|
A Shabby Sacking
Posted: Thursday, October 16, 2003
Newsday Editorial
WAS it government policy to merge the Unit Trust Corporation with First Citizens Bank or was it simply an idea floated by Prime Minister Manning for public comment? We ask the question because it concerns the shocking, contemptuous and inexplicable dismissal of Mr Hubert Alleyne as chairman of the UTC.
To begin with, Mr Alleyne had to suffer the indignity of hearing he had been removed from the post in a news broadcast over the electronic media on Friday last. This was because the order revoking his appointment, signed by Acting President Linda Baboolal on Thursday, was delivered to the Unit Trust office on Friday afternoon. Now surely, the person in the Finance Ministry who instructed the Acting President to fire Mr Alleyne should have known that he was not an executive chairman and, therefore, did not present himself at the office on a day-to-day basis. In any case, why was notification of his dismissal treated like an ordinary piece of correspondence; why was it not delivered personally as common decency would require; indeed, why was it not delivered to his Federation Park home as the official notice of his appointment was done? We find this treatment of the UTC chairman grossly insensitive and insulting to an official serving in such an important position. But we are even more puzzled by the reasons given, officially and otherwise, for Mr Alleyne's removal. In an interview with the media, Mr Conrad Enill, Minister in the Ministry of Finance, accused him of not carrying out "government policy."
When asked what was government's policy in this matter, Mr Enill apparently could not answer. The reason for this may well be the fact that no such policy regarding the UTC exists. For our part, we are not aware of any such policy and, as we said at the beginning, the speculative merger idea thrown out by the PM could hardly be placed in such a category. So if Mr Alleyne, answering questions from the press, expresses the correct and candid view that the law as it stands does not provide for such a merger, that the unit holders who own the assets of the Trust should be consulted and that he cannot see the UTC benefiting from such a measure, how can he be condemned for not following a mystical government policy? The fact is, it was an act of gross discourtesy to Mr Alleyne and the UTC board for the PM to solicit public opinion on such an idea without seeing the need to consult them. Why didn't Mr Ken Gordon consult with UTC officials before suggesting such a silly measure to the PM? And if, for argument's sake, the idea had obtained public support, would the merger then simply be imposed on the Corporation? But even if it exists, where in the law or the instruments of his appointment by the President is the UTC chairman required to carry out government policy? His exclusive mandate, it seems to us, is to seek the best interest of the Trust and its unit holders, a job that he has been doing quite competently.
It is absurd also for the government to accuse Mr Alleyne of "stirring up" the public when in truth and in fact the PM has done that admirably well with his poorly considered and potentially dangerous idea. Highly ironical too is the charge that he has made pronouncements that could affect the financial stablity of an institution. Quite the contrary, the UTC chairman's remarks could only have assuaged the widespread agitated concern which Mr Manning's idea had provoked and helped to preserve the confidence of the public in the corporation. We are truly saddened by this shameful and undeserved treatment of the dedicated, capable and successful chairman of the UTC.
 Send page by E-Mail
|
|
