Never before at a House sitting had a point been repeated as many times—I invite you to count them, dear reader—in the ostensible interests of clarity, self-preservation and having your cake and eating it: “Mr. Speaker I just want to offer a word of explanation with regard to the report of the Salary Review Commission. I want to make it absolutely clear, because I know this is the season of mischief, that no matter what you say [did ‘you’ refer to the Speaker?] someone or those with their own agenda are going to twist what is said in this House.
“I want to make it absolutely clear, Mr. Speaker, that these reports were commissioned by the former government. But the law commands me to lay the reports in parliament. I must lay the reports in parliament. I cannot leave the reports on the shelves or in a cabinet. The law says that the reports have to be laid in parliament.
“I want to make it clearer, Mr. Speaker, that the parliamentarians of the government have no intention to seek increases of salary at this time. Not in this season of sacrifice, not in this period when the economy is just beginning to recover. So, I want to make it absolutely clear that these reports are being laid in the House as the law commands but the government is not laying these reports for the purpose of attempting to secure a salary increase at this time. Not with the state of the economy, not in this period when the government of Saint Lucia has called on all sectors to make sacrifices.
“So I hope, Mr. Speaker, pellucidly clear [sic], pellucidly clear about this matter. And I repeat that we have to lay the reports of parliament because the law commands us. We are not looking to raise the salaries of members of parliament. The law says when there are reports like that, because this is a report the former government had started, and finished under this government, that the report must be laid in parliament. So, today we are laying the report in the House because the law commands us to lay it in parliament. I hope I am absolutely clear, Mr. Speaker!”
Not since Pontius Pilate had a man sought so desperately to avoid responsibility for his actions. But then ancient historians tell us the Christian authors of the gospels had little choice but to portray Pilate as an unwilling party to Jesus’ execution. In order to avoid possible accusations of being against Rome, the crucifixion had to be firmly and clearly blamed on the Jews. Taking into account the several contradictory reports—including that Pilate’s wife cautioned him against sentencing a just man—the historians concluded that Pilate never claimed he was “innocent of the blood of this innocent man.” Nor did he wash his hands, symbolically or otherwise.
But there can be no denying Kenny Anthony’s efforts at persuading Saint Lucians on the morning of Tuesday, July 7, 2015 that he was not culpable for what his government was about to inflict on the nation’s way overburdened taxpayers, that only the “former government and the Salaries Review Commission” were responsible. The law required him to “lay the reports in parliament” and as the perceived premier respecter of the law he had no other choice but to obey.
In any event, he promised, he and his fellow government parliamentarians had no intention to seek increases of salary in “this season of sacrifice.” Considering his earlier repeated acknowledgement that the Salaries Review was commissioned by the Stephenson King government, not the sitting Kenny Anthony government; and keeping in mind the “season of sacrifice,” why didn’t the House majority set aside the recommended salary increases, if only conditionally? If the Suzie d’Auvergne review of the Constitution could with a wave of Kenny Anthony’s prime ministerial right hand have been set aside indefinitely, then why not the salaries report?
Could the prime minister’s expressed concern for those worse affected by the Season of Sacrifice have been mere pre-election show business,
another advertisement for a government headed by the nation’s most caring citizen?
We can only speculate. However, barely had the populace decided the Kenny Anthony government “were going the wrong way” (to quote Philip J. Pierre) and could no longer be trusted to manage the nation’s affairs, the now opposition party started demanding the earlier refused recommended pay increases—Season of Sacrifice be damned. It mattered not that Saint Lucia remains in the relentless grip of the Season of Sacrifice. Or that the majority still cannot afford daily sustenance, let alone healthcare.
Some might remember an earlier time when the opposition cry to a broke government was “give de people dere moneee.” Now they cared only for those who profited most from being deep in the red.
At first the current administration resisted, citing Saint Lucia’s unending Season of Sacrifice. Robert Lewis would have none of that. The former education minister whose definition of “immediately” remains the nation’s best joke, turned to the courts—publicly supported by Ark angels Emma Hippolyte and Alvina Reynolds.
Conceivably on the advice of his attorney general, the prime minister relented, doubtless with tears in his eyes. Despite the on-going Season of Sacrifice, current and former parliamentarians—including now show host Richard Frederick and the MP who in 2015 wanted no part of the Salaries Review recommendations—will now pocket millions.
Ain’t life a beach!
