Over the last few years there have been calls for accountability. Interestingly enough, many of those calling for accountability seem to expect this from everyone else but themselves. That is not to say that the calls have been all misdirected, but they certainly should not be exclusionary.

Wesley Barrett

In this respect we should identify for assessment and accountability audits key institutions and bodies across the board that are charged with the responsibility for decision-making on how as a nation we live and progress. We should perhaps start with the public sector.

Heading the list should be our Parliament. Should not the Parliament account for its conduct in and out of session? Given the need for some latitude for interchanges in the cut and thrust of parliamentary debate, should there not be a threshold of permissible interchange and cross-talk that should on no account be crossed even in the face of rife provocation?

This elicits the question whether the rules governing conduct - if indeed there are current operational ones - should not be revised and made public so that a perceptive and alert public may observe the extent to which there is conformity which would be taken into account in decision making regarding those seeking re-election. Equally important, should not there be a state-of-the-nation debate and formal report regularly in which the government and Opposition give an account of their stewardship?

I am always intrigued by the sense of misplaced anxiety and anticipation attendant on a change of government. "Who will be the chairman and members of this and that board?" and "Will Mr X and Ms Y be reappointed?" The speculations are always gross and wild. Instead, I suggest that as soon as the date for a general election is announced, all government-appointed boards should start preparing an honest and comprehensive exit report incorporating previous reports on their work, achievements and unachieved objectives. This report should be informative to any new board, irrespective of the political party forming the government. Of course, the report format should be fairly standard. Anxiety should then be about a sober, even revealing and reflective report. Incumbents on the other hand should expect any eventuality!

This leads me to reflect in this article on one agency of the Ministry of Education, namely, the National Council on Education (NCE) and its achievement reports. Other agencies will be addressed subsequently. This body was and still is expected to play a crucial role in the education system. The question is whether it has delivered on the promise to influence and impact continuity in sound educational policy from one administration to another. It is supposed to have a research agenda which bears on educational policy of the day. In light of the many policy issues that have emerged and are still emerging - financing education, compulsory schooling, the school-age population - the question is whether the NCE has been a major contributor to policy formulation. I often reflect on the desirability of hearing the voice of the NCE on such issues. It would be ironic if its recommendations were only given in confidence and treated accordingly!

Many people are still inclined to ask about the demonstrated achievements of the body over time. We know that in the past it has attempted an analysis of the results of the Caribbean Examinations Council examinations, particularly in respect of the newer established high schools and that some members have been strident on the performances of these schools. The analysis of the results, often regarded as skewed and limited, has frequently been questioned and even discredited by schools, however. Many have claimed that the exercise has not been helpful and has been more of a distraction and irritant than anything else. Whatever have been the merits of the positions on the matter, it is clear that the outcome has not been regarded as an achievement.

Apart from the above case, the body has not really been visible and audible enough, either because of a press that perhaps has not been inquisitive enough to ask questions and report the answers, or the body has not itself been sufficiently communicative. Perhaps, too, the government has not been acknowledging publicly some of the advice, recommendations and counsel it has received and acted on. In any case, there ought to be more accounting and reporting. More important, it seems that the council's remit and modus operandi need redefinition. One recalls that some time ago there was actual talk about a review, but like many other things this matter has apparently quietly disappeared from the educational radar. Will it reappear any time soon?

The NCE is supposed to make recommendations to the government on the appointment of school boards. There are laid-down procedures, including the receipt of recommendations from the principal, the territorial education officer and the member of parliament for the constituency in which the school is located. This was supposed to be a departure from earlier practice in which the MP was the only person who submitted a recommendation.

I find interesting a recent report in the media of the appointment of an alleged political activist as chairman of a school board on the acknowledged sole recommendation of the MP. It seems to give credence to allegations of the unchanged role of the MP.

The matter in this case should be investigated to determine whether or not the principal and education officer were negligent or tardy in submitting their recommendations. If they were, then they should be made to give account. Perhaps the deeper question is the de facto practices and functioning of the NCE in this and other issues. We hope that we won't have to join cynics who declare perceptively that "the more things change the more they remain the same". Positive changes are needed.

Not only the NCE, but other national bodies should not begin their tenure without setting out succinctly, internally and otherwise, their work agenda and targets. Built in their programme of work should be provision for an honest appraisal of their "tour of duties" at regular intervals. I would also propose that they acknowledge what positive achievements they inherited from any outgoing board and build on the legacies, and not be consumed with prolonged discussion on what was not achieved. Ongoing accounting must become a routine.

wesebar@yahoo.com

Executive Class

Gardens with Gravel

Death to the Mullet!