Former BWA Boss in Barbados Fired from WASA After $13.4M Plan Collapses

 

By Peter MacD Earle BSc. LLM | Employment Law Consultant | June 2025

From BWA to WASA: The Rise and Fall of Keithroy Halliday

St. Kitts-born Keithroy Halliday was appointed General Manager of the Barbados Water Authority (BWA) on February 15, 2017, bringing a strong track record in strategic leadership and regional public sector reform. Over the next seven years, he would become a defining figure in the BWA’s modernization efforts—managing national emergencies such as the South Coast sewage crisis and spearheading an island-wide mains replacement initiative.

By 2020, Halliday had risen to Acting Chief Executive Officer, a role he held during a period of deep organizational restructuring. His resignation in August 2024 marked the end of a significant chapter in the BWA’s evolution—and the beginning of a controversial new role abroad as CEO of Trinidad and Tobago’s Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA), from which he would be abruptly dismissed less than a year later amid sweeping political changes.

________________________________________

🌊 Barbados Departure: Behind the Dignified Memo

In his farewell note to staff, Halliday struck an optimistic tone. He highlighted BWA’s transformation into a “zero-budget entity,” capable of meeting all its operational costs without external financial support. He praised the institution’s growth and promised a smooth leadership transition, committing to support the handover process through to completion.

Yet, beneath the polished public messaging, questions lingered about the real forces behind his departure. Many observers pointed to a deepening political undercurrent at the BWA, particularly following the introduction of the Barbados Water Authority (Amendment) Act, 2023.

________________________________________

🏛 The BWA Act and Shifting Power Structures

Officially presented as a modernization initiative, the BWA (Amendment) Act was laid in the House of Assembly on April 19, 2023, and finalized in the Senate by October 25 of that year. Its stated goals were operational efficiency and improved service delivery. But critics believe its impact was more structural—and more political.

Key features of the Act included:

• The replacement of the General Manager role with a Chief Executive Officer

• The creation of a new Chief Operations Officer position, viewed by some as politically driven

• Expanded ministerial oversight, granting the Minister of Water Resources increased control over daily operations

To supporters, these changes represented a forward-looking governance model. But to others, they signaled a weakening of executive independence and a realignment of decision-making power toward ministerial offices. In that context, Halliday’s resignation was seen not simply as a career move—but possibly a response to a shift in authority and autonomy.

________________________________________

🧭 Headhunted to Trinidad: High-Stakes Reform Ends Abruptly

Keithroy Halliday assumed leadership of Trinidad and Tobago’s Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA) on November 1, 2024, after being recruited by international executive search consultants under the then-ruling People’s National Movement (PNM) government. Appointed to head a newly restructured nine-member executive team, Halliday was tasked with executing a TT$13.4 million transformation plan designed to overhaul WASA’s operations, strengthen infrastructure, and introduce performance-based governance.

WASA Chairman Ravi Nanga praised Halliday for his “mix of knowledge and experience,” and expressed full confidence in his ability to provide “inspirational leadership” during this ambitious institutional reset.

The transformation initiative included:

• Redundancies affecting approximately 2,500 workers (1,500 monthly-paid and 1,000 daily-paid)

• Termination of 426 senior management positions

• Introduction of performance-based contracts

• Infrastructure upgrades to modernize services and reduce political interference in operational decision-making

But by June 2025, the political climate had shifted dramatically. On April 28, 2025, the United National Congress (UNC) won the general election with a 26–13 seat majority, ousting the PNM government that had appointed Halliday.

Just six weeks later, on June 10, 2025, the newly installed Minister of Public Utilities, Barry Padarath, criticized the transformation plan during his contribution to the Mid-Year Budget Review in Parliament. He cited:

• A lack of defined performance benchmarks

• TT$1.8 million paid to external transformation consultants

• Over TT$1 million in legal fees

• An allegedly underutilized and costly leased office space

He also raised concerns about TT$25 million in contracts awarded under the previous administration, which he referred to the Attorney General for further review.

Then, just two days later, on June 12, 2025, Halliday’s contract was abruptly terminated, alongside those of nine other executives. The entire transformation initiative was quietly shelved. To date, no publicly known performance review, formal inquiry, or due process has been disclosed. Halliday’s tenure—just seven months long—ended in an unexpected and highly controversial manner.

