Time for Powersharing - Part 2
Given the heavily ethnic nature of our politics, three leaders are best placed to break the parliamentary deadlock and organise a long-overdue powersharing arrangement, and they are Patrick Manning, Basdeo Panday, and Orville London. Manning is identified for being both prime minister and leader of the Trinidadian Afros, Panday for being leader of the Trinidadian Indos, and London for being leader of the Tobagonians.
Government and opposition must be involved in the constitutional and political change of direction that the 18-18 tie dictates, and they must be quick about it. Political habit, organisational commonsense, and a lack of efficient lobbies among the electorate combine to urge this action.
There is room for lobbies, whether corporate or personal, in the new adventure, but in the first instance, their best role will be to, through constant, well-thought-out, and robustly-articulated representations, force government and opposition to talk, and to talk about the specific agenda of powersharing.
Except he intends to break the law, or he has been suddenly invested with a wisdom that enables him to see executive powers in the constitution that the rest of us cannot, Mr. Manning cannot continue governing much longer - some say not beyond April 2002 when parliament should by law be convened. There are simply too many apparently insurmountable procedural hurdles, e.g., appointment of a speaker by majority vote, appointment of an elected parliamentarian as deputy speaker, possible non-payment of emoluments to UNC parliamentarians (in the absence of oath-taking in the parliament). And there are other hurdles which may not have been discovered yet.
The cabinet is a committee of the lower house, in that it derives its authority and legitimacy from a majority in that place. But if that house is not being convened, perhaps cannot be, and if, if it is convened, PM Manning cannot demonstrate that he has the support of a majority of the members (and the first order of business, the appointment of a speaker, will test that support), what then? President Robinson did not, in making him prime minister, say he would achieve that support, but, rather, that he was most likely to.) Can Mr. Manning prove him right?
Perhaps. But it is unclear to all of us who have commented on the deadlock so far, and it does not seem to make any sense at all to think that he can, especially as the polarisation of UNC and PNM seems to be deepening with reckless statements and actions from both sides, floor-crossing seems shamed out of possibility, and free voting is disabled by the ethnic gods (or jumbies) in the non-negotiation of a powersharing arrangement at any level.
There is a clear need for creative solutions to the deadlock, and even as we call on Manning and Panday to quickly go to the bargaining table and negotiate a powersharing arrangement, we must recognise the absolutely vital role of significant-group consultation before the bargaining process. The creative solutions are out there in the wisdom of the population, especially that part of it that is not enslaved by the constipated thinking of the parties. The consultation must therefore inform the bargaining, and both processes must be transparent. But how can either be brought about?
As prime minister, Manning clearly has a duty to take initiatives, but so does Panday as rejecter of the office of opposition leader. Look, the impasse has forced a new kind of competition on the two, and cat-and-mouse own-way-ness simply will not travel far. There's got to be a call, preferably a joint one, to consultation, to a coming-together of the significant groups. Both men must look up from the pre-election party ground of charge and countercharge to the high moral ground of compromise for the good of country. And if they don't, then we must reorient ourselves quickly into lobbies that seek to suppress their stubbornness and stupidity and focus them appropriately. The independent trade unions are on the path already, but there will be a need for more lobbies like them.
One of the latter (and it should have been on the path from the outset) is the Tobago House of Assembly, led by London. Every self-respecting Tobagonian knows that Tobago needs to have greater powers to run its business for the best results, but that its minority status in the first-past-the-post system has been keeping it down. Being a self-respecting Tobagonian and a historian to boot, London knows how unfair that system is. So he should be at the forefront of initiatives to induce an equitable powersharing arrangement between the ethnicities in Trinidad, as well as between the Trinidad ethnicities and the (major) one in Tobago.
The 18-18 impasse does not open up opportunities for fairer governance only in respect of the ethnic problem in Trinidad, but also in respect of the problem between Tobago and Trinidad.
Orville London must jump in.
Part 1 | Part 2 | Part 3
Archives / Winford James Homepage / Previous Page
^^ Back to top
