Deconstructing the latest Statement from the Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar on the Jack Warner issue

Earlier today (March 30th 2013) the Prime Minister's Office put out a statement on an issue most troubling to the national community that did nothing to address the disquiet and may have raised more questions than it answered. Because of that I thought perhaps we should deconstruct what she said, didn't say and should have said in the hopes of shedding more light on the matter as it were.

"Statement from the Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar

Soon after the Reuters story came to my attention on March 27th 2013, I issued a release from my office stating: “I will not rely on published reports in the media, but will again seek to get official corroboration of the information now in the public domain before making any determination or pronouncement."

- Yet this was not the process you observed with Mary King, Herbert Volney and Colin Partap, all Ministers for the same Cabinet, all fired on allegations of misconduct, all matters still not concluded, begging the question why one standard for Jack Warner and another for the others? It seems strange that in a situation far worse than the other three combined you would choose to deliberately foist a suspect individual on the people and leave him in charge of national law enforcement. The irony and the mixed messages here cannot be undone by staged or accidental blackouts and the duplicity being demonstrated here is bringing her (the Prime Minister's) leadership into question.

"Later on that same day, I instructed the Minister of Foreign Affairs the Honourable Winston Dookeran to pursue the matter via the established diplomatic channels to obtain the relevant facts and seek clarification on the reported allegations."

- Which are the established channels one would use to find out if one's Minister of National Security is in fact a crook being investigated internationally for serious financial misconduct? To whom does Mr. Dookeran pen his enquiries, and how would such entreaties be worded?

"I further directed the Attorney General, Anand Ramlogan, to write his counterpart, the US Attorney General, Eric Holder Jr., directly to seek his personal intervention in the matter so that there can be official confirmation of the facts and circumstances surrounding this the alleged investigation."

- Are you saying that you want to pre-empt the investigatory process in the United States the way we do here? Are you trying to insult the Office of the Attorney General of the United States?"

"Unfortunately, whilst there has been great diplomatic cooperation, attempts to elicit further information and clarification have thus far not been successful."

- Would that be because YOUR appointed Minister of National Security remains a subject of the very investigation, and until you remove him you run the risk of appearing either complicit or incompetent? Or is it that they function by process and the information is still too delicate to share with third and fourth parties? Besides that, how are they to know who in your government they can trust when you clearly make questionable decisions with your appointments to national Office? As far as they are aware YOUR Attorney General might well be another kook in your cuckoo clock of a Cabinet so why would they share sensitive information with him?

"It would be premature if not prejudicial for me to act without any official clarification or confirmation from the US Authorities on this controversial and sensitive matter. "

- In that case I strongly suggest reinstating King, Volney and Partap or risk having your Office painted as having a serious double standard where right and wrong are concerned.

"I am committed to upholding the high ethical standards which the public legitimately and rightly expects of my Government, but I am equally mindful that the commitment to the rule of law requires balance and respect for the presumption of innocence."

- This may well sound right and reasonable were we not talking about the holder of one of the highest Offices in the land and the one that deals directly with the rule of law. Tradition, convention and common sense dictates that you act and act swiftly if not to make us all the Commonwealth's laughing stock, if not the world at large. Again Madame Prime Minister, there is no negotiating this. Reuters or any reputable news agency for that matter would not have dared risk calling names in the manner that they did and there is sufficient smoke here not only to suspect fire but to call out the fire brigade.

"As Head of the Government, I would make an informed decision in this matter once the facts are established."

Communications and Media Relations Unit
Office of the Prime Minister 

- It may be truly pitiful what is left of your reputation and the respect the people have for your government Madame Prime Minister, should you wait on further bombshells to act. The issuance of warrants and the taking of individuals before the courts will bring the entire government of Trinidad & Tobago into disrepute if for nothing else, failure to act when the nation's Cabinet was challenged from within. There is no purpose or sense in any further delay, but the decisions and any political consequences of those decisions are all yours to make. As leadership consultant Peter Drucker so eloquently said - 'Management is doing things right, leadership is doing the right things.'

Do the right thing Madame Prime Minister, and do it right, in the best interest of all.