The Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) has spent approximately 13 of the last 44 years warming the Opposition benches which, when added to a 32 to 31 majority, can make for anxiety in Government.

One of the risks is too much haste in decision-making which could turn out to be costly to the people of Jamaica. As the old dictum says, haste makes waste.

Prime Minister Andrew Holness and the JLP Government need to distinguish between situations where speed is required and where excessive speed is harmful.

There are definite circumstances in which speed is good. The Government must be commended for moving expeditiously to appoint new boards. This mammoth task was necessary and urgent to ensure uninterrupted supervision of a large number of institutions.

The quality of the appointments will only be known over time, but we record our appreciation to those who have agreed to serve in these unpaid positions.

There are also circumstances in which speed is risky or, worse, harmful to the interest of the country. For example, the changeover of people in Jamaica’s diplomatic posts.

We would suggest that the Government makes haste slowly with respect to certain postings which are of critical importance to Jamaica.

We speak of our ambassadors to the United States and China and the high commissioner to the United Kingdom who were appointed by the previous Government and who are to demit office in another 13 days.

For the record, the diplomats involved took the proper and accepted step of tendering their resignations immediately after the February 25 General Election. We hold no brief for them, but we are concerned on two grounds.

First, humanitarian grounds. Certainly in the case of the US and China, the appointments were relatively recent, and in one case children of school age are involved.

They have just reorganised their lives and that of their families to take up their positions and will have to do so again in an unusually short space of time. They will also need to seek paying employment if they were not already employed in the foreign service.

This is a difficult situation for anyone, and those who agreed to serve Jamaica in these overseas postings deserve some consideration. Because it has not always been done in the past is no justification for continuing the practice of in with the new, out with the old.

For example, Mrs Fay Pickersgill has barely spent six months in China and there should be no great haste to remove her, as she is not known to be a People’s National Party activist.

Second, the quick removal creates the distinct possibility that there will be a lengthy hiatus when there will be nobody in the post of ambassador/high commissioner.

The replacements have to be carefully selected and then their names and curriculum vitae have to be submitted to the Government of the country to which they are to be posted.

There is usually a period of time for the process of granting “agreement”. This, in the past, has taken some time in countries where there are over 150 nations represented.

We see no need for excessive haste. The people currently in the posts are well-intentioned Jamaicans who would do nothing to harm Jamaica’s interests.

The changeover should be orderly, humane and avoid a hiatus.