General elections are due by June 2020 and elected officials, previously unsuccessful politicians, and newly aspiring politicians, will all be seeking to convince us of their suitability for elected office. The cynics among us expect that the courtship of the electorate will shortly begin in earnest, with candidates portraying what they consider to be their most desirable qualities, while pandering to the wants and desires of the electorate. Will the 2020 political aspirants surprise us and, rather than engaging in pretence, demonstrate by their conduct, a genuine desire to communicate their aspirations for Anguilla, now and in the future? Such conduct requires a certain level of maturity which would be welcome from all those who vie for public office.
Maturity in public office was the subject of the editorial published in The Anguillian of 27th January, 2017. It primarily addressed the need for mature relations between elected and appointed public officials in the decision-making process. Many of the observations set out in that editorial are very relevant to issues that face us as we consider who would best serve our individual and collective interests in 2020 and beyond. The editorial noted that –
“The ability of public officials to respond appropriately to the demands and responsibilities of public office requires a significant level of maturity, which translates into the proper application of discretion and common sense.”
“Maturity is reflected in a number of ways, some of which are considered more significant than others, in the context of public life. Some of the qualities of maturity, which come to mind in the context of public office are, the ability to be calm, peaceful and rational rather than desperate, frantic or irrational; being flexible and open as opposed to being resistant, controlling and unreasonable; the ability to see and prioritise the big picture rather than being driven by one’s own desires and ego; and the ability to seek guidance before acting, even when clearly authorised to act.”
In determining whether political aspirants have the qualities identified as being associated with maturity we do not have to, and should not, confine ourselves to how political aspirants behave in the months leading up to elections. Usually, our political aspirants have been well known to us for many years. It is their conduct and attitudes, over those many years, that we should use to determine whether they possess the qualities associated with maturity that would allow us to comfortably conclude that, if elected, we would be treated to five years of mature representation and decision-making.
I believe that a good way to determine the maturity level of the political aspirants, who currently or previously held elected office, is to review their conduct while in office. In doing so, conduct in the House of Assembly must come under close scrutiny as that is the arena in which we have the greatest opportunity to see and hear our politicians engage in matters of national importance. What will discerning persons say when they contemplate an elected official’s conduct in the House of Assembly? In their discussions, can we say they have demonstrated calmness, peacefulness and rational, rather than desperate, frantic or irrational, behaviour? Have they been flexible and open as opposed to being resistant, controlling and unreasonable in the administration of the people’s business?
While, in my opinion, the atmosphere in the House of Assembly, over the past four years has, with few exceptions, reflected greater maturity in the conduct of the people’s affairs, it is for each of us to make our own determination as regards the level of maturity of each political aspirant who currently, or previously, served in the House of Assembly. Reviewing a politician’s behaviour in the House of Assembly is, however, a tangible way of determining whether a politician’s behaviour in the months preceding the general elections is mere pretence – or genuinely reflects his or her true traits.
We will have to determine whether our political aspirants reflect what Eleanor Roosevelt espoused when she said:
“A mature person is one who does not think only in absolutes, who is able to be objective even when deeply stirred emotionally, who has learned that there is both good and bad in all people and all things, and who walks humbly and deals charitably.”
We, the people, have the means of discerning fact from fiction. Will we use those means effectively in deciding how to cast our vote in the 2020 General Elections?
