Smith defends his staying in Cabinet
He emerged from the December twenty-eighth Cabinet reshuffle as the man who gained the most, in terms of ministerial upgrades. With the addition of Foreign Trade, held previously by Eamon Courtenay and Tourism, the former domain of Mark Espat, Godfrey Smith has assumed a new stature as the “go to” guy in Cabinet. While some on the outside might look at this former rebel who, with the solidarity of six of his colleagues, forced the Prime Minister to the bargaining table, abandoned his colleagues for his own personal political gain, Smith says that’s not the case. When he sat down this morning with the media in his first interview since the Cabinet reshuffle, Smith told reporters that the acceptance of his new portfolios was neither a betrayal of his colleagues, nor a bid for political power.
Godfrey Smith, Minister of Foreign Affairs, Tourism & Foreign Trade
?In relation to the first part of your question, it can?t be a strategic move on my part if I can?t award myself these things. I wasn?t the one who gave it to myself. So I could not have developed such a strategy. As I indicated before it was not until late December twenty-eighth that I became aware. In terms of the other assertion, my position is this, that there are no vacancies for officers on the central executive of the Peoples United Party, that I am aware of right now. Nothing has been offered to me and neither have I asked for anything. In the event, in the event a vacancy arises, and people within the party say to me we think you are qualified for a particular post, then I might consider it. But until then it is wild speculation and I don?t wish to feed into that more than I have just said.?
?My understanding of the pact of August is different. It is my understanding that what we agreed to was that having resigned effective August sixteenth, in the event, we were called upon to serve in the cabinet we would do so on the principle that we go in all together or none at all. In the event, we were called upon and we did go back in to serve all together. So that certainly from my perspective, from my thinking the pact had expired. But subsequent to that there were several meeting including the seven ministers and we had freely discussed that the pact was no longer in existence. That occurred in several meetings post August.?
?Thirdly, it is somewhat illogical to think that within this system of government within which we operate that a group of minister could conceivable say to the Prime Minister at no time can you embark on a Cabinet reshuffle which removes any of us from Cabinet and bind him to that for the rest of the term. So I raise these points to meet the question you asked, to show that in fact the objectives of the pact of August were realized when we were all invited to go back into Cabinet and we did so.?
?Essentially, the purpose of August was to bring some reform to the governmental process. We believe–certainly I believe–that with the institution of things like the public finance committee, supported by the technical team, with the two minister of finance, with the consultations historic as it is, in terms of the budget process with the stakeholders that substantial reforms are underway, it does not lie within or on the lips of anyone to make a judgement of how successful that is now. That is something that will be borne out over time. So that to come to the issue of the to walk or not to walk, I believe certainly that for the rest of the four to have walked would have undermined the very principle, which we set out to achieve which was to bring about some adjustment, some change, some reform, which we consider to actually be underway. Remember at the end of the day Jules that I am a PUP and all of us involved are PUPs. Our objective is not to play into the hands of the United Democratic Party and bring the Government down. So let?s not forget that fact.?
The other three members of the so called G-7 who remain in Cabinet are Joe Coye, Servulo Baeza and Johnny Briceño.
