<B>By Nicholas RAINER</B>

The hullabaloo surrounding the minister of Education?s refusal or failure (depending on which way you look at it) to close down schools on March 26 has yet to die down.

The minister?s decision or lack thereof, which resulted in the tragic death of a student, continues to stoke the ire of the both the population and opposition. Calls for his resignation continue to pour down with the fierce persistence of torrential rains.

And indeed heads have rolled for far less. Yet Dharam Gokhool remains resolutely entrenched in his refusal to indulge his detractors.

Something needs to be cleared up. Despite what many would have you believe, the much maligned Dharam Gokhool was not, in fact, personally responsible for the torrential rains. He may have made a serious error of judgment that had disastrous consequences for a little Laura Paul. He did not, however, tear a gash in the heavens and unleash the heavy rains. The floods would have occurred whether or not he had declared that fateful Wednesday a day off for the country?s students. It is unfair to attribute all the desolation wrought by the floods to an act of Gokhool.

But that does not mean that the pertinacious minister should not resign. A man of greater stature would probably already have stepped down of his own volition. Firstly, his continued presence in government is a millstone around his party?s neck. Its popularity is already ebbing away because of recent price increases; so the last thing Labour needs is a political bogeyman in its midst. Then again, some may argue, the Education minister provides a useful focal point for the population?s discontentment.

Secondly, the crass lack of anything remotely resembling respect for the deceased and her family is unacceptable from a human being, let alone a minister who should, if anything, lead by example. His comment about one victim out of 350 000 students is not good politics. However effusive his subsequent apologies may have been, this faux-pas has stuck to the collective mind like chewing gum to a shoe.

The fact of the matter is that the beleaguered minister?s political capital expired a long time ago. His handling of the all-important education portfolio has, at best, been mitigated and, at worst, shambolic. His handling of several dossiers has already provoked widespread disapproval amongst teachers, parents and students alike. He may aspire to endowing Mauritius with a "world class" education sector; yet his performance can be described as anything but world class. The March 26 debacle was simply the proverbial straw that broke the camel?s back.

In this respect, his lot resembles that of his colleague, Rajesh Jeetah. A series of highly contested and ultimately detrimental "policy decisions" (if they can be called that at all) have gradually frittered away any credibility that these two ministers may once have enjoyed. As a result of their intransigence, both men have come to represent the parochialism that many reproach the government.

Whether the Prime minister will censure him remains to be seen. A cabinet reshuffle seems likely although the shape it will take is anyone?s guess. What is clear, though, is that the minister is skating on paper-thin ice.

The slightest misstep could well prove to be fatal.