FOR ALL the wailing and gnashing of teeth over the future of the Caribbean Community (CARICOM), today’s meeting in Grenada to review proposals on the critical issue of effective governance of the 37-year-old regional economic integration movement must avoid ignoring a very basic factor.It is that, given the realities of globalisation and the preferences of the international community for multilateral cooperation, as distinct from bilateral arrangements with a group of small states in particular, if there were no such regional institution as represented by CARICOM, then the governments may have had to create one.This is by no means to suggest prolonging a business-as-usual attitude by CARICOM’s political directorate – the Heads of Government – who must collectively share the blame for the serious problems that have arisen in the absence of an enlightened management system to ensure effective governance.It means that it is imperative for critical assessments to be made from the top down on why structural changes in administrative management; in the decision-making and implementation processes, as well as in interacting with the region’s public – on whose behalf CARICOM functions – must reflect unavoidable demands.In this sense, it is encouraging to know that more than being focused on finding a new secretary general, following the announced retirement from yearend by Edwin Carrington, who held that position for 18 years, the mandate of last month’s CARICOM summit in Montego Bay is to deal with the wider and fundamental issue of effective governance. Belatedly, the long delayed official recognition for the introduction of a much improved architecture of governance seems set to now coincide with simultaneous independent reviews on the rationalisation and functions of not only the Georgetown-based secretariat, but all major institutions of the 15-member community. Matters of immediate concern would be the composition and terms of reference of, first, a search committee to find the most suitable candidate as secretary general; secondly, the priority listing of and time frames for implementation of proposals for what’s contemplated as “matured regional governance”; and thirdly, the careful choosing of qualified personnel to undertake the proposed “independent reviews” of the functioning of all institutions of CARICOM. Names that come readily to mind for a small search committee to scout around across the region, in the diasporas and elsewhere could well include Sir George Alleyne, chancellor of the University of the West Indies, and Sir Alister McIntyre, a former secretary general of CARICOM and vice-chancellor of the UWI. It may also be advisable to include a choice from the region’s private sector.