________________________________________

🔄 Political U-Turn: From DLP to BLP — From PNM to UNC

Halliday’s trajectory starkly illustrates the vulnerability of public sector executives to political turnover:

• In Barbados, Halliday was appointed General Manager of the Barbados Water Authority (BWA) under the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) in 2017.

• By 2024, a Barbados Labour Party (BLP) government had enacted structural changes via the BWA Amendment Act, arguably curbing Halliday’s influence and autonomy, and prompting his resignation.

• In Trinidad and Tobago, Halliday was hired under the PNM and dismissed mere weeks after the UNC assumed office—raising concerns that his termination may have been more politically expedient than performance-driven.

These back-to-back shifts reflect a troubling regional pattern where executive leadership in statutory bodies becomes collateral damage during political transitions—jeopardizing reform continuity, institutional memory, and professional independence.

⚖️ How Halliday Was Dismissed: Process or Power Play?

Keithroy Halliday’s dismissal from WASA came without warning, public explanation, or any indication of due process. Despite leading a high-stakes national reform project, his contract—along with those of nine other executives—was abruptly terminated just seven months into his tenure, shortly after the United National Congress (UNC) came to power in April 2025.

There was no formal performance review, no disciplinary hearing, and no public statement of cause. Instead, the termination appeared politically coordinated—executed swiftly and silently, with the new administration distancing itself from the TT$13.4 million plan Halliday was recruited to implement under the previous People’s National Movement (PNM) government.

Such sudden terminations—particularly when involving high-ranking professionals recruited through executive search firms and tied to major institutional reform—raise red flags about procedural fairness, contractual rights, and political interference in public sector administration.

________________________________________

📚 Dismissal Law in Trinidad and Tobago: What the Law Requires

In Trinidad and Tobago, termination of employment is governed by a combination of contract law, statutory obligations, and constitutional principles that emphasize fairness and lawful cause.

Key elements of the legal framework include:

• Just cause requirement: Dismissals must be based on misconduct, incapacity, redundancy, or another valid reason. For senior executives, the terms are usually spelled out in the contract.

• Procedural fairness: Even where a contract permits termination “with notice” or “with cause,” employers are expected to follow fair procedures, especially for high-profile roles.

• Notice or payment in lieu: Employees must be given the contractual or statutory notice period or appropriate compensation in lieu.

• Protection from political discrimination: Under the Equal Opportunity Act, dismissals based on political opinion—whether real or perceived—may be unlawful.

Moreover, where the state is the employer, additional constitutional safeguards may apply, particularly where terminations are seen as arbitrary or influenced by changes in political leadership.

________________________________________

🧾 Legal Implications: Political Dismissal or Breach of Contract?

The circumstances surrounding Halliday’s dismissal—its timing, method, and lack of stated cause—could give rise to several legal claims:

1. Wrongful dismissal or breach of contract

If Halliday’s employment agreement included specific provisions about termination, severance, or performance evaluation, his abrupt removal without cause or due process may constitute a breach of contract. He may be entitled to damages for lost income, reputational harm, and contractual benefits.

2. Violation of the Equal Opportunity Act

Given the political backdrop, Halliday could argue that his termination was influenced by political opinion or affiliation, especially if evidence shows a deliberate replacement of executives aligned with the previous government. If so, he may file a complaint with the Equal Opportunity Commission, which could lead to adjudication before the Equal Opportunity Tribunal.

3. Constitutional and administrative law remedies

If the decision to dismiss Halliday is deemed to have been made arbitrarily or in bad faith by a public authority, he may pursue a judicial review of the decision, challenging its legality, rationality, or procedural fairness.

🧠 Institutional Vulnerabilities and Political Exposure

While Halliday's dismissal triggered legal and public scrutiny, it also spotlighted structural weaknesses in the governance of state entities like WASA. The TT$13.4 million reform plan was ambitious, but its execution came under fire from Minister of Public Utilities Barry Padarath, who alleged in Parliament that the plan lacked clearly defined performance targets and suffered from questionable expenditures—including over TT$1.8 million paid to consultants and more than TT$1 million in legal fees. Halliday has not publicly responded to these claims, and to date, no audit findings have been disclosed to substantiate or refute them.

