Clash between Govt and state boards

THE EDITOR: Should government related boards be independent of government influence? This is a burning question these days. It applies to boards of directors of state corporations, as well as companies in which the government has minority interest. Firms that have a working relationship with government, but no state financial participation, are also included in this debate. Two issues are involved. The first is the government’s announced commitment to transparency and morality in public affairs. The second is a legal position — does the government really have any rights to tell boards of directors what to do?

Take the boards of state companies. Granted that the state can appoint whom it wants, it nonetheless appears that the founding fathers wanted to give these boards the independence to do what is right without political pressures or interference. Even where state appointed directors may feel a certain sympathy, they are bound by conscience and morality to do what they think is right even while trying to be aware of the opinions in certain quarters. But carrying out the dictates of overlords is strictly and severely incorrect, morally and legally. Let us go to the other extreme. What is the position of boards of companies that have good working relationships with the government? Is it right for government jefes to seek to enforce their wills? The answer most certainly has to be “no.”

There is a third danger here. Outside of morality and legality, there is the serious question of consequences. If important government officials have their way in persuading boards of directors to act or to make appointments as government wishes, then the immediate consequence is a loss of confidence by the board in itself. Such a quisling board would lose its independence and its initiative and would soon become nothing but a rubber stamp or a pipeline. This is tantamount to corrosion of principle and rectitude, and could be correctly described as corruption. What is even worse is that wrong decisions that boards may be forced to take as a result of political pressures, could undermine and even destroy the company itself, and produce serious shocks and cracks in the economy. This is a very disturbing consequence and that is why competent people on competent boards must be left to make competent decisions, as the present and moreso the future depend on it.

These forms of skulduggery traditionally swirl around the activities of political minions and those close to the power base,  the so-called assistants to the Cardinal Richelieus of the modern state. Because of their prominence, they frequently get away with heavy influence peddling and mind-bending. That is why it is essential that the key people in any government must continue to keep their eyes on what’s going on around them lest they be accidentally gypped, and the country made to suffer in the process. Eric Williams is the one who insisted on morality in public affairs. We must never stray away from that concept.

PERCY DYER
Port-of- Spain