|
Two Man Rats
Posted: Saturday, December 15, 2001
By Donna Yawching
IN THE wake of the recent election and its unprecedented results, my political pipe dream of a few weeks ago is starting to look very appealing: we should just forget about elections altogether and hire a government of competent professionals, rather than being periodically saddled with ego-driven megalomaniacs.
However, since no prophet is ever heeded in his own country, this is not likely to happen for at least another hundred years. In the interim, it would seem, we’re stuck with the megalomaniacs.
And it's nice to see two of them being forced to dismount their high horses and meet in civil negotiation. The process should bring both men down a peg, since each knows that he needs the other desperately. Despite all the big talk, Mr Manning would be loathe to face another election: the results could just as easily swing out of his tenuous grasp.
And Mr Panday, of course, has never actually won an election fair and square: in 1995, he had to deal with "the devil" in order to assume power; and last year's results were tainted by the presence of two possibly illicit candidates. If the Gypsy-Chaitan process had run its full course (as it should have), all sorts of disgrace could conceivably have followed, including the loss of his government. As it was, Panday was saved from this humiliation by an even greater one: the shame of having his hand bitten by those whom he himself had fed (though perhaps not enough); and the premature forcing of his government to the polls.
In fact, Mr Panday lives in fear of being caught out, of being found to be wearing no clothes by the population at large. Could anyone but Gypsy (who may still face criminal charges over last year's indiscretions) have won him the Ortoire/Mayaro seat? Without that seat, Panday would not even have achieved the deadlock. Who knows what another premature election would bring–particularly if by that time, Gypsy happened to be "assisting the police with their investigations"?
Indeed, quite a few of Mr P's people, if we are to judge by the amount of material that has been reaching the DPP's desk recently, might be similarly "assisting" the police (don't paint Ramesh out of the picture yet!). The UNC leader could find himself with such a shortage of candidates, he might be forced to send Jack-in-the-Box out to face the electorate. In short, the last thing Panday would want is another election: his heart, quite literally, could probably not stand the strain.
He has no choice, therefore, but to swallow his chagrin and bargain with Manning: note his very quick offer of a "national unity" government, before the topic had even been broached by the President. Mr Panday has decided that half a loaf is better than none; and that none is a very real possibility if he does not move fast and shrewdly. He is unlikely to emerge from the current proceedings with the one-man-rat-power that he so relishes; but he may at least salvage a shred or two of dignity if he plays his cards right.
As for Mr Manning, he's clearly enjoying his chance to posture on the moral high ground, making pronouncements about corruption and his responsibility to the electorate as if his own party, in the past, were not itself linked to a few dodgy episodes (though not, it is true, anywhere on the scale of the UNC's transgressions). He is no doubt relishing the idea of waving to Mr Panday from the back seat of one of the new Mercedes, as the latter waits for transport at a maxi-taxi stand. Maybe he'd even offer his old rival a ride!
All joking aside, the current deadlock, while inconvenient, offers T&T a window of opportunity to redefine its entire approach to politics–something which Lloyd Best has been advocating for years. There is really no sense in returning to the polls in three months time: the ad campaigns alone could create mass national dementia. (My intelligence has seldom been so insulted as during this last month: all the ad agencies involved should be heartily ashamed of themselves, but the UNC's most of all. Clearly it is time for a watchdog body to monitor quality and ethics in this field.)
A new election would resolve nothing: we could end up with deadlocks every three months for the next 18 years, until one race or the other managed to produce enough voting-age offspring to skew the balance. We can't wait that long for a viable government, and in any case that should not be the basis of one. Instead of turning to the census figures to calculate who is likely to be in power at any given time, we should be looking at programmes, visions, goals.
And this is what the current situation gives us the opportunity to do. Assuming that it does not degenerate into a mere cynical carving up of the pie between two parties instead of one, with the PNM forgetting its fine words and settling in for a nice long snuffle at the public trough, this could be the chance for serious questions to be broached, and settled. It is, for example, the perfect moment to get a consensus on constitutional changes.
In truly "civil" societies, coalition governments can often work in favour of the electorate. Neither faction can achieve anything without the other: this then opens the way for "horse-trading". For one side to pass a bill or launch a project, it is obliged to negotiate with the other side, which can then extract significant benefits for its own constituents as a condition of its support. Meanwhile, since both factions watch each other like hawks, corruption is kept to a minimum. The people are the big winners.
In some ways, the 18-18 split was the best thing that could have happened to T&T. The question is, will we be wise enough to use it productively? Or will it merely turn into another short-sighted power struggle between two man rats?
 Send page by E-Mail
|
|
