WHENEVER THERE IS a public squabble in a political party in Barbados (and I suspect elsewhere), key operatives are always quick to point out that even in the most close-knit of families, there will be disagreements. I agree 100 per cent.
What they don’t so readily admit, however, is that outsiders tend to stay far from feuding families – and when it is a “political family”, as in the current case of the Barbados Labour Party (BLP), that translates into lost votes.
Given all that has happened in the BLP’s Christ Church West branch, where the dispute supposedly started between MP Dr Maria Agard and her executive committee and has now turned into a full-scale party war, I am sure a significant number of Barbadians now have diminished confidence in the party.
I certainly have lost confidence.
But this entire affair has raised a number of issues for me. The first relates to political party leadership.
I don’t know that there is any room for a dictator at the head of any political party in Barbados in 2015, or that romanticising the leadership styles of past leaders like Errol Barrow, Tom Adams or Owen Arthur serves any useful purpose, but I can’t help but ask which of these leaders would have allowed the tail to wag the dog as has been taking place for more than a month.
Party leader Mia Mottley taking decisive action as the one in charge does not have to translate into meaning that Agard is wrong. What it should mean is that when you are the leader, you are expected to lead. Tell the branch executive what you will stand for and if they don’t accept it, then you act. Tell Agard what you will not accept and then you act. And in both instances, you do so cognisant of what the appropriate “rules” state.
I am of the view that the whole Christ Church West matter is so insignificant that it should never have been allowed to reach this stage. If the leader of the party and the party itself are incapable of dealing with it effectively, then I have real questions about whether either would be able to handle the complex issues that will naturally come with governing the country.
On a scale of one to ten on this matter, if I had to attribute a score to its handling by Mottley so far, it would settle somewhere between three and four. That for me amounts to clear failure.
The second major issue this matter raises for me is that of communications by political leaders. It is no secret that I have a major problem with the fact that Prime Minister Freundel Stuart seldom speaks to the country, and when he does, he invariably does so from a platform where he can’t be questioned.
But that is a Barbadian tradition, with the only exception being the late David Thompson, who demonstrated without doubt that he was not afraid of media scrutiny.
I cannot understand or appreciate how we have established a political modus operandi where the national board of directors of this country, the Cabinet, never reports to its shareholders, the country, on its deliberations. Virtually everything we learn about what the Cabinet discusses comes via a leak.
Any sense that this will change has to come from an Opposition, and more particularly an Opposition leader, who consistently declares by action that there is no aversion to engaging the media.
In this Christ Church West matter, my considered view is that Mottley has failed to demonstrate she is prepared to engage the Press, presumably because to do so would mean she has to respond to questions that might be irritating. You cannot pronounce from the annual conference platform because it insulates you from questioning and then somehow for two weeks remain inaccessible to reporters.
It does not instill confidence. Leadership that is not prepared to be questioned on uncomfortable matters in opposition will only breed leadership that will do likewise in government.
I can’t help but wonder what would happen if the Prime Minister had been a gambler, if he had been given to making bold moves, if he had been of the variety who would call a snap election . . . .
Quite frankly, right now I am not at all impressed.
