How Delma Thomas accepted a pay cut to join the cabinet

 

IT was February 21, 2013 - two days after the general election that swept the New National Party back into office, having won all 15 seats.

Among them was first time winner Delma Thomas, who after losing at her first attempt in 2008, became the MP for At Andrew's North West.

 

I was in the Happy Hill neighborhood and dropped in by the newly re-elected Prime Minister to query when he will be making his first return to the Botanic Gardens office to ensure that cameras were there to capture the moment.

 

He shared with me -- a then not-for-reporting purpose -- the cabinet line up that he would  unveil on the weekend.

 

I noted that Thomas was not included.

 

I made no direct comment then -  and was not totally surprised, since even before the elections there was a suggestion that should Thomas win her seat, she will be advised to stay in her job at the St George's University, since she was then earning more than she will make as a Minister.

 

But that night, I called her and said - I noted that you have not been included in the cabinet -- and asked if that was something she was comfortable with -- because I had assumed by then she was aware.

 

Thomas intimated that was the first time she was being made aware -- but said she would have preferred to be nominated for a posting.

 

Then I raised the issue of pay -- and that maybe it is a good thing she was not being included in the Cabinet -- because leaving her job to do so will effectively mean taking a pay cut.

And her reply was that is fine with her.

 

I initially protested  to her, agreeing with the view that it was the right thing to stay in her current job.

 

She objected on two counts --(a) she was elected to serve her people, and felt their needs will be best served by being a member of cabinet and (b) her naysayers during the campaign were saying she cannot be made a minister because she is not capable -- explaining that a non-appointment will feed into that narrative, and ultimately hurt her politically.

 

I listened to her argument but did not make any counter comments.

 

The next morning I called the newly re-elected Prime Minister and said - I had slept on that list he had shared with me, and the more I thought about it, I felt it was a mistake not to appoint Thomas to the cabinet.

 

I argued that (a) I am confident she will turn out to be one of your biggest allies in cabinet and (b) unlike what some people feel, she has a type of passion and some useful ideas about governance and accountability that potentially will make her a good minister; and predicted she will pleasantly surprise some of the people who cast doubt on her ability.

 

His only retort was that she had a young family and she needed to keep her current job to be able to meet her obligations.

 

Without spilling the beans that I had spoken to her, I said - I get the feeling she won't mind, because she really wants to be in a position to make a difference to the people who rallied with her, even if that means taking a personal pay cut.

 

The conversion ended. I did not press further. He did not make any declaration or commitment -- though I left with the sense that he was reconsidering his earlier decision.

 

About 24 hours later, Thomas called to report that the Prime Minister had offered her the position of Minister of Social Services and Housing.

 

I joked: " Don't go there now and mamaguy yourself."