By Dr Isaac Newton

There are raving concerns but no real consensus over the public feud between opposition leader, Lester Bird and Her Excellency, Governor General (GG), Dame Louise Lake-Tack. At present, I suspect neither Bird nor the GG would want to be buried in the same place.

Dr Isaac Newton is an international leadership and change management consultant and political adviser who specialises in government and business relations, and sustainable development projects. Dr Newton works extensively in West Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America, and is a graduate of Oakwood College, Harvard, Princeton and Columbia. He has published several books on personal development and written many articles on economics, leadership, political, social, and faith-based issues.

This negative publicity is a losing battle even a travesty, against the leadership image of Antigua and Barbuda (A&B). Directly and indirectly, the leadership stature of two of the nation’s top officials is in disarray. But the promotion of incendiary rhetoric also tarnishes the high offices they hold. Simply put, this unfolding is outrageously distasteful.

The controversy

The outward crux of the disagreement, as told by supporters of Bird, is that he opposed the GG’s appointment because he felt that she was openly supportive of the United Progressive Party (UPP). Bird further expressed that the Ms. Lake-Tack’s cultural disconnect coupled with her financier status, would have compromised her ability to serve the nation above the political fray. The Antigua Labour Party (ALP) operatives declared that the GG departed from a well established commonwealth tradition of inviting the leader of the opposition to Government House for his instrument of appointment.

They reported also that the manner in which the GG denied and or selectively accepted Bird’s recommendations for national awards, during this year’s independence celebration, departed from expected standards. According to A&B’s custom, recommendations for national honorees are usually accepted by the GG, as a courtesy to the opposition leader, though the GG could exercise discretion in granting or denying them.

Bird and some leaders of the ALP further felt slighted that appointed Senators were not accorded the ceremonial honor of accepting their instruments of appointment at Government House. ALP operatives claimed that both the GG’s silence and inaction serve only to signal her disdain and indifference to Bird and the ALP.

According to the GG’s operatives, the chief motive behind the disagreement stretches back 14 years ago. They verbalized that Bird still nurses an old grudge because, in her capacity as a private citizen, Ms.Lake-Tack registered her public disapproval of Ron Sanders’ appointment to London. At the time, Sanders was Bird’s choice for High Commissioner, when he was prime minister. Operatives shared that Bird disrespected the GG when he first opposed, and later boycotted her appointment to the office of the GG.

They further claim that Bird and ALP elected officials have subsequently refused to attend Parliament on two occasions. Because Bird and his cadre have gone out of their way to point out, that the GG executes her duties in fragrantly partisan ways, operatives feel that the GG should not reward them for disrespecting her. They argued that even the act of extending an olive branch would be degrading of the GG’s high office. And they believe that Bird and his supporters, sadly vented their feelings in the local media with far reaching impact to regional and international domains.

Solving the issue

In any democracy, we must accept that we will not always agree on every issue. There will be turf fights, and partisan tensions, and struggles over just causes. This is to be expected. Our different orientations, various socio-religious values, and particular needs are likely to create responsible disagreements.

But we must learn to differentiate radical dissent from vicious attacks. Radical dissent encompasses diverse communities in sincere struggles over passionate concerns. But the sting of vicious attacks buried in venomous divisiveness, has no place in our growing democracy.

Resolving our differences honorably means that our spiritual creed should move us beyond moments of personal pain and national trials. We should however, seek to solve conflicts within frameworks of moral ideals. These ideals must be marked by compassion, forgiveness and unity.

Regardless of the legitimacy of who is right or wrong, it is better to examine the sincerity of our dispositions rather than the prestige of our positions. The first helps us see the big picture—the second defends preferred turfs.

The PM’s role

I was pleased to learn that PM Spencer will receive an honorary doctorate from the St. Francis Xavier University in Canada. He will be honored for his political ascendency to the office of the PM, and for his leadership in the trade and labor unions and other community associations.

Since Spencer’s vision of leadership was shaped by his studies in the areas of social leadership and community development, the public animus between Bird and the GG, offers him a rare opportunity to demonstrate leadership acumen on this important matter. Clearly, it is not good that the GG being Spencer’s appointment is marred in open controversy. The price of inaction is too high for the PM and the nation to pay. In his efforts to bring Bird and the GG to still waters, Spencer should:

Consider a one-on-one meeting with Bird and the GG

Call Bird and the GG and express his desire--deeply and sincerely-- to facilitate alternative ways to resolve their escalating conflict.

Invite each leader separately to meet with him privately. The aim is to clarify the nature and source of the conflict.

Meet with Bird and the GG together, and assist them in venting their differences in a supportive atmosphere. During this meeting, the PM should help both leaders search for common interests
Encourage both Bird and the GG to listen attentively to each other for mutual understanding
Recommend that Bird and the GG agree to implement specific actions immediately, en-route to seeking professional meditation, if a win-win solution is not found. This meditation process should be paid for by the state, and its progress monitored by the PM.

Pose for a national photo with Bird and the GG after differences are settled. This would illustrate collective success for the PM, Bird and the GG.

Faith Based Community’s input

No public official, appointed to serve with nobility, would want to resist the call to reconciliation by respected leaders, bishops and pastors in the faith based community. Leaders of impeccable moral standing that are experienced in solving conflicts and trained in pastoral counseling, should intervene in the name of God and service to country. They should call both Bird and the GG into private sessions.

Protected by confidential guarantees and for the purpose of healing, religious leaders may ask both Bird and the GG, to outline what they find praiseworthy about each other. This exercise would tame combative energies and set the tone for a new beginning. Through spiritual therapy, a plan of action to assist Bird and the GG, in working through real or perceived tensions should be pursed. I believe the intervention of spiritual leaders could turn resentment pain into innovative outcomes.

If our future is to be propelled by high hope, we should encourage not undercut, a clear path towards sustainable reconciliation. But beyond the facts, feelings and positions that surround inevitable differences, the fate of the nation, hangs on how we manage our private affairs and public lives. As change-makers, we should turn amazing disgrace into amazing grace.