The non-appointment of the CEO vs. the appointment

Feb 14, 2011 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
On January 1, 2011 the Kaieteur News headline captioned; “Olato Sam named Chief Education Officer” captivated my attention and simultaneously aroused much interest and concern.
My general feeling stemmed not from the person named in the caption, but rather to the position to which the person was named. The nation has been alerted of the unfortunate situation, which existed, with regard to the non-appointment of Ms. Genevieve Whyte-Nedd, to the post of Chief Education Officer (CEO), despite her acting in that position, continuously, for more than four years.
The Kaieteur News reported that on 31st December 2010, the last day of the year the Minister of Education, Mr. Shaik Baksh, made the announcement regarding Mr. Sam’s appointment, and that of the Assistant CEO, Ms. Donna Chapman. In the said report it was also stated that Mr. Sam served as the Minister of Education, Shaik Baksh, Technical Advisor since 2007 up until his appointment, it is in this fact that most of my concern rest.
The non-confirmation of Ms. Whyte-Nedd has attracted much public debates and open criticism from various organisations including the PNCR, Trades Union Movement, other interest groups and opinion shapers in our society. It also attracted picket actions in front of the Ministry of Education. The non-appointment of Whyte-Nedd was, generally, deemed discriminatory, vindictive, and repressive. There was a strong believe that the hands of the political directorates were firmly planted in this decision, the Minister of Education was identified as the chief political official dabbling in the situation.
In its May 27th, 2010 edition Kaieteur News published an article captioned; “Chief Education Officer targeted – Patrick Yard”, in this news item, the Public Service Union slammed the Ministry of Education for, denying Whyte-Nedd the promotion and stated that “… the Ministry of Education was instrumental and complicit in the post of Chief Education Officer not being filled during the period when Mrs. Whyte-Nedd was acting in the position, for more than four years.” The Peoples National Congress Reform in a series of its press statements accused the Minister of Education and government of playing politics with the position and for applying discriminatory tactics against Ms. Whyte-Need. The Minister, Mr. Shaik Baksh, in response to all these and other claims stated in the Guyana Chronicle dated Monday 16th August 2010 that, “… he has no say in the appointment of the CEO”. He went on to state that; “…Even as Minister of Education I cannot and no Education Official can be recommended by me. I have no say in that,” he stressed.
President of the Public Service Union, Mr. Patrick Yard, in his May 27th comment told us that Shaik Baksh, in answering question as to why Whyte-Nedd’s appointment is being delayed, stated; “…be advised that the Ministry is in the process of restructuring the Education Department. As, such, please hold on to the filling of vacancy of the Chief Education Officer until this exercise is completed”. Chronicle, in the said August 16 edition, reported that the Minister reiterated that there was delay in the appointment of the CEO because the Education Sector was undergoing restructure and reform; as such the appointment could not have been made.
Critics of this excuse question why positions of other senior education officials were not affected by the restructuring. They pointed to the appointments that were made to fill vacancies such as the Assistant Chief Education Officer ( Primary), Principal Education Officer (Georgetown), Education Officer II and many others that were filled, during, this supposedly restructuring and reform period.
Despite all the protest against the non-appointment of Whyte-Nedd, the government seems unmoved or intransigent in their position. The Minister of Labour, Mansoor Nadir, refused to respond positively to those who sought his intervention in this matter. So the “Whyte-Nedd saga’ continued, until Whyte-Nedd’s resignation followed by a law suit in the High Courts.
Months have passed and government, probably in the belief that the people have forgotten the issue, appoints a new CEO, at the close of the year. In this highly publicized issue, one would have thought that any responsible and transparent administration would have ensured that it, at least, demonstrates that it has acted above board where this particular issue is concerned. But instead a number of concerns linger on this particular appointment, and this invite a conversation or inquiry on a number of issues, the major one being whether Mr. Olato Sam’s prior position as advisor to the Minister of Education, was in fact a political appointment. If it was, then it raises other serious issues, such as whether it is ethical for the Minister’s political appointee to now occupy such a senior public service position. And how will such an appointment affect the overall function of the Education Ministry.Secondly, if a political appointee has become the head of operations within the Ministry, will the office of the CEO and the Ministry of Education be void of direct political interference? Is this appointment a deviation from the culture of the local Education Sector, where it is the legitimate expectation of the people, that the CEO would be a person who would have emerged out of the local education system, having built a career there? Or, is it that all these people have migrated out of the system.
Secondly, since the CEO has been appointed does it mean that the restructuring process, referred to by the Minister, is completed? If it is, what are these changes ushered in by this restructuring programme, that were so intricately attached to the office of CEO that the appointment of the Chief Education Officer ought to have been delayed?
Thirdly, since the Minister stated that, he could not recommend anyone for the office of CEO; it would be in keeping with principles of accountability and transparency to alert the public as to how Mr. Olato Sam’s appointment was possible, or who recommended him.
The issue of the non-appointment of Genevieve Whyte-Nedd as the Chief Education Officer is notoriously known and widely criticised. There are too many suspicions and claims, which abound regarding her non-appointment, therefore, the least the Minister of Education can do is to provide clarity on the issues raised here.
We read that the “Whyte-Nedd non-appointment” is now attracting the High Court as the past Acting Chief Education Officer has moved to the courts to challenge the constitutionality of the non-appointment of a CEO for a prolonged period, inter alia. This case will undoubtedly be a landmark case, in the nation’s history and may serve as a strong precedent for other such cases, as there are quite a few existing situations. Let me reiterate that this letter is not about the person, Olato Sam, whom I do not know, and have not offered an opinion on whether or not he is the ideal person for the job, but rather it is about a process or reality, which brings his appointment into effect.
This process, which remains highly suspicious, must be examined in order to make government officials accountable and responsible to the people.
Too often these officials say and do things which smacks at transparency and good governance. Many feel confident to perform in this manner as they believe that the people are too busy to scrutinize their words, deeds and policy, the “laptop flip-up” is a case in point.
I however, wish to remind us that in this election year, in particular, let us pay keen attention to what is said and done, and hold people responsible for their actions or comments. To do less would be to facilitate their game and allow for irresponsibility and non-accountability to continue to permeate the society.
Good governance is not a privilege it is a right, we all must work to claim this right.
Lurlene Nestor

---

---