Trinicenter.com
Trinidad and Tobago News
 
 Time
Caribbean Links

COLUMNISTS
Ras Tyehimba  
Susan Edwards  
Dr. K Nantambu  
Winford James  
Dr. S Cudjoe  
Raffique Shah  
Terry Joseph  
Bukka Rennie  
Denis Solomon  
Stephen Kangal  
Corey Gilkes  
A.S. Leslie  
Shelagh Simmons  
Guest Writers  

Affiliates
TriniSoca.com  
TriniView.com  
Trinbago Pan  
Nubian School  
RaceandHistory.com  
Rootsie.com  
RootsWomen  
HowComYouCom  
AmonHotep.com  
Africa Speaks  
Rasta Times  
US Crusade  


Under the microscope
Posted: Sunday, June 30, 2002

By Donna Yawching

WHATEVER political developments may occur in the very near future, I for one am very glad that we’ve had the experience of the current interim government.

Not because I am enamoured with either Mr. Manning or his administration (believe me, I’m not); and not even because I think the UNC were the biggest bunch of crooks to hit T&T yet, bar none. I’m happy for this particular political hiatus for one reason only: it’s like a window, letting in the fresh unfamiliar breeze of truth. Corners which otherwise would have remained closed and dark, the realm of murmurings and suspicions, are being aired out; and that's healthy.

Consider. Had the UNC regained power, would we be having any of the enquiries and investigations that are now underway? Not to mention the court cases, the revelations about bank accounts; and all these unusual signs of life from the CID and the Integrity Commission? I don’t think so.

And, had Mr. Manning won the election by a comfortable majority, would he have bothered to stir up the dust? Again, I doubt it: what would he have had to gain? As we all know, it is the very precariousness of his situation that is the driving force behind much of this frenetic activity: Manning knows he is in a race against time to disclose something utterly damning that could shut down the UNC once and for all.

And so, we must thank the strange fate that has led us to this unwieldy political impasse. Because, at the end of it (presumably, quite soon), we will at least have gained a very clear view of how our country—unfortunately— operates.

The Elections and Boundaries Commission is another corner into which some light has flooded. We have heard of its strengths (few) and its weaknesses (many); more importantly, we have gained an insight into the genre of people who populate our power structures, and the way in which these structures function (or don’t, as the case may be). We’ve been shown a statutory body which—amazingly in a democratic society—answers to no-one but itself, and is its own sole point of reference.

We have seen its gatekeepers’ competence brought into question, and we have seen them nevertheless refuse to step down, even as a point of honour. (As Shakespeare’s Falstaff once declared: “What is honour? A word. What is in that word honour? Air.” It could be our national motto.) And we have seen ourselves, as a society, powerless to make them leave. That alone is a valuable insight, or ought to be.

What else have we learned about ourselves as a nation, and about the people we install to lead us? My colleague Kevin Baldeosingh wrote stingingly this week about “examplars”, and he makes an indisputable point. All the people who would (or should) inspire respect are turning out to be little more than worms, once put under the microscope that has been created by the current political impasse.

Hence the distasteful spectacle of the Independent Senators (otherwise usually well respected, if only for their “independence”) grubbing after unearned pay, and taking strong exception when anyone queries their venality. It is true that they are under no obligation to say what they will do with their money; the question is whether they should be accepting any money at all. And the same goes, by the way, for the “Unindependent” Senators, who are just as superfluous, but are wisely keeping a low profile.

But the most important disclosures, I think, are those coming out of the Biche High School Enquiry. The last two weeks have turned up a succession of experts, all of whom are chiefly concerned with covering their own or their company’s self. There are so many conflicting interests—the Ministries of Energy and Education, SEMP, MTS, Trintoplan, Town and Country, Cariri, Envirotec—- it’s hard to keep track of who said or did what; and why.

However, what is crystal clear is that: (a) strong concerns about the project were expressed at an early stage; (b) sound technical advice was routinely ignored; and (c) unequivocal warnings of danger were brushed aside. We’re hearing high officials say things like, “We probably forgot”. Who is ultimately to blame for the fiasco is anyone’s guess; presumably, this is what Justice Sealey will determine. But what, to me, is most striking is that these many and varied experts who consulted on the project, and who noted the problems, apparently did not feel any obligation to continue sounding the alarm, or to do so publicly.

Once their job was done, their reports written (and ignored), their memoranda sent, they all, to a man (or woman), washed their hands off the issue and moved on, allowing the construction to continue as if all were well. The fact that so many grave dangers would eventually hang over the heads of innocent children did not, apparently, perturb them in the least. Not one of them protested openly, or even called the press to whisper: “Hey, there’s something here you should know.”
And that is one of the most damning indictments of our society that I can think of./

Off on vacation; see you in August.



Email page Send page by E-Mail