- NEWSDAY.CO.TT - A la Une - 15/Aug 07:08

Tale of two leaders: 100 days in office

DR BHUSHAN SINGH THE FIRST 100 days of any administration set the tone for its tenure, offering a glimpse into its priorities, leadership style, and ability to deliver on promises. For the UNC under Kamla Persad-Bissessar, these opening months have been marked by decisive action, a recalibration of national priorities, and a leadership approach that contrasts sharply with that of Penelope Beckles and the PNM. Persad-Bissessar has projected a leadership style that is collaborative yet undoubtedly firm, blending consultation with a readiness to act. Her administration’s early focus has been on stabilising key institutions, addressing pressing economic challenges, and restoring public trust in governance. Measures aimed at improving healthcare delivery, easing the cost of living, and jump-starting stalled infrastructure projects have been central to her agenda. One must keep in mind that a new administration has a tremendous amount of work to do before it can effectively take control. It would be foolish to ignore previous institutional loyalties and cultures that need to be reset while at the same time fulfilling the promises to the electorate. In contrast, Beckles’s leadership of the PNM in opposition has struggled to articulate a clear and compelling alternative vision. While she has adopted a measured and composed tone, her party’s inability to take responsibility for the challenges inherited from its decade in office has undermined its credibility. Many of the problems Persad-Bissessar’s government is now tackling, ranging from underperforming public services to economic stagnation, were entrenched during the PNM’s tenure. Persad-Bissessar’s first 100 days have been defined by a problem identification mindset. She has not shied away from making tough decisions, even in politically sensitive areas. For example, her administration moved swiftly to address the long-standing inefficiencies in the health sector by restructuring procurement systems to ensure faster delivery of essential supplies and tackle the WASA and CEPEP challenges. There would certainly be more to come. The state of emergency is another example of moving with alacrity to stem a crime problem where the tentacles are long. Beckles, on the other hand, appears constrained by the PNM’s record in office. While she has spoken of renewal and rebuilding, her messaging has often been vague, lacking the substantive policy detail needed to inspire confidence. In parliamentary debates, her critiques of the government have sometimes been overshadowed by the lingering perception that the PNM had a decade to solve many of the issues it now highlights, yet failed to do so. This political amnesia on the part of the PNM is not doing much for its credibility. The leadership contrast is also evident in their engagement with the public. Persad-Bissessar has embraced a more open and communicative approach, holding frequent press briefings and directly addressing concerns raised by stakeholders. This willingness to engage has strengthened the perception of a government that listens, even if it cannot immediately solve every problem. Beckles’s communication style, while dignified, has leaned more on formality, often creating a sense of distance from the electorate. Critics of Persad-Bissessar have raised concerns about the speed of some reforms, warning that rapid changes risk unintended consequences. However, supporters argue that after years of drift, urgency is precisely what is needed. By contrast, Beckles’s cautious style has been praised by some as steady and deliberate, but in the high-stakes arena of national politics, it has also been interpreted as a lack of boldness. Another telling difference lies in the way each leader speaks of accountability. Persad-Bissessar has publicly acknowledged the scale of the challenges faced and has committed to regular progress updates on key projects. Beckles, while promising to hold the government accountable, has avoided fully confronting the PNM’s own role in creating those challenges. This selective approach has reduced her ability to claim the moral high ground in the political narrative. The UNC’s early governance has not been without missteps. Some initiatives have faced implementation delays, and there have been disputes over some difficult decisions, but this cannot be avoided. Nevertheless, the administration’s willingness to adapt and respond to criticism has been noted. For many citizens, this stands in contrast to the PNM’s final years in office, when concerns often went unanswered. Ultimately, the first 100 days have revealed two distinct leadership archetypes. Persad-Bissessar’s is marked by urgency, active engagement, and a readiness to own both successes and shortcomings. Beckles’s is characterised by restraint, composure, and a reluctance to confront the political past head-on. As the political landscape evolves, these contrasting styles will shape both the government’s ability to deliver on its promises and the opposition’s capacity to regain relevance. For now, the momentum appears to be with the UNC, buoyed by a leader who has seized the early initiative and a public willing to give her the benefit of the doubt. Whether that momentum can be sustained over the long term will depend on the administration’s ability to translate early actions into lasting results and on whether the PNM can find a more compelling voice under Beckles’s stewardship. The UNC has certainly obtained a passing grade in the first 100 days. The post Tale of two leaders: 100 days in office appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.