There will be no grace period for this administration, partly because the country has waited so long for a government, partly because it was in office so recently, and partly because it has recycled so many of its personnel they hardly need a huge amount of time to familiarise themselves with their portfolios. As it is, some key ministers have already held press conferences or have spoken to the media about what they intend to do, and if nothing else, this is conveying a sense that meaningful work is already underway.
What the ministers are outlining, however, are all content matters, and do not, of course, indicate whether Freedom House is contemplating any structural changes in the shape of constitutional reform. Other than a passing reference to that subject, the most it committed to prior to the election was inclusionary government, although exactly what was meant by that was never elaborated on.
For the time being, therefore, everyone is watching to see how inclusionary the new incumbents will turn out to be in their approaches. The most unequivocal development in that area was the retention of the services of former Minister of Foreign Affairs and later Foreign Secretary, Carl Greenidge, in relation to the Venezuela border case currently before the ICJ. Newly appointed Minister Hugh Todd told this newspaper, “Mr Greenidge is on the team; he will be on the team until the conclusion of this matter.” He later added, “We are very happy to have his service and he is very committed to the process.”
Mr Greenidge is this country’s co-agent at the ICJ, a source telling Stabroek News, “This is a state matter and had the support of the PPP/C from the beginning. It is not political; it is a national issue.” The source went on to say, “When the case was filed it was filed for the country of Guyana. He is a co-agent and you cannot change your co-agent just like that. Remember too, there is also a parliamentary committee here, and both sides see this border issue as joined.”
On the matter of whether Mr Greenidge would be asked to stay as an advisor after the conclusion of the ICJ matter, this newspaper was told by the Minister that this would depend on the President in the first instance, and the former Foreign Secretary’s willingness to do so in the second. It should be understood that if the ICJ rules it has jurisdiction in the case, and then after hearing the matter decides in Guyana’s favour, Venezuela is unlikely to accept the judgment. It would certainly knock any ‘legal’ claims she might have made in the past from under her, and fundamentally alter the nature of the discussion internationally, but it will not necessarily prevent Caracas from behaving irrationally at a political level. In other words, difficulties with our neighbour to the west will not dissipate immediately on the announcement of a favourable decision, and we need to be prepared for that.
It might be noted that under the last government Mr Greenidge was advised by a committee comprising individuals who had worked on the issue in the past, or had experience of it, and it included a PPP/C representative. On what the PPP/C agrees is a national issue – and we have precious few of those in the eyes of the two political protagonists – it would make sense to try and retain as many members of this committee as are willing, along with whoever else the governing party believes could be of assistance. On an issue like this there has to be continuity and an intimate knowledge of what has gone before. In the end there is simply nothing more important to the nation than its territorial integrity.
Where this matter is concerned, however, one has the slightly uneasy feeling, given the main opposition’s hostility to this government, APNU might not have the flexibility or nobility, so to speak, to co-operate even on this front. One hopes that this is a totally mistaken perception, and that they recognise, as their predecessors always did, that there is no future if the contours of the state cannot be preserved intact. In other words, the onus is as much on them as on the government to safeguard our land space undiminished.
The other side of the coin in relation to the inclusion or exclusion of salaried office-holders, is the case of Mr Joseph Harmon, who has been fired from his position as Director General in the Ministry of the Presidency. The government had warned shortly after acceding to office that political appointees should resign. That has been the standard practice in this country, and was implemented by the last government as well, although in the new spirit of inclusion there may possibly be instances where there should be some retention or rehiring. Be that as it may, the last person to whom inclusion should apply is Mr Harmon, who after all was the most political of political appointees.
The former Director General received a termination letter last week from AG Anil Nandlall, who subsequently said he was acting on behalf of the PPP/C government. Mr Harmon informed this newspaper that he told Mr Nandlall in his reply, “Please take note that I do not recognise your authority and your convoluted attempt to explain the arbitrary, capricious action of a fraudulent government to deny me of contractual benefits. I shall pursue this matter further.”
He said that he had requested from the Ministry of the Presidency, through the Permanent Secretary and not the current government, 42 vacation days owed to him. “I never got a response from the Permanent Secretary but now I get a letter from Mr Anil Nandlall, whom I don’t recognize,” he said. When asked whether he believed he should be retained in his past portfolio and what he thought logically speaking the current administration should do, he responded that it was not about retaining a position and he should still be given the opportunity to keep his job. “I have a contract and I thought the thing to do was to call me for a conversation on the matter and let me decide,” he said.
The AG’s position, as reported in yesterday’s edition is that “… the post of Director General did not previously exist, either in the Public Service, or created by the Constitution or legislation. It appears to have been the creation of political expediency. As such, it enjoys no security of tenure and is purely contractual.”
Whatever the legal position with regard to the contract and the 42 days leave, it seems like ordinary common sense to the average citizen that Mr Harmon should leave quietly. How, the public must be wondering, can he expect to stay on given his record during the post-elections period in particular? In addition, why should he be so determined to work for a government he says he does not even recognise? And other issues aside, how can he possibly expect them to reside any confidence in him when he deems them illegal? It is all most perplexing, and will tempt critics to allege that he is embarking on a rearguard action in order to hang on to as much of his extraordinarily generous salary and benefits as he can. Whatever else it is, it is not dignified.
Far more commendable was the approach taken by Messrs Enrico Woolford the former NCN Board Chairman and CEO, and his Deputy, Michael Leonard, whose contracts expired at the end of July before the current government came to office. At Mr Woolford’s suggestion they had earlier gone onto monthly contracts because it was an election year, in order to ensure a seamless transition if the need arose. They were not seeking renewals.
Over in Local Government, Minister Nigel Dharamlall did not waste time reporting on the hundreds of millions of dollars paid to more than 50 contract workers in the Ministry of Communities by the previous administration, despite the fact he claimed there was no record of their performance. It might be noted that the PPP/C itself was earlier hardly above criticism in this respect, although in its case the sinecures were mostly associated with the Presidential Secretariat, as it then was. One can only hope that President Irfaan Ali has learnt a lesson where this is concerned, and ensures that everyone retained is both needed as well as paid appropriately, not extravagantly.
That said, the Ministry of Local Government should be careful not to fire indiscriminately all the junior appointees who worked with the Community Development Councils. Not only may some of them not have been political appointees, but even if they were, as long as they performed their tasks, then perhaps they should be left in place. If nothing else, the Minister may recall the case of the 200 Indigenous workers dismissed by the APNU+AFC government in 2015. They had indeed been appointed to perform political tasks in their communities by the PPP/C when in office, but their wholesale dismissals provided the party with regular propaganda fare.
