Email

Print

And so what will the Prime Minister do? Certainly he’s heard the calls for his Foreign Minister’s removal but today he told us that he is not about to heed them – in fact he’s not even close to doing so. He told us today why Elrington should have been more careful in his choice of wards, but why that does not disqualify him from being Foreign Minister.

Jules Vasquez,
“There have been howls of protest in the media, today the Deputy Leader of the PUP called for his removal or resignation.”

Hon. Dean Barrow, Prime Minister
“Which of the Deputy Leaders of the PUP?”

Jules Vasquez,
“I believe Mr. Espat, the first of four. How do you respond?”

Hon. Dean Barrow,
“In that case it is purely political and I have no difficulty with a politician acting like a politician and saying political things. But Mr. Espat apart there have been media calls and we have to take what the media says serious indeed. But I really believe that the reaction is overblown. I think that it exaggerated. It is not justified by the facts. I am prepared to concede that in the context of what was said, the whole incident is very regrettable but there are those who legitimately quarrel with what Mr. Elrington said and I think every allowance must be made for the strength of their feelings and the genuineness of their feeling.

But how do you get from their to calling for his removal which would suggest that what is involved is more than some kind of syntactical misunderstanding. This would suggest that as a matter of substance, Mr. Elrington’s position as Foreign Minister is untenable. I don’t see that at all. I think that people have raked him over the coals, maybe deservedly so, and we ought now to move on. I would say quite clearly there is no way in hell I would remove Mr. Elrington for something like this.”

Jules Vasquez,
“Shouldn’t you counsel him to back down, recant, apologize or something because this is how politics is, optics?”

Hon. Dean Barrow,
“Indeed and were I Minister Elrington I would have said, ‘Ladies and Gentlemen I used the words to mean a certain thing but it is clear that words often have more than one meaning. There were those who understood it differently and in the context of something as sensitive as our sovereignty, sanctity of our borders, it was regrettable and I therefore apologize and I will move on.’”

Jules Vasquez,
“But he isn’t doing that, he is doing the opposite. You’re his boss.”

Hon. Dean Barrow,
“But I am telling you that while I would have handled it differently, there is nothing that I can point to in the way he has handled it that I can say provides a basis for any kind of action against him. This usage of words as compared to actions of substance, we are talking about two different things and I am telling you I have every confidence in that putting forward the official position of Belize in talks with the Guatemalans or in any kind of official diplomatic dialogue, Minister Elrington can be relied on to do what is required.”

Jules Vasquez,
“You said it is not an act of substance, it is an act of words but as all lawyers always tell us, words have meaning and the meaning of it seems to be an enabler of those Guatemalans who might want to say aqui, he says it is artificial.”

Hon. Dean Barrow,
“No man, I don’t see how on a practical basis it can do that. Listen, the man has said that he was speaking in a kind of global universalist sense and he can make a case that in that sense, all borders that are manmade are artificial. It is just that you in my view must always remember the context in which you are speaking.”

Echoing Party Leader Barrow, Party Whip Michael Finnegan has gone on record to say that Elrington “misspoke” but added that does not make him a bad person. Finnegan says if it were him he would have apologized publicly and moved on.