It has become clear that the fundamental problem with the appointment of Reshmi Ramnarine is the prevailing partisan political culture which triumphs over every other consideration. It is the only way to explain why this inexperienced, unqualified, wholly unprepared young woman could have been so scandalously vaulted into such a position as head of a national intelligence agency. Frighteningly but revealingly, no questions were asked, no investigations done to verify the suitability of Ms Ramnarine to the position by the National Security Council, by the Minister of National Security, or by the Cabinet.
One major question to be answered here is who had the power and authority to advance the appointment of Ms Ramnarine so that it would get this free passage, a "bligh" really, through all of these institutions. Or is it that the country should believe that this free-wheeling manner of appointments to senior jobs in the State is the natural course of proceeding by this Government? It must be remembered that this is not the selection of a press aide or some minor functionary in a political position; this is someone to head the national intelligence gathering agency. The political culture has developed that the victorious party takes the spoils: one party wins, forms the government and makes all of the appointments and awards all the contracts.
But because the partisan politics is so narrowly cast, appointments are made from amongst those who supported and campaigned for the party to get into office.In such an environment competence, qualifications, suitability for the job are relegated to being of lesser importance compared to alignment to the ruling party. In response to such observations, politicians usually advance the argument that they have to put in office those who share similar views and they cannot give office to their enemies.
That may be a fair contention and it is a system that is operated in the United States where political appointees move in and out of office with their parties. However, in the US when it comes to appointments to significant and high-level jobs in the state system, judges of the Supreme Court and the like, such nominees have to go through congressional hearings. These are rigorous examinations of a nominee and act as the checks and balances to ensure exactly against the kind of appointment made to head the SSA.
The political culture and administration need to be advanced to develop a system of examination that would prevent narrow partisanship from prevailing.
There is another disturbing element to the fiasco and it has to do with the responses of the Government, led by Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar. First there were National Security Minister Sandy's attempts at diversion, seeking to be critical of the media for investigating and releasing information on the appointee.
Those were followed by other ministers falling over themselves to highlight the qualifications and experience of Ms Ramnarine. Those attempts all turned out to be filled with misinformation.
Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar then sought to hang blame for the sordid mess on the Opposition. Next, she shared responsibility around for the failure and now she is in the mode of having everyone "move on."
Subhas Panday was perhaps the worse, claiming that no mistake was made and the PNM and the media were just stirring up confusion.Only Prakash Ramadhar thought it necessary to own up to serious errors made and that an apology to the nation was needed. The hope must be that quietly away from the public view there is a recognition that the approach has to be changed otherwise the Government will simply "move on" to the next disaster.