The Era of “Good” Governance

By Anthony Sylvestre

The Prime Minister was on Love TV “Belize Watch” the other night. He was asked how would he like to be remembered as Prime Minister? As presiding over an “era of good governance,” he answered.

The Prime Minister was clearly making fun of us again, taking us for a ride, yet again, insulting our intelligence yet again.

You may not remember, but back in April, 2008, just after being elected to government, the Prime Minister introduced into the House of Representatives, the Sixth (Constitution) Amendment Bill.

The Sixth (Constitution) Amendment Bill, he said at the time, “are splendid proposals … fantastic proposals by way of enshrining the reform agenda and I think all of us that are members of Cabinet, all of us that are members of this party, all of us that are members of the Government of Belize, can feel extremely pleased with the fact that we are delivering so early on this fundamental commitment to the people of Belize.”

Included in the raft of constitutional changes was the expanded Senate which would have provided for a relinquishing of control of the Senate from the ruling party in government to the Opposition and non-governmental organizations representatives.

This, as the Prime Minister said back in April, 2008 when introducing the Sixth (Constitution) Amendment Bill, was to enshrine the reform agenda. It was a manifesto promise. And indeed having an oversight body like the Senate being out of the control of the ruling government was a “fantastic” idea. But it will not come to pass. As the Prime Minister told Jules Vasquez last Friday in an interview given after the House Meeting, “It ain’t gonna happen!” and “I am not going to do it!”

“[It’s] a manifesto promise I gladly break,” the Prime Minister went on to say.

Now watching the Prime Minister on Friday last and then on Tuesday night on “Belize Watch”, I had to pinch myself. Was I like in the Twilight Zone or what? How can a Prime Minister so arrogantly and glibly break a central plank of his campaign promise, yet, he wants to be remembered as presiding over an era of good governance? Particularly since the newly constituted Senate was to be a reform mechanism that fosters good governance.

As has been his MO (modus operandi) for the past 2 ½ years, the Prime Minister tried to blame his outright reneging on this very important manifesto promise on the PUP. I say “try” deliberately because he did not/cannot succeed on this one.

The PUP fought against “all the reform measures,” he said. That is rubbish!

The Prime Minister keeps doing this, and sadly, the PUP has not set the record straight when he throws these things out there.

He did the same thing back on 24^th March, 2010 after the Privy Council had given its decision in the so-called “Referendum Case”.

“The PUP fought these amendments tooth and nail, we had to go to the Privy Council, they would be a beneficiary of the provisions in the amendment that would cede control of the Senate to the PUP and the social partners. We had to wait so long to be able to bring into force any of the provisions in the law. I am saying, I don’t think anyone can begrudge me the feeling that let them wait as long as the Cabinet thinks appropriate.”

But the Prime Minister is untruthful when he says this. There was no PUP challenge to the Sixth (Constitution) Amendment Bill. Four citizens took the Government to court because Barrow’s Sixth Constitutional Amendment had in its first draft wide and sweeping changes which would have affected all citizens of Belize fundamental rights: these included the preventative detention proposal where citizens could be locked up without having the right to bail. At the time there was a law in place under the Referendum Act which required the Prime Minister to hold a referendum before any changes to the fundamental rights of a Belizean citizen could be tampered with. That was why the four citizens, Alberto Vellos, Darrel Carter, Yasin Shoman and Dorla Dawson, went to court to ask the court to make the Prime Minister do what he was mandated to do under the law – that is, hold a referendum.

Indeed, even the Privy Council, which Barrow back on March 24^th, 2010 said vindicated him, made this point: “… in commencing proceedings, the respondents [the four citizens] were acting out of public spirit, being concerned at the proposed restrictions of fundamental rights of citizens of Belize.”

And, by the way, the Privy Council only ruled the way it did “having regard to the complex series of events that [took] place since the respondents [four citizens] applied for judicial review.” The Privy Council was clear, that it was only as a consequence of these complex series of events after the case first went to the Supreme Court that “the Prime Minister is no longer under any obligation to request a Writ of Referendum.”  As is evident, the Prime Minister, contrary to what he has been saying all along, was under an obligation to hold a referendum, bottom line.

Had it not been for those intervening series of complex events, the Privy Council would have ruled against the Government. And those intervening series of complex events included the Government going back to the National Assembly and making some other amendments to the Sixth (Constitution) Amendment Bill although the matter was before the courts. The Prime Minister, as an eminent attorney, knows that lawmakers should not touch an issue when it is before the courts. But he and his UDP government went ahead and did that anyway.

It is for all those reasons naturally that the Privy Council did not award the government “costs.” Costs is what is usually awarded to a party which wins its case. So, although the Prime Minister says the government won its case and was vindicated by the Privy Council that is not accurate. And so now, for the Prime Minister to use this as the excuse why he will not bring the expanded Senate into law is deceit in its highest form.

The Prime Minister knows too well that at its mid-term mark, his Government has nothing to show except a ballooning deficit, onerous taxes, a further degenerating society, countless home owners losing their homes, countless workers becoming unemployed, countless business going under, crime engulfing the country, hope nearly nonexistent. Thus, the Prime Minister is more worried about his and the UDP’s political future than the good governance that he likes to talk about and that is the reason that the expanded Senate will not, under his watch, become law. He knows that as life has become “haada” for just about everyone, people are not thinking or acting squarely along political lines. He knows that the members of the Senate, particularly, the Civil Society representative, will shed their political ideology and vote for what is best for the country right now. Bottom line, the UDP is not good for Belize right now and this sure ain’t no era of good governance.

| | | | | |