Facebook

THE RECALCITRANT MINORITY

By on Oct 2014 in Print

John Peters Share On GoogleShare On FacebookShare On Twitter

‘’The ordinary politician has a very low estimate of human nature. In his daily life he comes into contact chiefly with persons who want to get something or to avoid something. Beyond this circle of seekers after privileges, individuals and organized minorities, he is aware of the large unorganized, indifferent mass of citizens who ask nothing in particular and rarely complain. The politician comes after a while to think that the art of politics is to satisfy the seekers after favours and to mollify the inchoate mass with noble sentiments and patriotic phrases’’ …… Walter Lippman

The quotation is as relevant in the North American Democracy as it is in the Caribbean context. One has to decide whether to be a recalcitrant minority and be part of the circle of seekers or to rise into the inchoate mass, making declaratory pronouncement of one’s patriotism.

Can small island states survive with such democracies, or will they be eventually crushed when the circle of seekers widen and become the majority. At some stage in our national development, we have to embrace the fact that the country comes first, and decisions should always made in that sphere of thought. When the loud recalcitrant minority determine whether a policy is good, and bully the decision process then we end up with towers of Babel, and confusion reigns.

I spent 6 years in the Public Service and witnessed the operations of the circle of seekers. They position themselves as the ‘henchmen’ within their communities, wielding tremendous influence. Some gain such power from their nocturnal proclivity, amassing a sizable entourage of offspring and jabals and thus control a sizable number of votes in a particular electoral district.

I have also witnessed the inchoate mass being patted on their backs as true patriots, having no rising chorus of discontent, but looking for a small wall to be built or a drain to be cleared. These were the ones that I was attracted to and very eager to assist in my time as Chief Engineer at the Ministry of Communications Works and Transport. In my time the recalcitrant minority of seekers of privilege, came with bits of paper from politicians. It was amazing to see how empowered they were, when they walked into my office with a letter from a Minister, and even more so when it was from Sir John.

For the politician back then in the 1980’s it was the relief valve that worked well, give them a letter to the Chief Engineer asking that they be given a contract. I understood the very difficult situation the particular Minster was facing as it was important that the perception that a Minister had the power to influence a contract award be maintained.

In those days the engineers in the Ministry were trusted to be professionals and were give authorization by a Cabinet Conclusion to award contracts on a sole selective basis up to the value of $ 20,000. The system worked on a process of rotation and evaluation and in my opinion proved to be very fair as most contractors were content with the system.

We have been showered over the last two years with a series of statements on how contracts were awarded, and I am reminded of the statements made in the House by then Opposition Leader Kenny D. Anthony of the need for the establishment of the Office of Contractor General. One notes that it was also restated in the Elections Manifesto of the St Lucia Labour Party. I fully endorse the pronouncements of the St Lucia Labour Party to establish this office of Contractor General which will hold Government Departments and Quasi Government Institutions to account for the award of contracts. Jamaica is the only Caribbean country to date that has passed the legislation establishing the Office of Contractor General. Trinidad and Tobago has pursued legislation looking at Government Procurement, which also seeks the same goal.

I am consoled however knowing that truth will always produce fruit in due season. Walter Lippman also said that in a democracy, the truth and nothing but the truth are rarely available immediately. In a democracy, the truth emerges — sometimes it takes years — and that is how the system is supposed to work and eventually strengthen itself.

 

So all who have plundered this fair Helen, the truth shall emerge one day, one month, one year, one decade. This spiritual law of emerging truth is indubitable, unalienable, and indefeasible.