Cabinet reshuffle really a distraction

It illustrates an ingrained culture adopted from colonial rule, where problem people are shuffled around the organisation’s leadership to disguise its weaknesses, its ineffectiveness, its progressive moral decay. Cabinet reshuffles are like moving around electrical wiring or outlets in an old house, believing that doing so will improve electrical output. so what purpose does a reshuffle serve apart from its use as a distraction and a sham to pretend that if immoral, callous, ineffective, egotistic people are moved from one decision-making post to another, out of this will suddenly come just, fair, innovative government?

Aside from this, does the International Monetary Fund, Inter-American Development Bank, World Bank and so on believe it’s prudent financial management for the Government to rent prime business property, namely One Woodbrook Place, on a series of deficit budgets? Do the international financial watchdogs/loan sharks think it’s prudent for the Government to rent any property and not use it? What of taxpayers? Do taxpaying citizens think it’s prudent for the Government to rent property that it doesn’t need, because the property belongs to big-shot elites?

More so, do taxpayers think the Government is sensible in renting prime high-end property at executive rates that it cannot afford, owning to the fact that the Government is running the country on another deficit budget, and it raised the debt ceiling to do so? Do taxpayers feel secure and comforted or alarmed that the Government is wastefully spending their scarce tax dollars this way?

B JOSEPH via email