Philipsburg;---In June 2009, Commissioner Theo Heyliger assuaged his critics he that he had to turn his back on the Democratic Party because the DP was "not appreciative of Theo Heyliger". Of course this was the furthest thing from the truth, evident to all by the "free hand" given to Commissioner Heyliger as a DP commissioner to manage his portfolios in a practically unchallenged way, the only constraints being the boundaries of the law. Not to add to an already strained political environment, the DP back then listened and observed as the June 2009 political upheaval was classified by some as the best thing to happen, we however knowing full well that while in the DP there have been differences of opinion on approaches to certain matters, respect was always there.How the tables have turned today. Today Commissioner Heyliger in a relatively short period of time, has had to contend publicly with "being put in his place" by his coalition partner, the National Alliance.
One could defend this with the argument that it is a 4 to 1 situation in the Executive Council, but to show up Commissioner Heyliger in the way that it is being done and for his own portfolios is nothing else than a slap in Theo's face.
- A public spat evolved with the Cape Plan Development plan between the 2 factions in the Executive Council (an assistant to a NA-commissioner calls Theo to order);
- The NA has put the GEBE headache squarely in the lap of Commissioner Heyliger, denying the collective responsibility they all share in the Executive Council and refusing to give him any support;
- If a decision was taken by the NA/Heyliger government on the Westin/Sonesta comfort letters as the leader of government alleged, how come Commissioner Heyliger had to resort to publicly calling for the letters issued by the DP administration, of which he was part, to be honored?
And now, the re-assignment/suspension/dismissal of the Director and acting-Director of ROB. Clearly Commissioner Heyliger was overruled in his own portfolio and not afforded the decency of coming with his own solution. And mind you, this witch hunt comes from the NA faction in the Executive Council, who when in opposition, called for a PUBLIC ISLAND COUNCIL MEETING, to debate the dismissal of a civil servant of the personnel department. "Because, government was taking bread out of some-one's mouth", the NA had alleged then.
And since this decision by the Executive Council on the ROB management was shared with only a very selected few within the Administration, how come it "leaked out"? Obviously, it needed to be established publicly who is the BOSS in the Executive Council. The position of deputy leader given to Commissioner Heyliger is but a "keep you happy".
Upon signing their governing agreement, NA and Heyliger had agreed to a leadership conference of Marlin and Heyliger. When , if ever did this "leadership conference" of Heyliger and Marlin meet, except in the press?