Walkouts and boycotts form an essential part of the armoury of political weapons available to Opposition parties in a vibrant democracy such as obtains in Barbados.
Indeed, if they are used effectively, these protests have the potential not only to grind the business of Parliament to a halt, but quite possibly to bring a weak government to its knees.
One of the most memorable, and certainly the most productive, came at the height of the furore over the proposed constitutional amendments by the Errol Barrow Government in 1974 when the Tom Adams-led Opposition walked out of a parliamentary sitting to join – and then opportunistically took over – a demonstration by political activist Eric Sealy and the two forces linked arms in a march to Government House.
The demonstration turned out to be one of the biggest, most destructive nails in the coffin of the dying Barrow administration which seemed powerless to stem the onrushing tide that eventually led to its overwhelming loss in the 1976 general elections, ending the Skipper’s 15 years at the helm.
Those were heady days!
The politics was as much about strategy and the interplay of nuclear level intellectual candlepower as it was about soaring rhetoric and an intuitive understanding of what was required to reach ordinary people.
The history would suggest, therefore, that those politicians knew the worth and potency of not only the parliamentary devices needed to prod a government into a debate it would rather not have, but also the appropriate time to take industrial level action such as walkouts or boycotts to derive maximum mileage.
Two walkouts from Parliament by the Mia Mottley-led Opposition Barbados Labour Party (BLP) – the most recent being last Tuesday, December 2 – appear not to have been carefully calibrated and certainly did not have the resonance with the general populace for which the party might have been hoping.
I am not sure if it was because we as a people have become so blasé to our politicians and to politics generally, or whether it was because we have resigned ourselves to a cynical acceptance that the issue – the ailing Queen Elizabeth Hospital (QEH) – is one that has confounded both major political parties and a problem that simply will not lend itself to easy resolution.
Given that the BLP is at least partly responsible for the parlous state of the QEH – its woeful under-capitalisation being exacerbated in the dying days of the Owen Arthur administration – it was, I think, a little disingenuous of the BLP, which is just two terms out of office, to expect it could jump on every cri de coeur from the doctors and gain traction with the wider public.
Lest I be misunderstood: I know only too well from first-hand experience that the QEH is not well. So while I am not less-counting the genuine concerns of the professional medical staff, I do not believe that the health of this country is an issue to be batted around by an Opposition looking to score Brownie points or to be muddled over by a drifting Government.
One acknowledges that it is quite possible for the situation at the QEH to have moved from “serious” in July – when the Opposition succeeded in getting Parliament’s attention for a debate on a matter of “urgent public importance” to air some of the difficulties the institution was facing – to “dire” a scant four months later.
Back then, the Shadow Minister of Health Dr Maria Agard (MP-Christ Church West) described the state of the QEH as “the worst crisis” in its 50 years of existence.
At that time, the Opposition action was triggered by a determination of the Barbados Association of Medical Practitioners (BAMP) that because of a critical shortage of basic and essential supplies its members would only be performing “urgent and emergency” medical procedures.
The unscheduled debate had the desired effect of prodding a seemingly lethargic Government into action and the Minister of Health promised an immediate injection of $22 million in emergency funding to ease the cash-strapped facility’s shortage of supplies.
Parenthetically, I am told by usually very reliable sources that so far only $14 million of that amount has materialised.
My concern is, though, that despite the fact that this shameless Government by shying away from a second debate on the QEH would appear to confirm in the minds of even the least politically paranoid that it really does have something to hide, the Opposition’s rushing around crying wolf could have the adverse effect of creating an infinitely more jaded society.
Mia must remember that when David Thompson boycotted Parliament “indefinitely” in December 2007, elections were about eight weeks away – the next election is in four years.
Albert Brandford is an independent political correspondent. Email albertbrandford@nationnews.com.
