BARBADOS IS ABOUT to witness a political hurricane.
It’s not a case of if it will strike, but when.
I speak of the Democratic Labour Party’s (DLP) closed-door meeting last Sunday, the theme of which was Oiling The Party Machinery.
As many as 200 people, including all DLP members of Parliament and senators reportedly examined the party’s readiness for the next general election constitutionally due in 2013.
My initial reaction was, why the hurry? What is Prime Minister Freundel Stuart up to? Is he planning to go to the electorate soon?
If this were the purpose of the meeting, I reasoned that at last Stuart had recognized the wisdom of the advice freely given to him to call an early poll.
I suggested Stuart do this as a way of strengthening his hand against his opponents within the party.
The move would also allow him enough time to take tough, unpopular decisions in the interest of the country so as to overcome this recessionary period, but sufficient time for the measures to work.
I waited impatiently for Stuart to speak about this meeting. I, like all of you, heard nothing. We didn’t hear from any of the Cabinet ministers either. Instead political strategist Hartley Henry spoke.
Later that day Henry also spoke at the St Joseph branch meeting, and on Monday was the one dismissing Opposition Leader Owen Arthur’s challenge to the Dems to call an early poll.
Why was Henry talking? Stuart should have been the one speaking. So why was he silent?
It was confirmed for me that the Prime Minister was not at that Dems meeting. It seems he did not return from the Heads of Government conference in Grenada in time. Really?
How can a political party hold an election strategy retreat with its leader absent? It leaves one to ask if he was integral to the meeting in the first place. And if he wasn’t, why not?
The dates for the CARICOM conference were known for months, so why schedule such an important political gathering that weekend?
Surely, for the purposes of being properly rested and prepared to tackle the issues raised at this meeting, it would have been better to push the retreat back. Surely if David Thompson were alive, such a significant meeting would not have been held without him.
Stuart’s silence
This raises the question again of Stuart’s leadership. His silence on the economy and the strategy for the way forward has been deafening; his acceptance of Thompson’s deathbed appointed Cabinet is unheard of; and his seeming aloofness from active engagement in the day to day matters affecting the average person do not portray him in a positive light.
On the other hand, the image of Thompson’s known favourite Chris Sinckler, continues to improve, and he is rapidly gaining a reputation for dealing with the issues – the latest being the Jubilee Juice matter.
In this fuzzy situation, Henry, the man who declared that the kingmaker dies with the king, re-emerges.
Who gave him permission to speak and on whose authority does he speak?
Could it be Henry is back because another political monarch has been identified? Or could his return be a signal that the strategy developed by Thompson is considered the best option for the party if they hope to win a second term? And if so, is Stuart part of this process or irrelevant to it?
I don’t have the answers, but what I do know is that nature abhors a vacuum and politics is about timing, tactics and opportunity. Stuart’s procrastination or reluctance to act decisively to place his stamp on the Government and party has allowed others to be seen as an alternative.
