Dear Editor,
I read in all the dailies the Alliance for Change (AFC) political party’s announcement that it will be seeking to discuss with President Granger and the rest of Cabinet the skimming of responsibilities from the Minister of State and expand those responsibilities into three separate Offices.
The AFC’s statement seems more like a public relations stunt than a genuine effort to address the root of the issue and how to address it. The AFC, being the major partner with the PNCR in the coalition government, could have easily requested a meeting with the President or raise its concerns at Cabinet before going to the media with its position. This action by the AFC raises several questions:
Is it that the AFC felt that it could not effectively raise these issues in-house to bring about a resolution? Or is it that we are beginning to see fractures within the coalition that is making the AFC nervous so that it has to create a public perception of independence of thought from the rest of the coalition? What is the rationale and what does the AFC hopes to achieve with splitting up the responsibilities? Will the splitting lead to more transparency, even though Mr. Harmon still maintains the portfolio of Minister of State? What is the AFC prepared to do if the request at fragmenting Harmon’s responsibilities is not acquiesced to?
It’s a long shot, considering how our politicians shy away from the media and public probing, but I hope I can get a response from the AFC on the questions raised here.
Yours faithfully,
Clinton Urling