#BTColumn – Leaving our colonial past behind

Disclaimer: The views and opinions expressed by this author are their own and do not represent the official position of the Barbados Today.

by Donna Every

The words “leaving our colonial past behind” have generated a lot of discussion since they were voiced in the Throne Speech last week, both locally and globally. In this article, I will share my own observations, concerns and suggestions about some of the aspects of the Throne Speech.

But first, I want to thank all of you who emailed me, WhatsApped me, hailed me up in the supermarket or mentioned me in your column to share your solidarity concerning the prepayment of personal income tax.

I wrote a letter to the Commissioner of Inland Revenue about it and I am pleased to say that she responded to me the same day to acknowledge it and to let me know that she has a lot of issues she is also dealing with (not surprisingly) but she will get to mine. Let us hope that my suggestions can be implemented. Kudos to her for bringing her private sector approach to the public sector.

The day that the Throne Speech was published I was up at two o’clock in the morning and decided to read all 50-something pages of it. It was full of promises for the future, almost like a manifesto, many of which were innovative and visionary.

What surprised me though was the announcement, in that forum, that Barbados would be a republic by November next year. Considering how many press conferences and addresses to the nation we have had in the two years since this administration has come into power, I would have more expected this to be announced in an address to the nation, although it can be argued that the Throne Speech is an address to the nation. Although I am in favour of the Republic, I found the way it was announced to be a bit presumptuous.

Having said that, I hope that the government will use the wonderful communication mechanisms (such as were used with COVID and the travel protocols) to educate the public about what a Republic is and what we can expect to see as a result of the change.

It is good to know that we are to have Parliamentary reform as we leave our colonial past behind, so I hope that means we will also leave the Westminster system that we have inherited and embrace a new system of governance and a new system to elect officials to run the country.

I would love to see the existing divisive party system abolished and instead, independent people run for a seat in Parliament and be elected on the basis of their contribution to the nation and not because they belong to a particular political party.

In the same way a leader would be elected, not because they lead a party, but because the people deem them to be the best leader for the country. I couldn’t help but notice the mention of a Green Energy Park in Vaucluse which will generate 30 megawatts of energy. I looked up what green energy is, and I was happy to see that green energy sources include wind, geothermal, hydro and solar energy.

I’m therefore hoping that means government is planning to construct a huge photovoltaic farm at Vaucluse, using the sunshine we have in abundance, to fuel this Green Energy Park and that it’s not a misnomer for the waste to energy plant that was mentioned in Parliament a few months ago that was planned for Vaucluse.

I was also happy to see the government committing to pursuing the Integrity in Public Life legislation in the new parliamentary term and this time I hope that the legislation addresses some of the issues that were lacking in the last act and also that the laws are changed to allow voting via Zoom or some other virtual platform so that the senate is not in a position again where there is not a majority present to pass the law.

As I said, I thought there were many great initiatives in the Throne Speech, but I also found some strange contradictions in it. On the one hand, Barbados was said to be described as “the best governed Black society in the world.”

Yet, we were told later that “Barbados is now increasingly finding itself on international lists, including within the multilateral system, which identify us as having a poor human rights record.” How is it that we can be the best governed Black society and have a poor human rights record? Can they be mutually exclusive?

I fully understand that the government finds itself between a rock and a hard place, as I wrote in one of my earlier articles. There is a need to preserve the standard of living in the nation while recognizing that although we call ourselves independent, we are not truly independent. That was articulated under the section Making Hard Decisions this way:

“Barbados does not conduct business, trade with itself or give itself loan funding. In some cases, our human rights record, when viewed against modern international standards, impacts these other issues and how we are viewed amongst the global family of nations.

“On this matter, the world has spoken. If we wish to be considered amongst the progressive nations of the world, Barbados cannot afford to lose its international leadership place and reputation. Nor can a society as tolerant as ours, allow itself to be ‘blacklisted’ for human and civil rights abuses or discrimination on the matter of how we treat to human sexuality and relations. My Government will do the right thing, understanding that this too will attract controversy.”

Yet, it is some of these progressive nations that have not been able to adequately cope with the COVID-19 pandemic, that tolerate systemic racism, that abuse civil rights and discriminate on the basis of colour and that have exploited our nations in the past and continue to do so through coercion and the threat of “blacklisting”. These are the progressive nations that we want to accede to? Are we really leaving our colonial past behind only to embrace a new form of colonialism where these so-called progressive nations seek to dictate to us what we must do?

Brittany Kühn in her essay “Universal Human Rights vs. Traditional Rights” quotes Ikenberry as saying: “Increasingly, a single world standard is emerging that acknowledges rights that peoples are expected to enjoy and that states and the international community are expected to observe and protect… states are under more scrutiny today by their own citizens, by the human rights movement, and by other states. The relations between the great powers and the decisions they make about humanitarian intervention in smaller states increasingly hinge on these ‘soft’ norms.”

This is clearly what the government is facing here. However, the question that Barbados needs to ask itself is: Who is our arbiter of what is right and just? Is it the international community or God? In the words of Martin Luther King Jr: “I still believe that standing up for the truth of God is the greatest thing in the world.

This is the end of life. The end of life is not to be happy. The end of life is not to achieve pleasure and avoid pain. The end of life is to do the will of God, come what may.”

The Throne Speech ends with these words: “May God keep his guiding and merciful hand on my Government, the citizens and country of Barbados.”

During the COVID-19 crisis I heard the Prime Minister quote several times from our national anthem that “The Lord has been the people’s guide for the past three hundred years. With Him still on the people’s side, we have no doubts or fears”.

If He is our guide, then as we follow Him and trust Him to lead us in the way we should go, we need not fear the devastating effects of COVID-19, natural and economic disasters or even blacklisting from the international community. He has given us free will to choose our way. Let us choose wisely.

Donna Every is an author, international speaker, and trainer. Visit her website at www.donnaevery.com or email her at donna@donnaevery.com.