|
|
|
Lady Janice Compton: Defending her family’s
name |
It was during his Christmas
message that Prime Minister Kenny Anthony advised St Lucians that
things weren’t going to be easy and that everyone would have to pull
in their belts. I did not hear the message, but it certainly was all
the talk in various forums for some days.
Not too long after the
Prime Minister’s exhortations, government announced that former US
President Bill Clinton would be visiting St Lucia. A visit by a
former US President, while something we might all consider a
pleasant experience, has to involve some cost. Former President
Clinton after all, makes a living from delivering speeches in return
for large remunerations. Coupled with that, the hotel,
entertainment, security expenses, to mention a few, certainly all
adds up.
And so my husband, as did others, asked a question: Who
was funding such an exercise? It was a question any St Lucian had a
right to ask. When it comes to matters of government there is meant
to be transparency and accountability.
I recall some years ago
when St Lucia hosted the First Ladies Conference of Latin America
and the Caribbean, I was heavily criticised by the St Lucia Party
and the question raised by them in Parliament as to the cost of that
conference.
And so my husband asked the question and, lo and
behold, screams and shouts from every corner.
Someone called and
jokingly said: “I see they have set the DOWS on your husband.” I
asked what the DOWS were. He laughed and replied, “The Dogs of
War.”
Another person remarked that whenever my husband comments
on anything he has a laugh watching how “they all jump up and start
making noise like a bunch of yard fowls that think a mongoose is
around.”
These comments were made in jest, but it really is not a
laughing matter, for what has happened in St Lucia is that St
Lucians in positions of responsibility who should provide the checks
and balances in our society, are remaining deafeningly silent for
fear that the “DOWS” will savage them.
By the DOWS, I mean the
likes of Leo, Shelton, Claudius or Earl, or, if it is a big enough
issue or big enough prey, one of the big guns, say Minister Pierre
who is usually assigned to my husband with his “old and passé”
line.
I have come to realise that all this clacking and barking
and savaging comes from a fear of Sir John Compton, for who better
knows from his years of experience in government what is—or rather
is not—happening in government today.
This government spent over
a million dollars of tax payers’ money on an inquiry intending to
bury Sir John. When that wasn’t enough they privately threatened him
and some endeavoured to demean him. I have to say that on these
occasions such behaviour speaks more of the character of the
bestower than of the recipient.
Power can be a very heady thing.
Lasting power is granted to only a few—and political power is often
fleeting. What is important, however, is not what the power is but
how best one uses that power.
I have said before that during my
husband’s term in office as Prime Minister we tried to live as
normally as was possible—and in a manner that we would always live.
And we raised our children that way and instilled in them the value
of every human being.
I have written also that my husband was
given a car that he never kept—that it was given to the nation. And
so we come to the matter of the car.
In 1996, April to be
precise, the month my husband retired as Prime Minister, he told me
that someone was sending a car for him. I recall laughing and
reminding him of the times during our marriage that he would remark
that he could have been a millionaire in this political life, given
the number of times persons had tried to bribe him, but that he had
always said he liked to sleep at night.
I told him that our car
was seven years old and that we would stay with the seven year old
car and sleep at night.
The following week I went to the Prime
Minister’s official residence to speak to my husband on a certain
matter and in passing through the garage, I saw a new car bearing a
government number plate. I asked my husband about it and he said he
had given the car to the government for the Prime Minister’s use. It
was the week before he left the office of the Prime Minister.
Someone last week sent me a copy of the STAR’s report of the St
Lucia Labour Party’s meeting on the Castries Market Steps which
claimed that Mr Chagoury had sent a car to the nation and suggested
that my husband had tried during this administration to get it for
himself.
This kind of misinformation brings to mind a comment
last week in a BBC report about a British Labour Party government
document, released to bolster support for the Iraq War. An
American/Arab postgraduate student claims that some of his
ten-year-old thesis was plagiarised to produce this document. The
British Labour Party MP Glenda Jackson, in criticising her
government, spoke of “misinformation as the parliamentary term for
lying.”
Here are the facts and St Lucians will decide for
themselves:
It was said on the Market Steps that my husband sat
in a car in Paris and said how nice a car was (nothing wrong in
commenting on a car). Mr Chagoury is said to have replied that since
he liked it he would send one for him.
Why would Mr Chagoury send
a car for my husband to enjoy and give it to the government just a
matter of days before Sir John was leaving office?
Why would Sir
John receive a vehicle while he was Prime Minister, put a government
number plate on it, hand it over to Dr Vaughan Lewis to use for a
year and then wait until Dr Anthony is in office to get it
back?
Why would Sir John receive a new car and not keep it and
wait for it to have been driven by a number of different persons and
a year and half later try to claim it?
It has been alleged that
ministers in this government received expensive paintings and that
one accepted an all-expenses paid holiday touring Italy—ten days in
Venice, Florence and Rome—for himself and his girlfriend. That is a
matter for those persons to answer. What brings me to comment is
that the replies were about a watch and a car and not about the
original allegations. I say “allegations” because these references
have been made by others. It is now the norm for this
administration. Make a noise in one corner to divert attention away
from the reality in the other.
The saddest part of this saga is
that I spoke of this car to a minister in the government and at the
end of the conversation, he commented, “It was the right thing to do
to give it to the nation.” That minister chose not to remember that
conversation. Instead, the St Lucia Labour party tried sully my
husband’s name rather than answer the questions I can only assume
they wished to avoid.
There is nothing of integrity, nothing
gentlemanly, admirable or decent in sullying a person’s reputation
in this manner.
Over the years, the Labour Party has used this
policy of misinformation knowing that some of their mud will always
stick.
This administration came to office on a promise of
integrity, transparency, honesty and fairness—of which there is
little sign.
In closing, may I say that Sir john Compton was the
Prime Minister who chose through his tenure in office to drive his
pick-up whenever he could. He would be found in an official car only
when he had to appear officially somewhere. There was the yellow
pick-up, the red one, the white one, the silver grey one and today
there is the green one.
The last official car purchased during
his tenure in office was a Toyota Cressida in 1989. It remained as
the official car for the seven years following.
This
administration by contrast has spent something in the region of half
a million dollars (that’s duty-free prices—a million dollars
equivalent duty paid) on luxury, top of the line cars for the Prime
Minister’s use during the last five years. Not to mention for the
Ministers and favoured contracted friends.
The Labour Party has
always been promoted as the party of the poor and depressed, while
the UWP was said to represent the privileged. Put to stand side by
side today, I wonder if anyone would see the truth in such a
thought.
It is not often that I have shared my thoughts over the
years—mainly when the name and reputation of our family has been
threatened. On these occasions, there has been much anger from the
Labour ranks. Apparently one is meant to bear the slings and arrows
and never respond. Only they must respond en force.
I imagine the
DOWS and the chickens will be pointing in my direction soon all
scrambling to protect their territory. I have spoken for mine. But
it is the deafening silence of the checks and balances that will be
more in my thoughts, those who have lost their voice, their courage,
their concern and their dignity. This is the sadness I feel along
with the overwhelming sadness that those one might have respected,
could so belittle themselves to so deceive.