DR DAVID BROWNE, principal of Queen’s College, is reported in his recent lecture as questioning whether Barbadians still had pride in their nation.
He cited their “lack of industry” and work ethic, and wondered whether there was sufficiently strong political will to address problems like escalating crime and violence. I share his concern.
In the same lecture he’s also reported as saying that “Barbados should have moved to become a republic a long time ago . . . it should have been a natural follow on from independence”.
I hope he isn’t implying that becoming a republic would’ve saved us from our present ills. I can’t see how it would’ve helped then or will help now. The monarchy doesn’t get us into trouble; we succeed in doing so all by ourselves.
In fact, being a republic may alienate us from some privileges we have as a result of our association with the monarchy. As a talk show moderator noted recently, becoming a republic will result in no change except a removal of “Royal” from the Royal Barbados Police Force (and “Her Majesty” from the prison) and new public service stationery, since the same group of people who presently govern us will no doubt be involved. Will their ability to govern suddenly improve?
On the same topic, I must commend Government for not nominating anyone for the Queen’s Birthday Honours this year. They at least showed some principle, since it would’ve been the height of hypocrisy to accept these honours when Prime Minister Stuart reportedly said last year he wants Barbados to become a republic, with a ceremonial president in 2016, the 50th anniversary year of its independence. Apparently the Prime Minister found it “awkward in the year 2015 to have to stand up and pledge allegiance to Her Majesty the Queen”.
It’s ironic, though, that while we’re harping on “getting rid of the Queen” who doesn’t butt into our affairs, we seem to want to direct how Britain is to conduct its affairs. Some are highly upset by Britain’s decision to leave the European Union, no doubt for the selfish reason that it may have some unpalatable repercussions for us.
But the time spent on all this republic talk would be better spent trying to find a workable system of governance, but I suppose no one wants to give up the seemingly lucrative “party system”. This party “cancer” also spreads its tentacles into the public service where it’s even more dangerous, for while the politicos “come and go”, these public officers are here until they die or retire.
A caller to Brass Tacks suggested that the purpose of life of each human being must be to be able to extract the maximum satisfaction from their lives; they must have adequate opportunity to acquire and make efficient use of resources while at the same time have the security of knowing that these resources won’t be taken from them. She noted, however, that in doing this, it was necessary to give up some individual choices and freedom to have an organised society with some rules and managed by government.
But, she went on to say, the public cannot surrender the protection of our resources to 30 people in Parliament and that there must be “civil engagement”. I assume she means that the public must monitor what’s happening, ask the questions that need to be asked and demand answers.
In short, we need a governance system that legislates accountability. Failure to provide answers in a prescribed time on issues like the illegal importation of chicken wings, the alleged Cahill agreement and the disappearance of money from the Central Bank’s vault, must be punishable by law. Not to mention, of course, all the questionable occurrences recorded by the auditor general on an annual basis.
Another suggestion was to have all independent members of Parliament who would vote by their conscience, but the campaign cost was seen as an issue. I don’t see why campaigns must be so expensive if the candidates are people with a known track record for being honest and effective. I believe Grenville Phillips expressed a similar view. But here again, we’re too entrenched in party politics to appreciate the benefits to be gained from such a system.
Finally, at the risk of ruffling Minister Inniss’ feathers, I ask again for a concise response from the authorities on the “illegal chicken wing issue”.
• Dr Frances Chandler is a former Independent senator. Email: fchandler@caribsurf.com