
Barbadians have already demonstrated their empathy and their patience; the ball really is in the court of the Prime Minister to level with his conscience and do what is best for the country and, consequently, for himself.
In all of this, he has perhaps rightly suggested that the provision ultimately comes from God.
