Students of politics would fully appreciate the extent to which our system is based on a representative and indirect model that restricts public interaction with Government to neat five-year intervals.
This system has served us well since it allows us to identify a preferred Government, but it does not require that we get too involved in the day-to-day operations of Government that the vast majority of us have little interest in.
We ostensibly make our choice based on competing manifestos, but are also influenced by an unstated understanding of the behavioural traits we would expect of a political party and its leadership based on their pattern of behaviour.
This agreement is reflected in the concept of a “social contract” and while that is often associated with the manifesto, it is becoming clear that this contract embraces other principles.
This emerging concept should perhaps be explored more comprehensively in a scholarly environment.
However, at the more superficial level, it is possible to argue that Barbadians can reasonably expect their Government to attempt to fulfil its manifesto promises.
Moreover, the general tone of our governance should prevail as Government remains loyal to its generally stated philosophical positions which have been endorsed.
In addition, we should expect that our Government would confront and address social and economic issues that we as a country face in a manner that is sufficiently timely so unnecessary damage is caused.
A major component of good governance should also be regular communication with the public (it is understood that this Prime Minister has never agreed with me on this) and it is difficult to see how it should not be intrinsic.
While the concept of communication is itself subject to interpretation, it is equally clear that his communication style has had little impact on us, implying that either the method of communication leaves much to be desired, or the content misses the critical issues.
In this regard, last week’s “suspension” of the Commissioner of Police takes centre stage since we have what appears to be an action of a branch of this Government that in my opinion breaches good governance principles and an attitude regarding the breach which is aggravating.
One is inclined to think that contrary opinions are in the minority as we see this action as an ominous signal of what we are to expect over the next five years.
In the past, the Barbados Labour Party Government acted frequently in ways that were hostile to good governance. However, in all instances there was never an unwillingness to identify politically with such actions, take responsibility and engage with the public, even if afterwards we were told to “cease and settle”.
This approach clearly reflects a different type of governance model than that to which we are accustomed and to which we do not necessarily subscribe.
It is, however, a natural extension of our endorsement of bad habits which presented themselves during the first phase of this administration.
Finally, our potential response to all this is a cause for concern since the legitimate avenues of our expression are slowly being blocked, which is a phenomenon that needs to be explored separately.
Public Accounts Committee hearings and the dismissal of the apparently hostile Press aside, the recent remarks of minister Ronald Jones about “shooting people” and “cracking heads” has taken this Government’s opposition to legitimate objection to another level.
These statements were wrong on so many levels but are especially insidious as he attempted to “de-legitimise” the actions of those brave souls who challenged the status quo in the 1930s, who have subsequently been beatified.
In 1991 Barbadians took to the streets in protest that was legitimate and, to the best of my knowledge the Leader of the Opposition has not yet called for similar action. It would, however, be most unfortunate if this were eventually necessary and met with unnecessary force by the police.
In all of this, the message of the Freundel Stuart administration seems to be that he has won in 2013 and we should suffer (if necessary) in silence until 2018, at which time our sole legitimate expression should be exercised. Needless to say, this makes me very uneasy.
• Peter W. Wickham is a political consultant and a director of Caribbean Development Research Services (CADRES).