Javascript Menu by Deluxe-Menu.com

SKNBuzz Radio - Strictly Local Music Toon Center
My Account | Contact Us  

Our Partner For Official online store of the Phoenix Suns Jerseys

 Home  >  Headlines  >  OPINION
Posted: Monday 30 September, 2013 at 2:45 PM

Wellness Month

By: James Milnes Gaskell, Commentary
    I commend this week’s ‘On The Mark’ programme and hope that there will be more of the same nature  to follow. It was non political, imparting necessary information on health and lifestyle in general and cancer, specifically breast cancer, in particular.  In his introduction Mr. Brantley did emphasize the importance of lifestyle, exercise and eating healthily, but perhaps on account of the nature of his three guests, the brave and passionate Dr. Jessica, Dr. Essien and Miss Parris, the lady from ‘Pink Lily’, most of the content was information about cancer and advice about early detection and how this can and should be done.

    Real estate agents say that the three most important things relating to the value of a property are ‘location, location, location’.  Transpose this to the three most important factors for health and you come up with ‘prevention, prevention, prevention’.

    The first stage in prevention has to be a change in lifestyle to one involving regular exercise and enjoyable nutritious food.  I do not mind being repetitive about this.  I read recently that a senior US political lobbyist advising his clients said that if you have a message to impart, repeat it at every opportunity again and again, and again, and when you are sick and tired of repeating it, then that is when you may have started reaching your core audience.  People are resistant to change, and become more so the older they get.  That is why the school meals programme (SMP) if it is to become the agent of change is so important.

    Mr. Brantley told us that Michael Henville, Master Chef, has been appointed to oversee the SMP.  This is good news for all, a necessary and critical step.  But why only part time?  He will not be able to fit in all he has been asked to do in the limited hours he has to work.  Considering the matter generally, if you employ someone in a job that holds their interest and pay them a rate with which they are satisfied, you will find that they go on thinking about their job and how they can be more effective in it at all times of day.  If you employ them part time and expect them to carry out what is a full time job, you risk building up resentment at being exploited and frustration at the lack of time allowed.  Probably they do not think about their job, after hours, in the positive way that will be conducive to improvements.  If our Administration is ‘finding’ EC$4 million to pay civil servants an extra month’s salary, there remains no argument that it cannot afford to turn a single hugely important job from part to full time.  Mr. Brantley did not say ‘we have appointed a part time chef’.  He said ‘we have appointed Master Chef Michael Henville’.  Hearing this everyone would assume that we have a full time Chef.  I wrote to Madame Education, Ms. Q. Connor in March 2012 to say ‘The chef’s office has no furniture, computer or telephone.  It would be difficult to start without a functioning office’.  I have written this in public several times.  His ‘office’ remains in that condition.

    I do not know if this is the responsibility of Education, Health or Public Works.  We do not need any ‘thinking outside the box’.  We require simple action within the box.  Those good words of Mr. Brantley’s have to be matched by supportive action, in order to establish and maintain the enthusiasm and goodwill of those who work in the programme.  I adopt the same approach to him as he does to the community when he says ‘Please take exercise and eat healthily’.  I say please go and see your Chef at his ‘office’ and both of you apply your minds to all that you want the programme to become, and how to accomplish it.  Who is responsible for what and how are they to be held accountable?  And above all check personally, frequently that what you are expecting to have been done has actually been accomplished.

    I turn to another matter, an urgent one.  The day before school started at the beginning of September, Public Works turned up at the Charlestown Primary School and with a backhoe dug a deep pit next to the outside toilet building and existing cesspits.  This hole of say 12 – 15 feet deep partially filled up with stinking sewage water, and day by day it remained in the same condition.  It is dangerous and highly undesirable to have such an open hole in the ground, anywhere on school grounds.  It is close to the area where children both work and play.  Children have to take a narrow pathway between the pit and the kitchen building wall to reach a class room.  They run and jostle and the pit is waiting for one of them to fall into it.  The Principal asks those who dug the hole to complete it.  This matter involves all three elected Ministers.  Education because it is an unacceptable happening in a public school, Health because of open sewage next to a  school kitchen, and Public Works because their leaders chose the last day of a two month school holiday to take action in a school.  Until September 27th and after more than three weeks and complaints from the parents and pleas from the Principal, nothing further was done other than  replace ‘caution’ tapes that had ruptured.  On September 27th Public Works returned to the school.  This time with a large excavator.  On September 28th a pit 15 feet deep was expanded into one much broader and wider and at least 30 feet deep.  A fall from that height could kill or cripple a child.  If this is the way Public Works operates, then the system is broke.  

    Another example.  Painting and other works had to be done at the Special Education Unit.  Public Works turned up for a two week job one week before term began.  The children were unable to attend school for the planned first week of term as the painting was in full flow.  Who gives these thoughtless instructions?  Do our elected Ministers not know that in one of their schools in a dangerous place is a dangerous deep open pit?  Who is responsible when little Johnny falls in and is injured or dies?

    In April 2012 I was asked to give a speech at the Charlestown Primary School Kitchen opening.  I said, and this was not reported elsewhere:

    ‘We, in Nevis, do not have a culture of maintenance do we?  Look around you at this school (CPS).  Is it freshly painted?  Two weeks ago it wasn’t.  Now it is partially.  That is not maintenance.  That is to look good for this ceremony.

    Look around further:
    Are the fences in place?
    Are the grounds litter free and attractive?
    Are the toilets usable?  Vandalised?
    Can we take pride in the appearance of our schools?’

    My message, although gently phrased, was clear.  Nothing has changed although I believe I heard Premier Amory say that the physical condition of the schools was not good and that the Government would make the necessary arrangements. 

    Everything starts from the top.  Let us not bring in blue or green partisanship.  We elect our ministers to come together, form a Government and manage the country to our maximum advantage.  We know that they can stand on a platform and tell an audience how they are going to run our country so much better than their opponents.  But we, in this very small island, actually want them to be down to earth competent administrators.  If they are given, for example, the portfolio for Public Works, we want them personally to accept responsibility for each job.  This means that they have to know what is being done, having sanctioned it originally, and then view and check and encourage or point out errors as many times as may be necessary to have the work done to maximum efficiency.  Somehow you have to have accountability.  If, for instance, the school had the responsibility for fixing this pit, and it had hired a private contractor, first the contractor would be asked to begin when the long school holidays began.  If they appeared the day before term began, they would have been turned away.  A time overrun would incur contractual penalties.  Inadequate performance and they would not be asked to tender again.  If Public Works cannot be made accountable in this kind of way, would we not be better off without it?

    James Milnes Gaskell, Syndicated columnist






    *************************
      DISCLAIMER
       
     
    This article was posted in its entirety as received by SKNVibes.com. This media house does not  correct any spelling or grammatical error within press releases and commentaries. The views expressed therein are not necessarily those of SKNVibes.com, its sponsors or advertisers              
Copyright © 2025 SKNVibes, Inc. All rights reserved.
Privacy Policy   Terms of Service