Ministerial Non-Responsibility

                                    Ministerial Non-Responsibility
Last Thursday, PM Rowley took centre stage at Government’s post-Cabinet to address several issues falling under the portfolios of several Ministers of his Cabinet.
What we, the people, were presented with were:

• A very detailed reporting on reports submitted to the PM from several public officers in the Ministry of Foreign and CARICOM affairs
• The personal observations of the PM as to the state of Tobago in light of the collapse of the seabridge
• A proposition that a Court matter alleging improper acquisition of property, both real ($1M US condominium) and personal (withdrawals of several hundred million US from a person’s bank account) was nothing but a “personal matter” with which the PM did not overly concern himself
• A settlement, including an unusual non-disclosure clause, of a harsh and oppressive dismissal trade dispute connected to claims of sexual harassment by the terminated worker by a Ministry using $150,000.00 of public funds of which the PM was only “recently aware” and to look into.

Apart from pointing fingers at senior public officers in the first case (which has led even a former Foreign Affairs Minister to join the chorus calling for their ‘heads to roll’), the PM’s purported accounting to the nation amounted disappointingly to very little else.
The characterization of questionable property acquisition by a Cabinet Minister or alternatively property of almost $1.5M US value legally obtained and accountable to the Integrity Commission – the enrichment of a Government Minister as a ‘personal matter’ by a Prime Minister is disturbing.
Even if that property were acquired legally it is still a ‘gift’ and there are Parliamentary Rules regarding Gifts to Parliamentarians in the Code of Ethics. Such enrichment is no personal matter.
The PM’s off-the-course assessment of hotel occupancy at the Magdalena Grand as a major basis for statement that ‘things are not so bad in Tobago’ was immediately challenged by the Tobago Hotel Association who cited figures from all classes of hotels and guest housing pointing out that average occupancy was almost 40% than the Magdalena’s as report by the PM.
Ministerial Responsibility Dismissed
Much more important and indeed very much more troubling than the PM’s deficient statistical methods in assessing occupancy rates, is the fact that in speaking on matters which have generated serious public concern regarding 4 Ministries, the PM managed in one session to almost magically dispense with the Constitutional principle of Ministerial Responsibility.
The doctrine of Ministerial responsibility is a Constitutional principle of the Westminster parliamentary system. We are routinely that ours is a Westminster Parliamentary system.
There are 2 aspects to Ministerial Responsibility – collective and individual responsibility to Parliament and the body politic.
Collective responsibility establishes that all Ministers are bound by decisions of the Cabinet and all Minister stand or fall TOGETHER with the Government.
Individual responsibility prescribes that Ministers are personally responsible to Parliament and the people, for their Ministries. Under this principle, a Minister is responsible for the actions or inactions of him/herself as Minister and the departments and agencies within and under that Ministry.
Mistakes or wrongdoing of all civil servants within the Ministry or the agencies under that portfolio are the political responsibility of the Minister.
In such a situation, the Minister must:

• Take action to correct the situation
• Apologise or even resign from their Cabinet position, depending on the severity of the error or wrongdoing.

The Minister takes political but not personal responsibility for the errors of those within the Ministry, other than himself.
Applying this principle in the case of the OAS embarrassment, which was so serious that the PM decided to investigate it himself, let’s see what we were told:

• The Minister, a former Ambassador to the very OAS (the PM reminded us) was quoted by the PM as reporting that he ‘did not know’ that the Dominica waiver was on the agenda of this regular meeting of that body.
  • Is the Foreign and CARICOM Affairs Minster is not aware of the schedule of major meetings of an international body and did not seek to acquaint himself with it in advance of the meeting?
• The PS and Deputy PS dealt with the matter and gave directions to the TT delegation without discussing same with the Minister.
  • They failed to carry out the standard practice in such cases and for their misdeeds they face possible disciplinary action for misconduct.

According to the principle of individual responsibility, the Minister is personally liable for his failure to be able to give policy direction to his civil servants because he simply did not apparently seek to make himself aware of the agenda of this important meeting.
According to the principle, the Minister is politically liable for the errors of his staff.
But, in this case, the principle was not applied by the PM.
The PM’s proposal to have a former ambassador review the matter does not change the facts plainly reported to him and from which reports he quoted generously at the post-Cabinet conference last Thursday.
Individual Responsibility of this Minister was converted into Ministerial Non-responsibility even in the face of his own admission of omission.
Once again, in this case and in others like the seabridge disaster under the portfolio of another Minister who was even excluded from a Cabinet committee which usurped the procurement role of the Port Authority, there is a demonstration of what has been politely referred to as a Governance deficit in some circles.
The editorial of a daily newspaper more abruptly declaring – ‘Moses Can’t Be Absolved’.
For a party which constantly reminds us of its record as the longest serving in Government, it is indeed strange that a Constitutional principle of our Governance system is so easily dis-applied in relation to its Ministers.
Yet again the quality (or lack thereof) of Governance in our nation is exposed.
 
Clyde Weatherhead
A Citizen Fighting for
Democratic Renewal
Of Our Society
9 April 2018