Such criticism—whether proven or not—reinforces the need for transparent performance frameworks and predefined evaluation mechanisms when executing large-scale public sector reforms, especially when a change in government is imminent.

🛑 Governance Gap: Board Vacuum Under PNM

One significant governance issue was the absence of a WASA board during Halliday’s early tenure. After Halliday’s November 1, 2024 appointment under the PNM, the board—whose members typically serve three-year terms per the Water and Sewerage Authority Act—was not refreshed. According to multiple reports, nine commissioners, including chairman Ravindra Nanga, resigned between May 2–6, 2025—leaving WASA effectively boardless from early May to June 5, 2025 azpnews.com+4scribd.com+4newsday.co.tt+4. The lack of oversight just as the UNC came into power deepened a governance vacuum, with Minister Padarath even stepping into operational oversight during this period newsday.co.tt+7scribd.com+7newsday.co.tt+7. Critics argue that this prolonged caretaker status, especially during a politically-sensitive reform rollout, exposed Halliday to heightened operational risk and undermined institutional resilience.

________________________________________

🕰 UNC Board Appointment: Was There Enough Time?

The new WASA board, appointed by the UNC government on June 5, 2025, took office only a few weeks after the April 28 election victory . Given that Halliday was dismissed shortly thereafter, the board had limited opportunity to conduct an independent, thorough assessment of his leadership or of early-stage reform outcomes. This condensed timeline raises critical questions: Did the board have enough time to review the CEO’s performance fairly? Or was the dismissal influenced more by political exigency than professional evaluation? The compressed window between the election, board appointment, and termination undermines the appearance of a considered, process-driven approach.

________________________________________

🗣 Public Remarks and Legal Implications: “A Failed CEO”?

During the Mid-Year Budget Review in Parliament, Minister of Public Utilities Barry Padarath publicly referred to Keithroy Halliday as “a failed CEO from Barbados.” The statement triggered public debate and media commentary—not only because it dismissed Halliday’s professional reputation, but also because it appeared to lack any formal, transparent performance review or inquiry by the new board.

Given Halliday’s track record at the Barbados Water Authority (BWA)—which included:

• Managing the South Coast sewage crisis,

• Leading a major mains replacement programme, and

• Overseeing the transition to a “zero-budget” operational model—

it is questionable how such a conclusion was reached after just seven months at WASA and mere days after the new board’s appointment.

While the minister’s comments in Parliament are shielded by parliamentary privilege—meaning Halliday cannot sue for defamation over remarks made in that forum—any repetition of the statement outside Parliament (e.g., on social media, press interviews) could expose the State to defamation claims under the Libel and Defamation Act, Ch. 11:16, especially if the statement cannot be proven as fair comment or grounded in fact.

Beyond the legal technicalities, such public rhetoric—without substantiated performance evidence—undermines confidence in merit-based leadership evaluation, discourages qualified regional professionals from public service, and may even prejudice any legal recourse the dismissed CEO may seek

🌍 A Recurring Theme: Politicization of Statutory Leadership

Halliday’s dismissal echoes a broader regional trend in which statutory entities undergo sweeping leadership changes following elections. In Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados, and other Caribbean nations, it's common for new administrations to replace leadership at state institutions—such as the National Housing Corporation or central banks—shortly after gaining power. These shifts often occur without transparent justification or performance-based evaluations. While such dismissals may be lawful under contract law, they erode the perception of secure tenure and institutional impartiality in public office.

________________________________________

📌 Conclusion: Stability Requires Structure

The dual-board issues—the PNM-era vacancy and the rushed UNC appointment—underscore a central truth: institutional stability requires consistent governance frameworks, especially during leadership transitions. Halliday’s short tenure and abrupt dismissal, devoid of formal review, highlight how reform-minded executives can be undermined by procedural weakness and political turnover.

For public sector transformation to be credible, governments must:

• Ensure boards are active and focused, not left vacant during transitions

• Allow adequate time for objective performance assessments

• Separate political cycles from organizational governance

Without these protections, the region risks significant professional flight and the default politicization of public sector leadership—a loss that may ultimately cost citizens far more than political capital.