The recent call for the resignation of the Board of the Children’s Authority raises a bigger issue.

In a country of only 1.3 million people, we can’t keep changing boards every time something goes wrong, or there’s a change of government, and expect different results. While concerns like financial mismanagement must be taken seriously, simply replacing people does not fix the system.

From my experience, board members often know that their time depends on how well they align with the Minister’s expectations. The problem is that those expectations can sometimes be more about party priorities than national ones. That makes it harder for board members to speak up or challenge decisions when necessary.

We need to move away from that. Board appointments should be based on competence, integrity, and a genuine focus on national outcomes—not party interests.

At the same time, we should be demanding better performance, clearer accountability, and real follow-through when things go wrong. Where there are serious failures, boards must be held properly accountable for their decisions, including, where necessary, legal consequences—not simply allowed to walk away.

In a small country like ours, we need continuity, courage, and systems that support good decision-making—not constant starting over.

Calypsonian, Mighty Cypher (real name Glenroy Joseph) sang in 1967, “If the priest could play, who is me?” It was witty, but it carried a warning: when those in authority stretch the rules, everyone else feels justified doing the same.

That is why the recent enforcement actions led by Senator Phillip Alexander at Maracas Beach and within a Housing Development Corporation (HDC) community deserve serious reflection.

No one is suggesting that unlawful structures should be protected or that businesses operating without approval should continue unchecked. The State has a duty to enforce the law. But enforcement is not simply about removal; it is about method. When activities have existed openly for years and are suddenly dismantled in a highly public manner, citizens are entitled to ask whether proper notice was given, whether there was an opportunity to comply, and whether similar breaches elsewhere are being addressed with equal urgency.

Process is not a technical obstacle. It is what separates lawful authority from raw power. If the State appears to act first and explain later, the signal sent to the population is that force is more important than fairness. If enforcement looks selective or abrupt, respect for the law weakens rather than strengthens.

Citizens are watching. They learn how to behave by observing those who govern them. When public officials model patience, documentation, and consistency, they teach discipline. When they model confrontation and spectacle, they normalise confrontation.

We cannot hope to reduce aggression and disrespect in national life while displaying impatience in the exercise of public authority. Leadership is not only about being correct in outcome; it is about being careful in conduct.

Law must be enforced. But it must be enforced in a way that deepens trust.

Mighty Cypher’s comment, “If the priest could play, who is me?” is still an excellent example that the leadership at the top influences how people follow.  Our country needs politeness and respect at all levels.