The “Musical Chairs” of Permanent Secretary Must Stop! Reimagining Leadership in the Public Service
Dear Editor,
Recent reports regarding the reassignment of several Permanent Secretaries across Government ministries once again bring into focus an issue that has lingered within the public service of Antigua and Barbuda for far too long. While administrative reshuffles are often presented as routine measures to achieve the “best fit” across ministries, decades of experience suggest that the continued shifting of the same pool of Permanent Secretaries from one ministry to another has not necessarily strengthened the day-to-day operational leadership required within Government institutions.
The role of a Permanent Secretary is among the most critical within the machinery of Government. These officers are the administrative heads of ministries and serve as the bridge between policy direction from elected officials and the effective implementation of programmes and services for the people. In practice, however, the system has too often produced an environment in which operational decision-making is slow, technical matters remain unattended for extended periods, and issues that should be resolved administratively are unnecessarily escalated to Ministers or even to the Prime Minister.
Many public officers and stakeholders within the system quietly acknowledge a number of persistent challenges. Too often, decision-making is delayed or avoided altogether. Interpersonal leadership is lacking in some cases, with management styles influenced more by ego, gossip, or hearsay than by professionalism and evidence.
Also, many tend to fall asleep when meetings start to dive into the details, or they get lost in the required action points. As such, meetings become exercises in performative formality rather than spaces for decisive and effective administrative leadership. In some instances, Permanent Secretaries struggle even with basic use of modern technology, such as monitoring and responding to official correspondence via email, WhatsApp, and other instant messaging applications, which is an essential function in the contemporary public sector. These realities allow issues within ministries to fester and boil over, ultimately undermining efficiency and accountability.
Equally important is the fact that several ministries require highly capable administrators who possess not only managerial ability but also a degree of technical competence and intellectual engagement with the subject matter of their portfolios. Ministries such as Health, Finance, Foreign Affairs, and Agriculture operate in environments that demand constant attention to detail, policy awareness, and the ability to engage with complex technical issues. In such ministries, the Permanent Secretary must be alert, responsive, and sufficiently knowledgeable to guide the ministry’s internal machinery with confidence.
Yet the existing, woeful pool of Permanent Secretaries lacks the youthful energy, technical competence, technological fluency, and forward-looking management approach that modern governance demands. The continued practice of “musical chairs,” where the same administrators rotate through ministries, risks recycling the same structural challenges rather than solving them.
If Antigua and Barbuda’s public service is to evolve, the Government must begin deliberately cultivating a new generation of administrative leaders. Across the public sector, there are many young, professional, competent, and highly educated officers. Whether established or non-established, such individuals should be identified through a transparent and rigorous process, interviewed, trained, and gradually introduced into senior administrative leadership.
A structured pathway could be created for prospective Permanent Secretaries, including professional development, leadership training, and a period of probation during which their performance is carefully evaluated. Such an approach would allow the government to build a modern cadre of administrators capable of managing ministries efficiently and responding to the increasingly complex demands of governance.
At the same time, the institutional knowledge of existing senior administrators should not be discarded. Those Permanent Secretaries who may no longer be best suited to the pace and demands of day-to-day ministry management could transition into advisory roles within the Civil Service. In such positions, they could provide guidance, historical context, and institutional memory to newer leaders while allowing ministries to benefit from fresh administrative energy.
I therefore urge the Prime Minister and the Cabinet of Antigua and Barbuda to look seriously at the future composition of the Permanent Secretary cadre. The country deserves a public service that is dynamic, competent, technologically capable, and committed to effective day-to-day management of government ministries.
Sincerely,
A Concerned Youth
Advertise with the mоѕt vіѕіtеd nеwѕ ѕіtе іn Antigua!
We offer fully customizable and flexible digital marketing packages.
Contact us at [email protected]
In dominica and st.kitts the permanent secretaries of critical areas like health are technicians who have had admin coaching. So look out soon, that will be ANU.
This would be ideal. Persons with technical knowledge and experience with the system, who have administrative potential being trained and promoted within the system.
Time enough we stop reading things yall batches can’t affix yall real signatures to
Did someone say signatures?
Did we recently read that a certain someone forged a signature in a certain ministry?
God nah sleep
I agree with the writer. We should have had Public Sector Reform 20 years ago. In fact, if my memory is correct that was Gaston Browne’s first assignment as a Minister under the late Lester Bird. A PS is the chief manager and administrator.in every Ministry but most, if not all of them, could not manage a roadside vending operation.
But there will be no changes as the politicians like it this way. Let me relate a story. About 10 years ago, a manager at a government statutory corporation suspended 2 workers. One was a ghost worker who signed in and disappeared daily and the other was a supervisor who got into a physical fight with a cleaner in full view of the public and tourists. The Manager was summoned to the office of the Minister and in the presence of the 2 suspendees was advised that these were his constituents with a combined 7 votes in their homes and they were to be return to work immediately. That is Antigua. We like it so.
Permanent Secretaries hold the signatures of the National and so become responsible for all of the corruption which happens – even if it is at the wishes of the Minister.
The trickle down effect makes their actions at the top trickle down through the Publuc Service, to the private Sector and then the people – corruption runs Antigua.
Good article, there are different angles and additional institutional problems as well. The Cabinet especially under this administration has been playing musical political chairs with the PS’s and the civil service as well. The government ministers use the PS’s to benefit their self enrichment schemes. Also as most Antiguas the civil servants are beggars to the politicians and cannot hold their grounds.
My question- Can Establishment act independent of cabinet? Since to me that is the main problem.
