#BTEditorial – Taking care of business at home and abroad

Opposition politics can be the best of times, but it can also be the worst of times for any political group seeking to unseat an incumbent.

As we in Barbados have come to appreciate, opposition politicians can be most robust in their attacks on the party in office. They really have nothing to lose and all to gain. Their aim is to highlight as many faults as possible of the ruling administration and possibly give the electorate pause, to perhaps engage in buyers’ remorse.

When Prime Minister Mia Amor Mottley was Leader of the Opposition, her party kept the government led by the late David Thompson and his successor Freundel Stuart on its toes. Some suggested that the blunders-filled former administration made it easy for the opposition party as the country moved from one economic and social crisis to another.

The opposition led marches on the streets, walk-outs from Parliament, no confidence motions, toe-to-toe Budget debates, and press conferences. The opposition conducted a master class in how to unseat a government and it culminated in a record clean sweep at the polls, not once, but on two successive occasions.

With all opposition parties defeated, resulting in an embarrassment of riches on the government’s side, there is no opposition party in Parliament on which to deflect criticism, and so every move of the government is being carefully analysed by a discerning electorate and pounced on by an opposition party trying to find its footing again after being decimated during the last two general elections.

New leader of the Democratic Labour Party, Dr Ronnie Yearwood, has rolled out an opposition response to the Mottley administration, that quite frankly, mirrors that of the BLP from which he came.

He is engaging the public frequently, not letting any opportunity slide that would highlight areas of perceived weakness in the administration’s process of governing.

The leading opposition party has raised an interesting area of criticism of which we are yet to know the true impact. Yearwood’s team has fixed its attention on the amount of travel that the Prime Minister has been undertaking. There has been swift and forthright defences to the broadsides. They have come from Minister of the Environment Adrian Forde in the House of Assembly, from Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, Senior Minister Kerrie Symmonds, and from the political leader herself.

Such a line of criticism, in normal times, would have been a chink in the armour  of the administration, but it is difficult to see how effective such a jab will be when there are tangibles that the political leader can show for her world travels. Among the stops in recent days have been London, New York, Egypt, Rwanda, and South Africa.

So far, the defence looks pretty strong. The list of benefits to the country include fortified diplomatic alliances, airlift agreements, access to millions of dollars in climate financing and grants, and the possibility of thousands of jobs from a pharmaceutical manufacturing complex being established here.

Prime Minister Mottley has undeniably become a world figure and leaders from around the globe, non-governmental organisations, academics, and thought leaders are paying close attention to what she has to say. It would be difficult for people outside Barbados to reconcile local criticism of her overseas travel when she is being treated with such high regard by the rest of the world. Graca Machel, widow of the late, great Nelson Mandela spoke of Mottley with nothing but adoration.

To have Barbados’ Prime Minister being treated like a “rock star” for her intelligent and forthright conversations with the rest of the world, while being decried at home, would appear petty. The criticism also comes at a time when Jamaica’s oldest and most respected daily newspaper, The Gleaner, called for Mottley to be nominated by the Caribbean Community and a serious campaign be launched to have her elected as the next secretary general of the United Nations.

In all this, we must remember that the Prime Minister is a politician whose office is dependent on the favour of the electorate. So, unless the political leader is viewed as not taking care of business at home, it will be difficult to use excessive travel as an effective source of condemnation that will sway an electorate at this time.