The carnival is over. A good time was had by those who desired it. It’s now time to return to other socio-economic issues. I offer the following unsolicited advice to Philip J. Pierre, leader of the House opposition and of the St. Lucia Labour Party. I trust it is received as a beacon of hope. He has toiled long and hard in the political vineyard of this country. Few can offer friendly disinterested advice, because many fear being accused of supporting a desperate, losing cause.
My credentials include his help when I contested the Castries East seat in the mid-1970s. I know, Philip, you share my concerns and understand the reasons we put country first. We both erred when we deviated from this noble principle. I have made the correction; it’s now your turn.
I am painfully aware of the difficult road you have travelled ever since you threw your hat in the political ring. Unlike many others whom we can both name, our early involvement in politics was a high-wire trapeze act without the safety net of the amateur performer. Indeed, any political departure from the party was difficult to contemplate as we both persevered in a life-or-death situation in which few had dared to stand up against the might of John Compton. Ours was not a task for the fainthearted. Some described us as political upstarts. But that was fair wind considering the storms that were to come.
Still, there were early differences between us, which we did not emphasize. I perceived at an early age that the only visionary in Compton’s camp of the ‘70s that coincided with my own, was Hunter J. Francois. Henry Giraudy was not cut for the rough and tumble of elective politics, and Compton was driven mostly by British colonial aid. I believed that, given the opportunity, I would out-perform these men. That was the reason politics needed people like you (and me) and why we canvassed to help our country socially and economically. I campaigned hard, but never begged anyone for votes or deviated from the process of enlightening the electorate.
I was confident that we, along with Hilary Modeste and a few other young progressives, should have formed the nucleus of a new SLP, casting out the opportunists and the moneychangers from our midst. The sweat and toil that you and I put in politics deserved more than the sad disaster of 1979-82. My most difficult moment was standing on the Castries market steps alone, amidst boos and jeers from the massive crowd. I did it to save the SLP because no one else dared. I proved that night that I would rather die on my feet than submit to the fakery and self-interest that threatened to strangle the SLP. I also proved that I could no longer support the ambitions of the “big brother” or the weaknesses of the political leader.
Today, 38 years and some eight general elections later, I am still around
to offer advice, even unsolicited. Standing alone on the Castries market steps has qualified me to make this offer to you because I proved that the SLP (and party politics) was worth saving. Such independent political stance is never easy, but by grace I’m still standing! You have now arrived at a point where you must pause and take a firm decision how to proceed, and with whom.
You must decide what patriots will help you cross the Rubicon. Your job as leader of the opposition and SLP demands a visionary, focused and respectful articulation of the alternative country you wish to build and how you intend to do it. Will it be an all-inclusive and strongly united country, or will it be as divided as you found it? It has been said that in a multi-party democracy a government—any government—needs a strong opposition to perform optimally. It also affords the electorate a clear choice between contending political, social and economic visions of the country. Criticisms of the government must therefore be thoughtful, measured and hit the mark. Constant attacks on one man will not cut it.
You now have to stand firm and not be used by novices or failed leaders. Do not allow every Tom, Dick and Harry to join the SLP and push you around as if you were some idiot who never studied at a renowned university. You must take a couple of weeks or more off island to meditate and review what I have written here. In the process, confide in those people whose only interest is the progress of Saint Lucia.
Stop your party ignoramuses from talking nonsense about “that white prime minister”. There is nothing some party hacks would like more than to be embraced by some white man (or woman) for pay. Every time an SLP hack says he or she does not want a white man as prime minister, ask yourself what has sixty-plus years of adult suffrage revealed. Since George Charles in the 1950s and Allan Louisy’s brief spell, what do you see? Cenac, Pilgrim, Compton, Anthony . . . Some people make it appear that any difference of opinion within a party spells division and doom. But isn’t it better to cleanse the party and have the bloodletting before general elections, not after? It’s not hard to do if one believes that the country always comes first. Politics must aim to serve the country, not self. Your campaign must therefore be an offer to help people—all the people!
In closing I recommend that you and your experts discuss Sir Arthur Lewis’s The Theory of Economic Growth and Economic Development with Unlimited Supplies of Labour. While you’re at it, decide whether it makes sense to establish industries (job creation) even though their costs of production may greatly exceed their monetary cost of imports.
You may also wish to discuss whether, with the high cost of road construction, lands bounded by public roads (and feeder roads) that are vacant, and not in production, ought to be taxed. Finally, try and envision a new agenda with reputable people that put country before self. If you cannot do this, then you must decide soon, the best time to call that George.
