Tweet
Bruce does not have the suitable leadership hardware!
CHRIS BURNS
Monday, November 09, 2009
Evidently, Prime Minister Bruce Golding and his Jamaica Labour Party government are in over their heads and are obviously not ready for the big league. By their own deeds, they have admitted that instead of preparing themselves for governance they spent the time plotting Edward Seaga's demise, and sadly, Jamaica is now reaping the whirlwind from their unpreparedness.
CHRIS BURNS
Upon fair reflection, the party must be very remorseful for having allowed the power struggle to reign supreme over other substantive issues, such as evidence-based research, policy development, sector consultations, capacity building, and other strategies deemed useful to achieve quality governance.
So, we now have an administration steeped in inexperience, except for the few old-timers, and it does not bode well for the country. No amount of ad hominem argument is going to hide the blatant incompetence that pervades the Golding administration from "tap to battam", to quote Sir Alexander Bustamante. Dissatisfaction abounds, and although no reasonable person expected Mr Golding to work miracles, they were expecting real changes.
The disquiet has everything to do with Mr Golding's wishy-washy start, his feeble batting record, his indecisive posturing towards serious issues such as the Dudus extradition affair and the frequent contradictory statements about macroeconomic policy adjustments. These are all products of Mr Golding's own creation, made worse by his faint leadership; therefore, the ensuing maladies are his to hug and to hold.
It's no wonder that my good friend, with whom I discuss Jamaican politics, called recently registering his displeasure with Mr Golding and suggested that Bruce would make an excellent governor general. For, according to him, as head of state, Mr Golding would be in his "ackee", kissing little children, making speeches and cutting ribbons of all sorts, without having to worry about the travails of political leadership.
I quickly drew the inference that what he was implying was that Mr Golding is talented, but that leadership requires more than oratorical brilliance and it is not a synonym for the kind of "puny-puny" leadership emanating from him and from some members of his two-year-old Cabinet.
Strangely, I overheard a woman telling one of her friends in a supermarket in Brooklyn, New York, that "Bruce Golding a gwaan like de steam fish dem inna 'im back dun aready". As I laughed, I counselled her not to take that particularly harsh view of him, since it is said that "Silent river runs deep" and he could well be raising cane under the quiet, although his batting average has remained "south" of zero since September 2007.
As my friend asserted, Mr Golding exudes brilliance and great talent, but I am really not sure if he now occupies the right position as prime minister. As I see it, transformational leadership - the type Mr Golding promised - requires vision, political will, and "fixity of purpose", and he does not appear to have these in any quantifiable portion and does not seem as passionate about his prime ministerial potential as before.
And while I cannot speak to the prime minister's diet or to any desire for aphrodisiacs, it should not take a rocket scientist to figure out that he has already lost much of his political capital and gravitas and is moving "full speed" ahead to dismantle whatever leadership hardware he has left.
The truth is that effective leadership requires visible passion, strength, and competence, all of which are indispensable assets and are crucial requirements for good governance. Many saw Mr Golding, as a man with strong political vertebrae and enough political will to lead, and to do so fully conscious of his obligations to be forthright and decisive. But his recent antics, inside and outside of Parliament, have not done anything to restore not even a scintilla of hope among the hopeless, and his disingenuous double talk is quickly chipping away at his credibility.
Perhaps my friend is right, but we are stuck with him for now; the least he can do is to break up his "folly grounds". Yet whatever option he takes, he must be guided by the fundamental principle of truth and reasonableness, which are vital to good leadership.
GOLDING... has already lost much of his political capital
And one of the cardinal rules of that good leadership is not to destroy people for selfish reasons and then somehow claim the action to be purely altruistic. History will not be kind to those who stoop this low.
Bad Karma may just cause them to be "hoist by their own petard". Hence, pointing out Dr Davies in Parliament last week as an act to "save face" was unnecessarily spiteful. I abhor the use of parliamentary privilege to bring people's character into disrepute and to impute motives. For "when push comes to shove", that's all they have - their reputation.
