Did NDP win?

In August of 1984, less than two weeks after the July 25 election, the new James Mitchell NDP government had appointed a committee to assess the situation with public financing and debt. This was announced by PM Mitchell at his first press conference. His indication then was that he was not on a witch hunt, and that he just wanted the situation of the country to be known and if there were any misappropriations, those would be dealt with by the DPP.  

Economist Noel Venner, who chaired the committee, Arnhim Eustace, and the other four members and three consultants took an oath of secrecy at Government House. Besides being tasked mainly with formulating policy recommendations for dealing with the country’s debt, they were to investigate the operations of 25 statutory bodies and state entities and were expected to have an interim report done within a month, with a final report due in November 1984.

The Vincentian, Aug. 24, 1984. Article entitled “Mitchell Courts Industry, but Businessmen Balk”:

“The prime minister noted that his government will be reappointing all statutory and state cooperation who will cooperate with the government and who are competent to serve in that capacity. As a matter of policy, “no government minister will be appointed to serve on any such board”. He noted that he is establishing guidelines of principle. In that, any person appointed by him or by his ministers to fill any government position. If Government loses confidence in such persons or is removed from parliament, that person who was appointed will automatically resign.”

This is not meant to be a direct comparison with the current NDP administration heading by PM Friday. If it were, then we could include other actions of Mitchell’s 1984 administration. For example, on Sept. 13, 1984, James Mitchell held a press conference to tell the nation, among other things, the circumstances under which the county had found itself after Cato’s Labour Party. Among other things, he told the nation that the national debt of the country was EC$190 million.

Likewise, we had the current (2026) NDP government at a press conference earlier this year, telling the nation that the debt now is over EC$3.5 billion.

However, there are some actions or inactions by the newly formed administration that have come in for public discourse. Some have gone as far as suggesting that the political compass of the NDP lacks calibration. The main complaint is with remnants of the old ULP administration still in decision-making positions, including statuary bodies, dictating things, while those who voted for that to change continue to look on, and in many cases, still victims of their decisions. In that, those heads are still applying pressure to those who voted for change.

Imagine if Gonsalves remained in the Financial Complex or the official residence for over two months after the election, while those who are responsible for removing his belongings ask for patience. For those of us who lack political calculation, it amounts to the same thing in the minds of those who voted for change, as having those remnants still in their positions making decisions, seemingly unabated.

It was astounding to hear the head of the Public Service Union detail on radio several weeks ago that persons within the Ministry of Health who attempted to return to work, following the government’s directive, were still faced with frustration, and it appears as though the prime minister, the minister of health, and the attorney general just shuffled papers while the complaints poured in. Reason number one why the suggestion is that the NDP did not win. Instead, it appears as though the ULP just lost.

What we have continuing is the decision-making remnants of the old ULP administration sitting comfortably in certain positions.

Boards of some statutory bodies remain, making decisions with the new administration seemingly completely unaware. The corruption continues.  Those who don’t feel like coming to work or coming when they feel like, continue to do so. Others are given salary raises upwards of EC$2,000 per month. Meanwhile those who voted for change continue to sit by and watch, all while the new administration tries to decipher which direction is north, politically.

This cannot be the character of a party that won. It must be that the opponent just lost. Those two things are not equivalent. Maybe we ought to do a survey to measure how many voted for better police accommodation or even for VAT reduction and VAT-free days. Let’s do a survey to calculate who voted FOR, versus those who just wanted to see the back of the ULP and those who helped to mastermind its reign by wreaking havoc on those who didn’t fall in line. Let’s measure that.

Perhaps the political sense of the new administration would kick in then, proving that they are currently allowing to continue what the people voted against. The level of political miscalculation here is astonishing, at least in the minds of those who must still live with this, two months after an election.

At the very minimum, there should have been some sort of moratorium issued on the actions of the people who are left there, if all that the new administration is seeking, is time to sort things out. At least that; but to allow them to operate rouge is a slap in the faces of those who voted for change.

This needs to be addressed, and not with hardened hearts. Before you know it, you will be back before the electorate asking for votes. While you may thrust towards an end in good governance, this is still politics. Be wise, politically.

Observer

The opinions presented in this content belong to the author and may not necessarily reflect the perspectives or editorial stance of iWitness News. Opinion pieces can be submitted to [email protected].