Winning an election gives politicians the authority to govern. But does it also come with public employees expected to promote them, polish their image and prepare the ground for their next campaign? It is a question worth asking in Aruba, because the boundary between serving the public and serving a politician should be clear.
Government needs to communicate. Ministers should explain decisions, report progress and answer questions. But when public communication consistently centres on a politician’s personality, citizens should ask what purpose it serves. Are we learning about the work of an institution, or financing publicity for the person temporarily leading it?
A road, a grant or an improved service is paid for through public resources. It is not a personal gift from a minister. Political leaders can deserve credit for delivering policies, but citizens should never be made to feel that receiving a public service creates a debt of political loyalty.
The same applies to public employees. They are entitled to political opinions and voluntary participation in party activities. But can they decline to attend, promote or applaud without worrying about their careers? If saying no carries a professional price, calling their participation voluntary becomes difficult to defend.
Public servants should be valued for competence, integrity and results. Their responsibilities include implementing legitimate government decisions and providing honest advice, including advice a minister would rather not hear. Personal loyalty should never become an unofficial qualification for professional advancement.
This standard must apply to every party. If we condemn the use of public resources for political promotion under one administration, we cannot excuse it under another simply because we like the minister. Campaigns belong to parties, and parties should organise and finance them.
An election victory grants a temporary mandate, not ownership of the public administration. Politicians are entrusted with institutions that must serve everyone, including those who voted against them. The public payroll should never become the prize money of an election.