Last week, the prime minister made two announcements in Parliament. The first dealt with the firing of Derick Latibeaudiere, governor of the Bank of Jamaica, for what Mr Golding termed "unacceptable, embarrassing and repugnant" aspects of his employment contract. Second, he focused on the "resignation" of the Commissioner of Police Rear Admiral Hardley Lewin, for what Mr Golding said was the "lost confidence in the ability of the Commissioner to deliver the result that the country required".
If one followed the antecedents outlined in the prime minister's presentation for both announcements, then one would be very sceptical of anything he says going forward. For, given the case, as he presented it, I do not know how he could claim to "have not known" of the reasons for the commissioner's resignation, when the Cabinet, led by Mr Golding all but fired the man.
And just forget the invectives used to describe the contractual arrangements between the BOJ and the former governor. Given all we now know, it is the prime minister and Minister "Erratic" who are now looking strange. According to the prime minister, Latibeaudiere will be paid all benefits and emoluments due him, which is the same amount he would have received if his contract had gone full term. Then, why fire him now? Where are the savings to Jamaica?
The fact that it took the government two years to figure out the former governor's compensation package is disgracefully suspicious. The prime minister's dossier was thick - very thick - and full of historical data going back to 1998. Also, given the detective-like proclivity of Minister "Erratic", it is disconcerting that no one in the administration knew of these arrangements before last week.
It makes me wonder if the firing is connected to that "infamous" Washington telephone call between Mr Golding and the former governor regarding the IMF's willingness to give consideration to providing budgetary support for Jamaica.
I agree that $24 million in housing allowance is excessive. But for someone who managed an asset base of $323 billion and turned a profit of nearly $7 billion which went into the government's coffers, $14.5 million in direct salary is reasonable.
I have not heard the prime minister mention a single word publicly about the approximate $2 million a month or $24 million per annum being paid to the head of the sugar divestment team, neither have I heard anything from him regarding the lavish refurbishing and furnishing at either the Ministry of Transport or Ministry of Tourism.
CHRIS BURNS
Monday, November 09, 2009
Evidently, Prime Minister Bruce Golding and his Jamaica Labour Party government are in over their heads and are obviously not ready for the big league. By their own deeds, they have admitted that instead of preparing themselves for governance they spent the time plotting Edward Seaga's demise, and sadly, Jamaica is now reaping the whirlwind from their unpreparedness.
CHRIS BURNSUpon fair reflection, the party must be very remorseful for having allowed the power struggle to reign supreme over other substantive issues, such as evidence-based research, policy development, sector consultations, capacity building, and other strategies deemed useful to achieve quality governance.
So, we now have an administration steeped in inexperience, except for the few old-timers, and it does not bode well for the country. No amount of ad hominem argument is going to hide the blatant incompetence that pervades the Golding administration from "tap to battam", to quote Sir Alexander Bustamante. Dissatisfaction abounds, and although no reasonable person expected Mr Golding to work miracles, they were expecting real changes.
The disquiet has everything to do with Mr Golding's wishy-washy start, his feeble batting record, his indecisive posturing towards serious issues such as the Dudus extradition affair and the frequent contradictory statements about macroeconomic policy adjustments. These are all products of Mr Golding's own creation, made worse by his faint leadership; therefore, the ensuing maladies are his to hug and to hold.
It's no wonder that my good friend, with whom I discuss Jamaican politics, called recently registering his displeasure with Mr Golding and suggested that Bruce would make an excellent governor general. For, according to him, as head of state, Mr Golding would be in his "ackee", kissing little children, making speeches and cutting ribbons of all sorts, without having to worry about the travails of political leadership.
I quickly drew the inference that what he was implying was that Mr Golding is talented, but that leadership requires more than oratorical brilliance and it is not a synonym for the kind of "puny-puny" leadership emanating from him and from some members of his two-year-old Cabinet.
