By Cletus I. Springer
There’s no question that the Westminster system has had a deep and lasting impact on governance in its former colonies, notably in political, legal systems and democratic spheres.
Some countries have tried to adapt and reshape the system to reflect local circumstances. For example, Guyana (1970), Trinidad and Tobago (1976), Dominica (1978) and Barbados (2021) removed the British monarch as their Head of State. However, it would be true to say that even in those countries, Westminster remains intact. Bicameral parliaments are the norm. Parliamentary representatives are chosen through regular elections, based on the first-past-the-post system. Similarly, in those countries that have ditched the Privy Council as their Final Appellate Court, legal systems remain rooted in English Common Law.
In these and other respects, it can be argued that Caribbean Governments have retained some of the positive features of Westminster. However, there are some areas where the system has not worked with the same intent and/or achieved the same positive impacts as in the UK.
THIs commentary focuses on the role and function of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC).
Chaired by the Leader of the Opposition (LOO), the PAC is legally mandated to hold Governments accountable for the management of public funds. Under Standing Order 67 of Saint Lucia’s House of Assembly, the PAC is authorized to examine accounts showing the appropriation of monies approved by the Legislature and to ensure these monies were spent for authorized purposes.
While I can’t speak about other LOOS, I remain deeply impressed with Sir Julian Hunte performance as Chairman of the PAC. He regularly summoned Permanent Secretaries to account for expenditure and to address issues raised by the Director of Audit.
Importantly, Sir Julian was not impeded in performing this role. Most, if not all Permanent Secretaries felt obliged to inform their respective Ministers whenever they were summoned and brief them on issues that were raised.
I have frequently cited Sir Julian’s sterling example as evidence that notwithstanding its carbuncles, there are many positives in the Westminster System that could and should be leveraged to improve Saint Lucia’s governance. I became more convinced of this, when a colleague from Jamaica and me were invited to testify before a UK Parliamentary Committee, tasked with revamping the UK Government’s policy on Climate Change relating to Small Island Development States.
In the manner ably demonstrated by Sir Julian’s PAC, these Committees frequently summon ministers, request documents, and produce influential reports that have shaped legislation and policy. Generally, they have helped to enhance parliamentary oversight, encourage transparency, and enable sustained investigation of complex matters.
However, there is one important snag. The Westminster System assumes an Opposition will always exist. However, the 2022 and 2026 General Elections in Barbados quashed this assumption. In the absence of a LOO, the Barbados’ President used his discretion to appoint senators who debated legislation, questioned government policy and provided accountability. However, within the Lower House, the Government had free reign.
Instructively, since the 1990s, Barbados has relied heavily on its Social Compact—comprising elected and unelected representatives of government, the private sector and labour unions –to help maintain economic stability, social cohesion and collaborative governance. Critically, by emphasizing cooperation over conflict, the Compact has helped Barbados to manage crippling economic challenges like inflation, chronic debt, unemployment and fiscal deficits.
Saint Lucia had a similar set-up (National Economic and Social Consultative Council) in the mid-1990’s, which did not survive the change in Government in 1997. A National Economic Council (NEC) was later established in the early 2000s, but it did not deliver any tangible outcomes.
For me, the longevity and success of Barbados’ Social Compact, speaks far more eloquently than the Constitution about the importance of a mature, responsible and collaborative approach to governance. It says that development parts can voluntarily pursue sound governance.
A fortnight ago, I attended a stakeholder workshop, organized by the International Conservation Caucus Foundation (ICCF) to ponder a Voluntary Protection Agreement (VPA) for a 60-site at Dauphin that the family of Sir Calixte George wishes to donate to help Saint Lucians to embrace their natural, cultural and archaeological patrimony. The site is widely recognized as one of Saint Lucia’s most important historical sites from Amerindian days, through the French occupation to today. It is home to diverse species of flora and fauna of national and global significance. It is referenced in some of Sir Derek Walcott’s literary works.
As far as I am aware, this was the first time a group of parliamentarians from any chamber of our Parliament had joined with stakeholders from the public and private sectors to explore solutions to pressing land and water conservation challenges facing our country.
The make-up of the parliamentarians was both impressive and instructive. It included, Senate President, Hon. Alvina Reynolds, and senators Embert Charles, Elisha Norbert, Tommy Descartes, Dr. Virginia Albert-Poyotte and Ignatius Jean. To give their party affiliations here, is unnecessary as at no time, did partisanship rear its monstrous head.
Other attendees included representatives of Forestry Department, the Attorney-General’s office, Development Control Authority, Water Resources Management Authority, UNESCO National Commission, Department of Sustainable Development, St. Lucia National Trust, the Chamber of commerce, and critically, the family of Sir Calixte George.
So, what are VPAs?
Essentially, these are arrangements in which landowners commit to conserve natural resources without being legally mandated to do so. These agreements are often incentivized through technical support, financial payments, tax breaks, or recognition programmes that are usually cheaper than traditional, regulatory approaches.
The workshop also considered the pressing issue of water conservation, through the lens of watershed management. At the end of the discussion, it became clear that our country’s water woes extend well beyond replacing aged pipelines and de-silting the Millet Reservoir.
I feel strongly that our Government should push voluntarism as part of its people empowerment agenda. As Singapore’s success has shown, doing something willingly because it is the right thing to do is a powerful driver of personal and national development.














