Monday 2nd August 2004
 

I am appalled at the uncivil and crude language used by spokesmen for the Bahamas Public Service Union (BPSU) to respond to a set of ideas that were advanced by me at the meeting of the Caribbean Public Services Association meeting held in Nassau last week.  My address was given on Wednesday 28th July. The press reported a response from one Eric Darville and supported by John Pinder that I consider raises the question as to who speaks for the BPSU.  These reports published in the Nassau Guardian of Friday 30th July have not been denied by both Eric Darville, former Secretary General and John Pinder, President of the BPSU and I take these gentlemen therefore to stand by the reported assertions.

Mr. Darville is reported to have said: “You sit back and allow him [the Minister for Public Service] to walk out of here yesterday morning.  God knows something is wrong.  Ya’ll let him walk out of here just like that after talking all that foolishness.”

The BPSU needs to clarify whether this gentleman speaks for them.  It is obvious, however, that whomever he speaks for, he speaks from a position of incredible ignorance of the facts.  He did not hear the speech, and if he read the speech clearly, he did not understand what he was reading.  To describe rather complex proposals as foolishness says much about him.

He went further to allege that what the Government proposes to do with reform of the public sector would undermine the very fabric and integrity of the constitution.  This is patent nonsense.  The idea of allowing some workers to work on contracts is not revolutionary and exists already in the service.  Police officers and Defence officers now work on contract.  Foreign teachers also work on contract.  The BPSU knows also that some younger workers who are Bahamian would prefer to have a contract of a limited duration and look forward to a gratuity, rather than a pension entitlement thirty years down the road.

Further, there may be some financial gains to the Government service by reform in this area.  This is particularly the case where the National Insurance Board’s actuary has indicated that one of the ways the National Insurance Fund might be helped is by the NIB assuming all pensions for the public service.  This would have to be phased in and would affect new workers coming into the service only.  Clearly some consensus would have to be arrived at.  At the moment these are only ideas being advanced and discussed.  There are no constitutional implications to any of the proposals.

The BPSU’s apparent spokesman seems also to have a partisan political agenda.  Nowhere in my address was there any reference to politics.  Mr. Darville is quoted as saying: “Overnight, every Tom, Dick and Harry belonging to those politicians’ families will be in the public service with a contract.  They are there now.  Those who couldn't get a job no place else.  They couldn’t even sell numbers because they couldn’t keep books.  Now they are there as consultants.  Consultant to what?”

This is patently false and again obviously spoken out of a lack of appreciation for the facts or is deliberately misleading.  I challenge the BPSU’s spokesman to say which politicians’ families have contracts in the public service for which they are not qualified and competent and who used to sell numbers.  Clearly no such persons exist.  His comments are patently absurd.  It is a figment of his imagination.

If all of this were not enough, their spokesman then goes on to bring into it the demonstrations in which one supposes he [Mr. Darville] was involved in 1986, which he said brought down the last PLP Government.  Are we to take it from these statements that the BPSU as a union now wishes to bring down this PLP Government?  I do not believe so, but loose lips sink ships.  If this is the case, pray tell me how that comes in context of a speech on public sector reform?

It is inappropriate at the very least, and rude in the extreme to invite someone, me the Minister, there as your guest, asking for ideas that the Government has on reform, then turn around and try to create a political fight where there is none.  Mr. Darville, the BPSU’s apparent spokesman described the proposals as “Monkey see! Monkey do!” proposals.  There is of course another saying of which the BPSU’s spokesman needs to be reminded and that is that ‘one monkey don’t stop no show’.

All sectors in this country acknowledge that the public sector is in need of reform.  John Pinder, the President of the BSPU must now step up to the plate as a responsible leader of the present, and not stand by and let the former leadership of the Union drag him willingly into backwardness.  It needs to be clarified and clarified now, who speaks for the Bahamas Public Service Union, and whether the public statements made by the former Secretary General with the apparent support of Mr. Pinder is the official position of the Union with respect to the Government, the implication of which is that it wishes to bring the Government down.

There is a far more serious issue to consider.  Having regard to Mr. Darville’s political views espoused in his address, can he fulfill his constitutional role as a member of the Public Service Board of Appeal?  This arises if he is the same Eric Darville who has reportedly been nominated by the Union to be its representative on the Public Service Board of Appeal.  Such a member is supposed to act quasi judicially, without fear or favour and without bias.  His political views about the present Government at this most recent speech gives rise to a concern about his possible impartiality in these matters.  This is a very serious legal issue indeed.  We need to hear from the BPSU.