Strangely, I overheard a woman telling one of her friends in a supermarket in Brooklyn, New York, that "Bruce Golding a gwaan like de steam fish dem inna 'im back dun aready". As I laughed, I counselled her not to take that particularly harsh view of him, since it is said that "Silent river runs deep" and he could well be raising cane under the quiet, although his batting average has remained "south" of zero since September 2007.
As my friend asserted, Mr Golding exudes brilliance and great talent, but I am really not sure if he now occupies the right position as prime minister. As I see it, transformational leadership - the type Mr Golding promised - requires vision, political will, and "fixity of purpose", and he does not appear to have these in any quantifiable portion and does not seem as passionate about his prime ministerial potential as before.
And while I cannot speak to the prime minister's diet or to any desire for aphrodisiacs, it should not take a rocket scientist to figure out that he has already lost much of his political capital and gravitas and is moving "full speed" ahead to dismantle whatever leadership hardware he has left.
The truth is that effective leadership requires visible passion, strength, and competence, all of which are indispensable assets and are crucial requirements for good governance. Many saw Mr Golding, as a man with strong political vertebrae and enough political will to lead, and to do so fully conscious of his obligations to be forthright and decisive. But his recent antics, inside and outside of Parliament, have not done anything to restore not even a scintilla of hope among the hopeless, and his disingenuous double talk is quickly chipping away at his credibility.
Perhaps my friend is right, but we are stuck with him for now; the least he can do is to break up his "folly grounds". Yet whatever option he takes, he must be guided by the fundamental principle of truth and reasonableness, which are vital to good leadership.
GOLDING... has already lost much of his political capitalAnd one of the cardinal rules of that good leadership is not to destroy people for selfish reasons and then somehow claim the action to be purely altruistic. History will not be kind to those who stoop this low.
Bad Karma may just cause them to be "hoist by their own petard". Hence, pointing out Dr Davies in Parliament last week as an act to "save face" was unnecessarily spiteful. I abhor the use of parliamentary privilege to bring people's character into disrepute and to impute motives. For "when push comes to shove", that's all they have - their reputation.
Last week, the prime minister made two announcements in Parliament. The first dealt with the firing of Derick Latibeaudiere, governor of the Bank of Jamaica, for what Mr Golding termed "unacceptable, embarrassing and repugnant" aspects of his employment contract. Second, he focused on the "resignation" of the Commissioner of Police Rear Admiral Hardley Lewin, for what Mr Golding said was the "lost confidence in the ability of the Commissioner to deliver the result that the country required".
If one followed the antecedents outlined in the prime minister's presentation for both announcements, then one would be very sceptical of anything he says going forward. For, given the case, as he presented it, I do not know how he could claim to "have not known" of the reasons for the commissioner's resignation, when the Cabinet, led by Mr Golding all but fired the man.
And just forget the invectives used to describe the contractual arrangements between the BOJ and the former governor. Given all we now know, it is the prime minister and Minister "Erratic" who are now looking strange. According to the prime minister, Latibeaudiere will be paid all benefits and emoluments due him, which is the same amount he would have received if his contract had gone full term. Then, why fire him now? Where are the savings to Jamaica?
The fact that it took the government two years to figure out the former governor's compensation package is disgracefully suspicious. The prime minister's dossier was thick - very thick - and full of historical data going back to 1998. Also, given the detective-like proclivity of Minister "Erratic", it is disconcerting that no one in the administration knew of these arrangements before last week.
It makes me wonder if the firing is connected to that "infamous" Washington telephone call between Mr Golding and the former governor regarding the IMF's willingness to give consideration to providing budgetary support for Jamaica.
I agree that $24 million in housing allowance is excessive. But for someone who managed an asset base of $323 billion and turned a profit of nearly $7 billion which went into the government's coffers, $14.5 million in direct salary is reasonable.
I have not heard the prime minister mention a single word publicly about the approximate $2 million a month or $24 million per annum being paid to the head of the sugar divestment team, neither have I heard anything from him regarding the lavish refurbishing and furnishing at either the Ministry of Transport or Ministry of Tourism.
Comment