For most of my adult life, from the age of twenty-one, I have been privileged to study at many institutions of higher learning, and to live and work in several islands in the Caribbean and further afield. Throughout these years, and up to the present, I have been careful and intentional about being a person of objective and independent thought, integrity, accountability, compassion and deep spirituality, because I firmly believe that a person’s lifestyle must be consistent with that person’s beliefs and faith.
Over the years, as well, I have learnt many useful and important lessons. A few of them are:
(i) The importance of knowing who you are. This enables you to be grounded and firm but at the same time humble and sincere.
(ii) The importance of being open to other people and views. This makes you respectful and tolerant without losing your basic principles or attempting to manipulate others.
(iii) The importance of knowing what you know and what you don’t know. This makes you a continual learner who is open to the contributions others can make to you and your cause.
(iv) The value of being truthful and honest at all times even if it is unpopular and inconvenient. This heightens your sense of justice and gives you the courage to speak and act with integrity. It also gives you a sense of freedom and peace of mind despite the criticisms which may come your way as a result.
(v) The joy of being consistent and selfless. People who are inconsistent and selfish are usually unhappy, aggressive and quick to attack and blame others, while being evasive and illusive.
(vi) The importance of being able to deal effectively with differences and other opinions without becoming disagreeable or regarding those who differ from you as your enemies.
(vii) The importance of having a good understanding of an issue, or idea, before commenting on it, or criticizing it, or condemning it or the person or group raising the issue or putting the idea forward. This saves you making false assumptions and unnecessary mistakes, and from proposing wrong solutions. A proper understanding of the issue or idea enables one to be sound and solid in one’s contribution.
I have long been interested in politics. My older cousin, the Chief Minister, knows this for in the early 1960s, when he returned from England, we both rode across this island on my motorcycle to have him introduced to the people of Anguilla as a dynamic and upcoming politician. In those days, Anguilla had only one representative in the Government in St. Kitts.
My interest in politics grew with the years, and so has my understanding. “Politics refers to the affairs of the people,” whatever those affairs are – housing, health, education, work, roads, food, security, religion, social conditions, etc. etc. etc. Whatever is needed to be done to enable the people to live happy, healthy, prosperous and meaningful lives is political. Politics is therefore everybody’s business – the preacher, doctor, nurse, teacher, engineer, parent, police, civil servant, sailor, lawyer etc. etc. etc. Understood this way, civil society is impossible without politics.
Today I am more deeply interested “politics”, but I very much dislike “party politics” especially as it is practised in Anguilla. Somehow we have created a brand of “party politics” which is in need of serious reform if it is to serve the nation at a much higher level. If we could do the business of politics without having political parties which are so partisan, divisive, bias and vindictive, we would be much better off. However, the reality is that we have them, and we must do what we can to make them work much better for the good of everyone, not just for those who are loyal supporters of the party. The fact is that every Government of the day is the Government of ALL the people, and deserves the critical support of all the people. Blind support is not good, and so are relentless opposition and destructive criticism. We need to find the balance which the attitude of “critical support” demands. If we do, we will see more progress.
I have had the privilege of serving as one of the nine Directors of Anglec for almost three years. I recently resigned. I indicated in my letter of resignation several factors which contributed to my decision. To my great, great disappointment some members of the House of Assembly failed or refused to understand the central point of my letter, and used the privilege of the House to launch an attack on me, which can only be described as feeble, pale and lacking because they preferred to play “party politics”. The major point of my letter is this: “Anglec is facing serious trouble in its finances, morale and leadership and needs urgent remedial action to obviate a crisis”. By failing to be critically objective and responsible, some members of the House chose to indulge in scandal rather than engage me in dialogue in order to be proactive. The viability of Anglec is a “political” matter but it is not a “party political” issue. By failing to appreciate this difference the House is contributing to the possible national crisis by default.
I must now respond to some specific comments made by the Chief Minister. Yes, we are blood cousins, and have had a very good relationship for more than half a century. It is true, as well, that in the past you praised me on several occasions as an intelligent, knowledgeable, and prudent person. At times you were embarrassingly superfluous. It is also true that I could have been the Chairman of the Anglec Board, but it was one of your colleagues who dictated who the Chairman should be. (Let the truth be told.) It may be that I am misguided as the officials of the day thought Moses, or the Prophet Amos or Jeremiah was. If that is so, I am proud to be standing in a good tradition, and there is no need to change direction now.
What I find most astonishing, Mr. Chief Minister, is your bold, but completely wrong assertion that “Rev. Niles is not the architect of that letter”. It is unbecoming, misleading, and irresponsible of you, as Chief Minister, to knowingly indulge in such a fabricated falsehood. What is even more astonishing is your attempt to connect me with the “Journalist” and, by extension, the United Front. When I heard that, I said you are either making a joke or you are downright malicious and devious with ignoble intentions. Which is it? The more I reflect on what you said and attempted, in the House, the more I realise that your intention is to discredit me. Why? This, indeed, is a very far cry from your truthful expressions and opinions made in the past.
Could it be, Mr. Chief Minister, that for a moment you slipped into the “party politics mode”, and as a result did not see the real issue highlighted in my letter of resignation? That issue, which I stated earlier, especially the leadership aspect as it relates to the Board, warrants your serious attention. It is the leadership, not the management. Failure to be objective and prudent in this matter will have dire consequences for Anglec and Anguilla. My letter calls attention to a matter of National interest. Please do not treat it as a “party political” issue.
For the benefit of those who may not know me as well as you do, Chief, I say very clearly that I am the sole architect of my letter of resignation. I was aided by no one, and influenced by nothing and no one but the factors indicated in that letter. And Chief, I am also the sole architect of this article. May those who should hear – listen and act prudently.