Let us now look at the recent changes that took place and have taken place at the Ministry of Education. Yet no improvements. First PS Greenaway, who before being appointed PS at Education was a model civil servant. She was assistant Establishment officer. She was outstanding and her institutional knowledge of the operations of the civil service is unmatched. She fitted into the role of a PS’s at Education , showing up at events, giving speeches, making presentations in the absence of the absentee minister. The PS’s in doing these often, let down in their administrative duties. Hence, she took the fall for the government not paying of the teachers, that lead to strike actions.
I met her replacement at Health as an assistant. She was outstanding there , when I was around that ministry. At education she too became involved in the same thing like her predecessor.
Now let us look at this newly appointed PS. “His Pilgrimage “ this guy is a member of ABLP political Party. He had even thrown his hat into the political ring. We were told he withdrew for certain gains. He was banded in a ruling under the UPP administration, because of land dealing- self enrichment scheming and corruption. He is a Cutie impersonator in speech and a leader in scheming. As PS at Ministry of Works, the end result was the construction of an edifice at the on independent Ave. Every corrupt move he seems to get an update. Over the past decade he was appointed Ambassador with economic and investment portfolios. So to me this is a down grade to where he is coming from. I guess Chet had enough of him , with a personal drive. Ministry of Education here comes- Dr.Amb. PS. Pilgrimage- Don’t know if you have enough self enrichment opportunities. If not make sure you have enough Photo up opportunities, enough boards for extra perks and enough functions to fill the large appetite. A big belly to fill, speeches for Cutie 2nd. Director it would be interesting to hear you two speaking after each other. Adm. lock the cookie jar!
Am a non-national, and I’ve never met persons so incompetent and lacking in knowledge, sitting in a PS seat in any other country where I’ve lived, as I’ve experienced here. How does someone become a PS here? Is there not a probationary period? I also have the very same questions related to the position of the chief establishment officer
Imho, it’s not as simple as just focusing on who has the administrative role – young or old, tech savvy or not, good somewhere else or not. Running a Ministry or Department in the public sector is and is not like running a business. If you start your own business, as it grows, you are the expert in your business, you can make good, strategic decisions and tell new employees what to do because you fully understand your business as you established it yourself. Once the business gets very large you have to hire more experts, specifically trained in different areas – management, marketing, sales etc. You will have to start listening to what they have to say since you are not an expert at everything so you will need to meet with them not just to tell them what to do, but to hear what they are seeing on the ground, what their recommendations are etc. You will have to put all of that info together to make decisions that they then take back to their teams. You still have to know and understand the business to in order to make successful decisions. You will also have to listen to feedback of how your decisions are working out and then make adjustments as needed. If all of that is done well, the business will continue thrive as a larger corporation etc. Eventually, you might just sell the business and retire or move on to other things. Someone else becomes the CEO. They now have to try to understand the historical context of how the business functions, they have to get to know the preexisting workers and how they operate, they have to listen to others’ points of view before they can just come in with sweeping new changes in operations. If they don’t tread carefully, they could destroy the business. New changes might not work if not well planned. New changes might not be well received by preexisting workers. Some changes might be impractical to implement. The leader might not always understand why workers are not cooperating with some changes if they don’t take the initiative to fully understand the preexisting system. The public sector has some of those elements… New administrators are coming into systems that they have little historical knowledge of. They don’t always understand why things were done a certain way. They don’t always take the time to gather information and feedback from the ground up. They might just meet with some middle managers who might also be lacking knowledge because they never took the time to truly understand the system in place. So, new ideas might not be implemented smoothly because of lack of consultation with lower level workers. Unlike a business, the public service does not exist to just make a profit but to serve the country. So, decisions cannot just be made based on profit motivations alone. A business make questionable decisions to maximise profits and then can fold if things don’t work out, but the public will always need services. So, changes must be carefully managed. So, do new administrators really understand the technicalities of the new Ministries or Departments they are assigned to? Do they go around and interact with workers seeking understanding of processes and seek to resolve challenges that exist? Or do they just assume that all is well and meet with others in similar positions, enjoying perks while workers struggle to meet unrealistic demands without adequate supporting systems?
Wait….you leave them in the same place and we have a problem.
They are rotated and we have a problem.
Just cannot win
Maybe change the system not just the person. Insist that administrators make the rounds, consulting with relevant personnel, to find out what is going on, compile lists of problems, keep records of what they have done to try to make improvements, and submit some kind of quarterly or annual reports of system issues addressed etc.
Signed by “A Concerned Youth”
Sounds rather grown up to me. Not sure if to say kudos to the writer or…….
In order to avoid people becoming complaisant in their position it is a good governance practice all over the world to rotate people often. PS do not make policy. They only execute Cabinet’s policies. And they ensure things are executed as per regulations and law. Every now and then we see the changing of the guard of the ambassadors from various countries. I’m not sure if Antigua and Barbuda is practicing this. But as I said we see that with many ambassadors of several countries. How frequent do they change them? I don’t know. I would suggest permanent secretary should not stay longer in their position then one year. This practice also makes them ALL ROUNDERS. Which is good. Because they are not technocrats. They are administrators. The PS in Public Works is not an Engineer. The PS over APUA is neither. The PS over Agriculture is not a agriculture engineer. I would like for this policy to be implemented in the Statutory Companies and State Owned Companies. We have General Managers and Directors in their position for too many years. In doing so they have build their own Kingdom. And we know what happens when people have build their little kingdoms. Corruption kicks in. The government would do best to use this very same policy to break these little kingdom and expose some of these corrupt practices that exist. There doesn’t have to be a reason for the change and no advance notice. What needs to happen is that government needs to have in place a team that will ensure smooth transition of the guards. A handover team.
Comments are closed.