What is the role and responsibility of a Cabinet Minister?
Barbados’ parliamentary system of governance gives the Prime Minister the authority to change Cabinet Ministers.
In many instances, there is no direct correlation between the skills, experience and track record of the appointed minister and the perceived requirements of the portfolio. Consequently, the actual management of the portfolio falls to senior public servants, who have not been elected.
This is not to cast aspersions on the senior public officials but it does raise questions about accountability and perceptions of access. I recently heard a story, the veracity I cannot confirm but it makes a point.
It spoke of a minister being asked at a public meeting about the government’s policy on an important matter within his portfolio. The minister said he would like to consult with his senior officials before answering. When he spoke to the Permanent Secretary, he was told that the policy was to have no policy. Shades of Yes Minister.
Contrast this scenario to the rigorous scrutiny applied to cabinet-level positions in the United States. Truthfully, the process can be rancorous, protracted and extremely partisan but the discussion of the candidates’ qualifications and how they apply to the challenges of the portfolio and the promises made by the government; is fulsome and thorough.
I am certainly not suggesting that this leads to perfect outcomes or to perfect ministers; political nuances are always in play. Nor am I suggesting that Barbados’ governance model should be changed to the American one.
What I am suggesting is that the perennial complaints about failed promises and poor implementation can be laid at the doorstep of this clear mismatch between a minister’s capabilities and portfolio requirements.
This phenomenon is not restricted to the public sector but its effects are apparent in crucial areas. In this context, it is easy to understand why true public sector reform has, so far, been impossible to implement.
In a recent discussion among concerned Barbadians, there was genuine scepticism that our present approach can yield the leadership and innovation required to make Barbados globally competitive and allow its people to prosper. The thrust of the argument is that the middle class is too comfortable to demand or tolerate transformational change.
To them, there is no crisis.
It is reminiscent of advice on how to boil a live frog; if you put the frog in water of a comfortable temperature, it will savour it and not notice when the heat is increased to the fatal boiling point. Try to put the same frog into water that is already boiling, it will jump away.
There are also those who contend that people now holding political office are primarily concerned with getting re-elected and qualifying for pension. I don’t believe that.
These dynamics do pose a serious challenge to us all. I am concerned that the manifestos and subsequent pronouncements fail to acknowledge the urgent need for a change in governance. I am encouraged by the number of talented persons in public service who are chafing at this litany of “progress blockers”.
I also see some very promising people in elected positions in both parties.
The antidote to the “Yes Minister” scenario is that the politicians have the power and responsibility to legislate for the good of us all.
Each of us has a part to play.
