At the core of the TWG's recommendations is a proposal for the establishment of a high-level four member CARICOM Commission empowered with executive authority and approval by parliament of a "single CARICOM Act" by all participating member states in accordance with the letter and spirit of the new CARICOM Treaty that provides for the creation of the emerging Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME).

The call by the TWG for a CARICOM Commission -- the modalities of functioning and financing of which are outlined in its report -- comes 14 years after the idea for such an administrative mechanism was first proposed in the far-reaching 1992 report of "The West Indian Commission", headed by Sir Shridath Ramphal.

Today, I wish to ask a question that must also be engaging the attention of others interested in how the business of CARICOM is being conducted in the interest of achieving the laudable objectives of the substantially revised "Chaguaramas Treaty".

The question is whether fear of losing or sharing some of the power they control is at the core of the apparent reluctance by CARICOM leaders to devolve executive authority for effective governance of the Community.

If not, then the region's public should be enlightened why there continues to be pathetic foot-dragging on a recommendation, repeatedly made, for the creation of an empowered CARICOM Commission, as articulated in the comprehensive 1992 "Time for Action" report by The West Indian Commission (WIC).

A core recommendation in that report by the 15-member WIC of eminent CARICOM nationals -- chaired by Ramphal with Alister McIntyre as vice-chairman -- was for the establishment of a three-member body, empowered with executive authority to manage the affairs of the community, based on some operational guidelines of the European Commission.

The rationale for the CARICOM Commission, as outlined in the comprehensive, 591-page report of the WIC, was that, "if the integration movement is to be strengthened, if it is recover lost ground and respond to the demands of the present and the future, the West Indies must put in place machinery that overcomes this weakness..."

But a mixture of political opportunism, crass pettiness and false assumptions were to result in the shelving of the idea of such an empowered Commission with promise of pursuing it later, along with other significant recommendations embodied in the WIC's report.

The 1992 Port-of-Spain Summit, at which core recommendations of the commission were discussed, missed an opportunity to take a firm, visionary stand in favour of creation of a management structure that could have avoided the necessity for so much of the subsequent ineffective layers of bureaucratic arrangements and studies. For instance, that of the 2000 'Review of the Structure and Functioning of the CARICOM Secretariat’.

Even the ideas suggested in that "review" were to be sidelined with the explanation that the Heads of Government had decided (at their 2003 Montego Bay Summit) to have an even more wider examination of the governance system of the community's business in preparation for operationalising the CSME.

PAPER CHASE

By November 2003 a committee of technocrats, functioning within the context of a Prime Ministerial Expert Working Group on "regional governance" with a mandate grounded in "The Rose Hall Declaration" of the 2003 Summit, returned to the imperatives in having a CARICOM Commission "or other executive mechanism".

But the paper chase would continue as the realisation of such a governance mechanism was to remain elusive.

The political merry-go-round on creation of the commission continued right up to last year's CARICOM Summit in St Lucia, when another Technical Working Group was established.

The mandate of the TWG, chaired by Vaughan Lewis with Denis Benn as vice-chairman, included coming up with recommendations on specific guidelines on the functioning of a management body empowered with executive authority.

Having outlined their recommendations, including calling for a four-member CARICOM Commission of "persons of high political experience", vested with executive authority, the members of the TWG offered the justification for the proposed approach for effective governance in the regional integration process.

"There is growing recognition", the TWG noted, "that an effective system of regional governance is a key requirement for the optimal functioning of the agreed regional integration space. The quickening pace of integration evident in the move towards the establishment of the CSME now requires the introduction of an innovative system of regional decision-making, if the objectives of Caribbean integration are to be achieved..."

The TWG's report was to have been discussed at a scheduled special meeting of CARICOM leaders earlier this month in Port-of-Spain. For reasons not clear the meeting was indefinitely postponed.

I doubt that it would take place before the first Inter-Sessional Meeting of CARICOM leaders planned for February next year in St Vincent and the Grenadines.

In the circumstances, it is relevant to ask whether the political merry-go-round on a decision to establish the CARICOM Commission will continue beyond the Inter-Sessional Meeting.

There are eminently qualified CARICOM nationals "of high political experience" to comprise the proposed four-member commission.

However, to suggest potential names could only further prejudice the chances of this elusive governance mechanism being established any time soon, in view of the evident reluctance by CARICOM leaders to devolve executive authority.

That is something the Community Secretariat has never been given under any Secretary General -- from the now late William Demas to the current Edwin Carrington.