#BTColumn – Life after high office

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

by Michael Ray    

“Politicians have done little to promote meaningful non-partisan discourse on this issue.”

“We must, however, as a country determine how former Governors General and Prime Ministers should be treated on leaving office.” – Extracts from Nation Editorial, Page 8, Monday, December 28, 2020.

Kindly allow me to first respond directly to the above-mentioned statements and then make further comments.

1) If politicians have done little to promote meaningful non-partisan discourse on the matter of “Life after high office”, then what powers do other citizens (as non-parliamentarians) have to promote any such meaningful discourse? Could the editorial writer not provide a few suggestions?

   2) It is not the prerogative of members of the public to determine how former Governors General and Prime Ministers should be treated on leaving office. As legislators, parliamentarians have the authority to enact the requisite rules and regulations to determine the status, conditions, functions and assignments of “after-office-life” for themselves and their peers.

The editorial writer made the assertion “when the curtain comes down on such office holders it should not be their closing bell of worthwhile contribution”.

This is a decision that only the individual can make, maybe by coaxing or suggestion from other quarters, but the person demitting office is the only one who can determine what is his/her focus or passion.

Surely, one’s mental and physical capabilities do play a significant role concerning the type of activities in which to be engaged and quite often, whether to be involved or to be simply excused.

Although it is worthwhile to open windows of opportunity for retirees of “high-office” status, why is there mention of only two posts?

Is there not room for High Court Judges, Commissioners of Police, Superintendents of Prisons, Directors of Public Prosecution, Chief Fire Officers and a host of other high-ranking public servants?

It has often been shown that a number of skills, talents and experiences exist among individuals within the various strata of our society. It would therefore be short-sighted and ill-advised to conceptualise a system that only has scope and opportunity for a limited few to contribute towards the greater good at the national level.

Should contributions to the national good follow so closely the Barbadian Table of Precedence?