The unanimity and speed with which the normally divided Parliament of Barbados agreed to step back from the “Anti-Corruption Bill” was amazing but not unexpected.
It confirmed the generally accepted view that there exists little political will among the political class, across the political divide, to pass integrity legislation.
Indeed, from very early in the life of the current administration, there were clear signs that the party had bitten off more than it could chew with its election “grand charge” to introduce integrity legislation. The first sign of backtracking came from the late Prime Minister David Thompson himself, who, using Trinidad as his example, suggested that any requirement to declare assets, would militate against good persons coming forward to serve on public boards, due to the need to protect their privacy. That was like saying that we should lower the entry requirements for the police force, since the high standards would reduce the number of persons available for police duty.
Interestingly, the experience of St Lucia and other jurisdictions which have functioning Integrity in Public Life Acts, that require public officials above certain grades to make annual declarations of assets to the Integrity Commission, was conveniently ignored.
The move to send the bill to a joint Select Committee was led by the Deputy Leader of the Opposition, Dale Marshall, a former Attorney General of Barbados. Instead of demanding greater restrictions and prohibitions from the Bill, Marshall was to complain that “by putting such an imposition on members of the public, whom we invite to serve this country what we are doing is removing from them any motivation so to do”.
Adding insult to injury, Marshall brazenly admitted that “in appointing boards we don’t just try to find people who are fit for the post, but it is also an opportunity to give a little recognition for hard work for people who have supported our political cause”.
Mr Marshall, please, it is precisely because of the political intimacy between those who serve on boards and the political parties, that stringent integrity safeguards are required!
Centuries ago, Plato had advised that public life should be made as unattractive as possible to ensure that only those with the highest integrity would come forward to serve.
In other words, by removing material inducements and by making public service unpleasant, this would ensure that only the most honest, genuine, and selfless would have the mettle for public life. Con men and charlatans would move to more private, greener pastures.
Both parties missed the point. The tenor and eventual outcome of the debate on the anti-corruption Bill showed clearly, that Barbados has miles to travel before it can earn its claim to being a model democracy.
Thankfully, the mask is now off.
Tennyson Joseph is a political scientist at the University of the West Indies Cave Hill Campus specializing in analysis of regional affairs.
