Votes Should Come With the Tools to Deliver

An Op-Ed by Audley A. Astwood

Elections are promises dressed as hope. People line up in the sun, mark a box, and trust that life might work a little better after. That’s the deal. Votes in exchange for results in a small country where everyone feels the impact of government decisions up close.

But here’s the problem. A government can win an election and still not fully run the system that turns promises into action. That’s where frustration is born in the Turks and Caicos, where people expect to see change with their own eyes, not just hear about it.

If voters choose leaders, those leaders should be able to guide the engine of government. Not to bully it. Not to turn it into a party club. But to make it move in the direction the public chose. Otherwise, we’ve built a strange thing. Leaders who carry the blame, and a system they don’t fully steer even while communities from Grand Turk to Providenciales are waiting on results.

People don’t care about structures and titles. They care if the clinic in their district has staff, if the hospital can cope, if a small business licence or planning approval comes on time, if roads get fixed before tyres give out and drainage works before the next heavy rain floods neighbourhoods. When that doesn’t happen, they don’t blame a department chart. They blame the government they elected. Fair enough. That’s democracy. But fairness cuts both ways. Responsibility and authority should live in the same place in our system, not split in ways ordinary people can’t see.

A professional civil service matters. It should be skilled, steady, and not tied to party politics. That’s not in question. But being neutral doesn’t mean being distant from elected direction. Civil servants serve the country by helping the government of the day carry out its plans. Advice can be honest and firm. Final direction should still come from those with a public mandate from the people of these islands. This isn’t a judgment on the dedication or competence of the people who lead and serve within the public service. Many are hardworking professionals doing their best within the structure they operate in. The issue is whether that structure itself matches what voters believe happens when they choose a government.

In a small territory, speed isn’t a luxury. It’s survival. Investment, housing, schools, health care. These things can’t crawl through a maze of split control and blurred lines while the population grows, tourism expands, and pressure on services rises. When leadership and administration pull in the same clear direction, projects move. When they don’t, paper piles up and nothing changes on the ground in communities that feel every delay. This is about better alignment between elected leaders and the public service, not friction between them. Both exist for the same purpose, to serve the people well.

This isn’t about grabbing power. It’s about making democracy real in daily life. If elections are to mean more than speeches and slogans, the people chosen at the ballot box must be able to set priorities for the public service and expect delivery in a country where government isn’t distant, it’s part of daily life. Our governance model was shaped in a different time and under different pressures, and it’s reasonable to ask whether the balance between elected authority and administrative control still fits the country we are today.

Of course there should be guardrails. Hiring based on merit. Strong rules. Oversight. There should also be protection for those who speak up about wrongdoing. Professional standards don’t weaken when elected leaders have clear authority. They matter even more in a close-knit society where trust in public institutions is everything.

In the end, the question is simple. If the people are in charge, shouldn’t the government they choose be able to run the system that serves them. If the answer is no, then elections start to feel like theatre. And citizens of the Turks and Caicos deserve more than a show.