Price of public service

LYNDON DE GANNES should be commended. Anyone willing to engage in public service, at any level, should be praised. To seek or hold office is an incredible commitment. Few are brave enough.

But Mr De Gannes, who is a UNC candidate in the pending local government election, is also to be commended for taking on the Central Bank.

Last week Friday he obtained an injunction against the bank, where he chauffeurs, pursuant to a constitutional case challenging the bank’s decision to enforce conditions of employment which would bar him from seeking political office.

This is now before the court, and we do not wish to influence the outcome of matters there.

However, because the issues involved extend far beyond the parameters of the Central Bank, and because this matter relates to the functioning of independent offices as well as public service more generally, we are constrained to record observations.

Whatever the outcome of the case, the Central Bank should have long clarified its policies. The bank’s functions are far too important. It is a shame it has taken legal action to highlight deficiencies in its rules which need to be more definitively crafted either way. Either the institution allows its employees to be political, or not. A halfway house which seemingly allows some degree of activity but not full-fledged candidacy is incoherent.

However, we note with dismay recent statements made on political platforms and elsewhere which suggest appointments to the bank are political. Such statements are crude oversimplifications.

Like many independent institutions in this country, appointments are indeed made through the involvement of Cabinet action. Further, ministerial directives to such entities are not uncommon under various statutes. Additionally, entities like the Public Service Commission, the Integrity Commission and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions are funded through the national budget. Yet, such organisations are not meant to be partisan.

While we agree our Constitution has not properly insulated independent bodies, it is a mistake to downplay the standard of decision-making expected of nominally independent entities. It is better to clarify employment rules and to have a separate conversation about constitutional reform than to blur the lines for political expediency.

That a conversation is needed is clear given how this issue keeps recurring. For example, last December former calypso monarch Duane O’Connor lost his challenge over a suspension issued by the police service after he was merely screened for the 2019 local government election.

There is an important role to be played by independent institutions in this country, in whom all must be able to have complete confidence. But being a part of such institutions, at whatever level, possibly requires its own kind of unique sacrifice.