It has been about four months since Barbadians went through a most bruising general election in which many friends were won and lost.
In normal circumstances, the winners would by now be beating their chests and crowing, while the losers would be hanging their heads and eating crow.
But these are not normal times.
Having retained office by a knife-edge margin, through superior political marketing skills and strategies, the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) has now come face to face with the harsh reality of the stark absence of skills to manage an economy in dire trouble.
Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler has not yet shared with Barbadians the benefits of the recent roadshow in London and New York and so, again, we may have to wait until possibly August for the Budget presentation.
Meantime, he has raised the loan limit of Government by $1 billion even while acknowledging that within recent times commercial banks have been wary of taking up Government paper. The question is: if the banks were chary then, what would make them confident now?
It is against this backdrop that I was mildly shocked by the response of Leader of the Opposition Mia Mottley during last Tuesday’s debate in the House of Assembly on raising the limit from $1.75 billion.
With Sinckler virtually on his knees in the face of a continuing decline in Government’s revenues, Mottley, who has an earned reputation of being one of the most fearless and feared politicians, chose to adopt a soft, friendly approach to a party which only a few months ago was grinding hers into the dust.
“Come let us reason together,” she offered, as a way of trying to find solutions to Barbados’ economic problems.
“How can it be . . . that it is okay to sit down with the unions; it is okay to sit down with the private sector; it is okay to sit down with the church, but the very people who are capable of constituting a Government remain outside of the loop?” she asked, almost plaintively.
Of what earthly benefit would a three-hour national consultation be in finding a solution to the problems?
This importuning, by the way, is of a Government that has stated it is not willing to listen to anybody outside of the cloistered confines in Bay Street and possibly in Church Village – put your suggestions in writing.
So why is Mottley so eager to break bread with her allegedly sworn enemies?
What manner of softly, softly, strategy is this?
Recall that prior to the election, Government had no interest in dealing with the mounting economic issues. It was politically convenient to blame it all on the international environment. The strategy worked. The national interest was cast aside when Government, having raised the issue of privatization, avoided it like a plague during the campaign. Indeed, Prime Minister Freundel Stuart pushed Sinckler under the bus after he publicly said there was no philosophical difference on the issue between the two parties.
It was a deliberate political stroke, which served its purpose but only delayed the day of reckoning.
In the aftermath of the election, it was hoped that the winning party would have tackled the issues head-on. But plasters are being used to cover up the wounds now fully admitted to by Government spokesmen.
In this fertile political pasture, tailor-made for an Opposition, it was surprising to hear such conciliatory tones from Mottley.
The world’s most famous master plan for seizing and holding power is about a prince, but its contents are equally relevant for a princess.
While it is important to guard political borders on all sides, especially for someone who has been burnt in the past, one must not fear imaginary dangers.
When asked whether it is better to be loved than feared, the prince observed: “The answer is, of course, that it would be best to be both loved and feared. But since the two rarely come together, anyone compelled to choose will find greater security in being feared than in being loved.”
Since it is easy for a princess to avoid being hated, the more admirable quality in politics is to be feared.
• Albert Brandford is an independent political correspondent.
