News

The Dems are proposing that leaders should be limited to only two terms in office – a legal requirement practiced in the United States where the President serve for two consecutive four year terms only. This law is believed to have entered US politics following the protracted stay in office of President Roosevelt. If implemented here it could see political parties changing along with their leaders considering the style in which we vote in Barbados. But why would the Dems want to pursue such a course.

The DLP passionately believes that Barbados is their country to do as they please and that “no price can be too great to redeem that situation”.

It is fascinating to note that the late Rt. Excellent Errol Barrow led the DLP as Premier and Prime Minister of Barbados for fifteen consecutive years between 1961 and 1976. Not once during that period was a Dem heard to say that Barrow was in office too long. In fact when he returned to lead them to victory in 1986, no one questioned the sanity of his decision nor did any one think then that we as a people should have been focusing on the development of institutions of governance that can operate independently of people, rather than the building of dynasties that are directly related to individuals. Following the death of Mr. Barrow, the mantel of leadership fell to Sir Lloyd Sandiford. His administration faltered so badly that by the middle of his second term the only respectable way out of his dilemma was an early election. Any administration that can feel comfortable with an unemployment rate of 26.2%, an 8% cut of public servants salaries in addition to severing over 3000 of them can not be a administration that is interesting in the well being of its people. Such administrations are not fit to govern. The electorate exercised its democratic right and removed that administration from office.

The dismal performance of the DLP was the main reason for its defeat in 1994. not its length of stay in office. Any suggestion to limit a Prime Minister terms in office that does not take into account the freedom of choice and the right of the electorate to determine when a Prime Minister and his administration has lost its political relevance and right to govern is baseless. In the same way that the electorate is given the freedom to determine when an administration is serious and ready to govern it must also be given the freedom to determine when it has fallen out of favour with the people and is unfit to govern. This has been our experience.

The suggestion being advanced by Peter Wickham and the other DLP apologists, who now find themselves faced with the real possibility of losing the next election can only be described as desperate and regressive. In fact why would Barbadians want to take this retrograde step of limiting our leader’s term in office when in the USA they are now debating moving back to their former system of unlimited terms.

The tinkering being proposed to our constitution is not dissimilar to that carried out in the DLP when Thompson was re-installed as leader. However Barbadians stand too much to lose from such foolish and unnecessary risk.
Back To News