Dear Editor,
There comes a point in the life of every government when somebody has to look around the room and quietly ask the question that nobody seems particularly eager to ask: Is everybody really sitting in the right chair? In Guyana, that question may now be worth asking.
The suggestion of a Cabinet reshuffle is, of course, not a particularly popular subject among politicians. In our political culture, questioning the performance of a minister can quickly become a question about political loyalty. If you dare to suggest that a minister may not be delivering, someone may conclude that you must be against the government, against the party, or perhaps simply against progress itself. Yet there is a rather important distinction between political loyalty and administrative competence. They are not interchangeable.
A minister can be loyal to the government, loyal to the party, loyal to the President and still not be the most suitable person to manage a particular ministry. That is not necessarily an insult. It is simply a fact of management. Not every good politician is a good administrator, just as not every good administrator is necessarily a good politician. Perhaps Guyana should therefore take a brief vacation from personalities and politics and talk about performance.
The country is awash with money compared with what previous governments had available. The oil wealth has transformed the government’s financial capacity and created opportunities that earlier generations could scarcely have imagined. But money has a peculiar habit of exposing management weaknesses. When resources are scarce, everyone can blame the shortage. When resources are abundant, the excuses become somewhat more difficult to explain.
We hear constantly about transformation, modernization, development, efficiency and accountability. These are wonderful words. They sound particularly impressive at political meetings and in press conferences. But sooner or later, words have to leave the microphone and report for duty.
A road must actually be completed. A hospital must actually function. A school must actually open. A government office must actually provide a service without the citizen having to make repeated visits, telephone calls and inquiries before somebody discovers which desk is responsible. And this is where the question of competence becomes unavoidable.
When President Irfaan Ali announced his Cabinet in September 2025[1], he indicated that ministers would be continuously assessed and that changes could be made where necessary. That commitment should be taken seriously. Continuous assessment cannot simply mean asking a minister whether everything is going well and receiving the expected answer that everything is going very well.
In Guyana, almost everything is going very well, at least until you actually need the service. Perhaps a more useful approach would be to assess each ministry on what it was expected to accomplish, what has actually been accomplished, how much was spent, how long it took and whether citizens can see a meaningful difference in their daily lives.
This should not be a political witch-hunt. It should be basic management. If a minister is performing well, that performance should be acknowledged. If another is struggling because the portfolio is particularly complex, perhaps additional support is necessary. And if another has consistently demonstrated that the portfolio is beyond his or her capacity, then the President should have the courage to make a change.
That is what management is supposed to be about. Unfortunately, in Guyana, changing a minister can sometimes be treated as though the government is breaking up a family. There are concerns about hurt feelings, political supporters, constituencies, factions and who might become offended if someone is moved from one ministry to another. But the ministry does not belong to the minister. The office belongs to the people.
A Cabinet reshuffle should therefore not be political musical chairs, where the music stops and everybody grabs whichever chair happens to be available. Nor should it be a reward ceremony for political loyalty. It should be about putting the right people in the right places. There is also no shame in moving someone to a portfolio better suited to his or her abilities. The minister who struggles in one ministry may perform admirably in another. What would be unfortunate is keeping someone in a position simply because removing that person would be politically inconvenient.
Guyana has entered an era in which the quality of management will matter as much as the quantity of money available. Oil revenues can finance roads, hospitals, schools, housing, infrastructure and other national priorities. But money cannot manage a ministry. Money cannot write a good policy. Money cannot supervise a project. Money cannot hold a contractor accountable. And money certainly cannot answer a frustrated citizen standing at a government counter. People have to do those things. That is why competence should become one of the most important considerations in deciding who occupies a Cabinet seat.
The President should be able to look around the Cabinet table without worrying about who might be offended and ask a simple question: If this were a private company and the citizens of Guyana were the shareholders, would we be satisfied with the performance of every chief executive sitting around this table? That question might produce some interesting silence. It might also produce something more valuable, a Cabinet that is continuously evaluated on performance rather than simply on political convenience.
The people of Guyana are not asking for perfection. They understand that government is complicated, that projects encounter difficulties and that not every problem can be solved overnight. What citizens are entitled to expect, however, is competence, accountability, urgency and measurable progress.
Public office should not be treated as a permanent parking space. A ministerial position is a responsibility, not a reward. If the government believes in accountability, then accountability must apply to everyone. If it believes in efficiency, then inefficient performance must have consequences. And if it believes in delivering better services to the people, then the performance of those responsible for delivering those services must be examined honestly.
Perhaps, therefore, the time has come for the President to take a hard look at his Cabinet. Not because somebody is politically unpopular. Not because another faction wants a seat. Not because a particular minister has made an unfortunate statement. And certainly not because Guyanese politics demands that somebody be sacrificed to satisfy the newspapers or opposition parties.
Do it for the simplest reason of all: competence. After all, the citizens of Guyana are ultimately the shareholders. They are paying the bills. They are providing the resources. They are living with the consequences of decisions made in those Cabinet rooms. They should therefore be entitled to ask whether the people sitting around that table are delivering the best possible return on the country’s greatest opportunity. If the answer is yes, carry on. If the answer is no, perhaps it is time to move some chairs. And this time, let competence decide who sits in them.
Sincerely,
Keith Bernard
References
- President Ali sets results-driven agenda as the new Cabinet is sworn in - News Room Guyana — newsroom.gy ↩