The title of my article last week, for those of you who did not notice the punctuation mark, was a question not a command. It was entitled: “You got to get the rid of Eddie??” I was responding to the boisterous calls for the Chief Minister (in the wake of the Dolphinarium issue) to fire his Minister of Social Development, Hon. Edison Baird. I was in no way suggesting that the Chief Minister should take any such action. I was merely expressing surprise that after all this time, when it has been obvious to most discerning people that AUM/APP Government is a fractured body, that its supporters were only now coming to grips with that reality.
After having heard about Mr. Baird’s dismissal as a Minister, today (Tuesday, June 25, 2013), those persons who did not take note of the question mark in my title would most likely conclude that the Chief Minister had taken instructions from me. I want to allay the fears of my supporters and detractors alike, that there was absolutely no collusion between the Chief Minister and myself on this matter. Like other callers to the Monday Night Talk Show, I had come to believe one of three things: 1) that the Chief Minister is afraid to dismiss Mr. Baird because he has no confidence in, or respect for, the ability of his other Ministers; 2) that Mr. Baird has a few dark secrets on the Chief Minister which he is using to blackmail him; or 3) that the Chief Minister is helplessly in love with Mr. Baird and wants him around. Whatever is the real reason for the Chief Minister’s reluctance to dismiss Mr. Baird – after at least three years of blatant disrespect for his authority – it “came to a head” today much to the disbelief of many.
That disbelief was a factor of the many times that Mr. Baird had questioned the Chief Minister’s competence and dared him to dismiss him both in the public media and the Anguilla House of Assembly. Any other Chief Minister, in any other part of the world, would have fired Mr. Baird more that two years ago. Several supporters of the Chief Minister over that period had pressed him to take action in very strong terms on Talk Shows and through various letters. But the recent protest marches were the most animated expressions of their determination to force his dismissal at any cost. And the war of words and insults that ensued between Mr. Baird and his colleague Ministers over the past week suggested that the matter had elevated to a most dangerous level.
It is amazing when one looks back over the past three and a half years of the AUM/APP Government and realize that it has been characterized by crisis after crisis; controversy after controversy; conspiracy after conspiracy; dispute after dispute; outrage after outrage; protest march after protest march; tirade after tirade; rant after rant; mistake after mistake; lie after lie; and the list of dysfunctional conduct goes on. Never in the history of politics in Anguilla have we seen a Government win an election with such goodwill and then remain angry from day one to the present. Someone remarked that if you observed the behaviour of the AUM Government the day after election, you would have thought that they had actually lost the election. With eighteen months left to go, in a five-year term, it seems highly unlikely that their style; approach and attitude will change significantly.
It is interesting to read a few statements made in Mr. Baird’s very brief press release, today, on the matter of his dismissal. He said:
• “I have had the view for some time now, that Mr. Hughes as Chief Minister lacks the capacity to lead Anguilla, especially in these difficult times. This view is based on his conduct in the Executive Council, the House of Assembly, at home and abroad”.
• “Mr. Hughes is the Chief Minister; Minister of Finance; Economic Development; Tourism; Labour and Immigration. Despite such a concentration of political, economic and financial power, he has failed to turn the economy around, as promised in the 2010 General Election.”
• “Rather than accept responsibility for his failures; he blames other people.”
All three of these excerpts from Mr. Baird’s press statement are serious indictments on the competence of the Chief Minister to take Anguilla forward, but I am quite certain that someone would want to say to Mr. Baird: “Where have you been over the last three and a half three years?” It would be a reasonable question given the fact that these statements were made after his dismissal. But it is also quite possible that Mr. Baird’s decision to hang on may have been driven by some practical reasons, namely, to see whether despite such shortcomings he could achieve some positive outcomes for Anguilla and/or, as the only other Minister with experience, create some balance in the decision-making dynamics of Executive Council. It is inevitable that there will be speculation that there may be other reasons of a more mercenary nature for remaining in a dysfunctional government. But it cannot be denied that Mr. Baird’s persistence in getting the Education Act passed, and his refusal to support certain decisions by the CM and his colleagues that did not meet with the requirements of good governance, were positive contributions by him to the development of Anguilla. Who will now fill that role over the next eighteen months with Mr. Baird being stripped of his Ministerial function in Executive Council?
I am amazed at the number of persons who do not understand where we are with the dismissal of Mr. Baird as a Minister in the AUM/APP Government. It would therefore be useful to clear up any misconceptions about how this Westminster system works. I am hearing such questions like: Does this mean that the Governor can now dissolve the House? Does Mr. Baird still have a seat in the House of Assembly? Can the Chief Minister operate with two Ministers only? And so on. Let me explain the situation in point form as follows:
1. Mr. Baird was relieved of his Ministerial responsibility but he still remains an elected member of the House of Assembly like the Hon. Evans Niel Rogers and the Hon. Othlyn Vanterpool.
2. Mr. Baird will now be seated on the south side of the House with the abovementioned members of the Opposition.
3. Mr. Baird will no longer attend Executive Council meetings neither does Niel nor Othlyn.
4. The Executive Council can still meet constitutionally without a third Minister. Section 23 of the Constitution provides that EXCO shall comprise “the Chief Minister; not more than three other Ministers”. It says nothing about having less than three other Ministers.
5. Like Mr. Baird, the Hon. Walcott Richardson is still a member of the House of Assembly but because he still supports the Government he will continue to sit with the Government on the north side of the House of Assembly.
6. Even though Mr. Walcott Richardson voluntarily stepped down as a Minister, so that his matter in the High Court may not prejudice the functioning of the Government, he may still be reinstated as a Minister if the Chief Minister informs the Governor that he intends to do so.
7. Mr. Evans McNiel Rogers remains the Parliamentary Leader of the Opposition in the House of Assembly by virtue of the fact that he control the majority support of the members on the Opposition benches.
8. The AUM/APP Government still maintains a majority in the House of Assembly — Four to three.
9. No by-election or general election is mandatory at this time unless an elected member of the House loses his seat by virtue of conviction or the CM decides to call an early/snap election.
10. Once the CM can maintain a majority in the House, and maintains peace and order on the island, the Governor has no valid reason to dissolve the House and call for fresh elections at this time.
While there may be other questions — I believe that these ten points can give readers a pretty good idea of where we are at this time. What is left to be determined, however, is whether the Chief Minister finally has a stable Government. The fact that there may be less conflict in EXCO, with the absence of Mr. Baird, may not necessarily be a good thing. Without any experienced Ministers in EXCO one can expect that it may come very close to being a one-man show. And given the Chief Minister’s record of blatant disregard for rules; procedures; and the exercise of good governance practices the next eighteen months could be an administrative disaster. By his own admission, the CM reads very little and signs documents blindly. The 200 million dollar loan travesty and the Cap Juluca sub-leases come to mind. Which of these two “rookie” Ministers will pay close attention to the details – and be willing to confront the CM when he wakes up from his occasional slumber? These are real concerns!
I am sure that with the addition of Mr. Baird the strengthening of the Opposition benches will be a good thing for balanced representation in the House of Assembly. But will an Executive Council comprising partners that are “unevenly yoked” afford us a quality of governance in the future … “for better or for worse?”
