The mess in Tobago
By Dr. Winford James
December 26, 2004
So now the contest is down to the PNM and the DAC (we must discount the independents as only having nuisance value at this time). The NAR is out of it, knocked to ground by three specific acts - Robinson's retirement, Charles' resurrection of the DAC, and Caruth's last-minute defection to the DAC - but essentially by one development: the exhaustion, through sheer inertia, of a structure-less institution that had been kept on its ungainly feet by the power of Robinson's persona. The UNC was always a non-starter. Who will win? Does it matter?
The PNM has three major things going for it: incumbency in both islands, relative structural stability, and fragmentation and uncertainty in the opposition. But it has far more going against it, including: literally more money than previous administrations but very little in transformative development to show for it; a rolling back of gains from previous administrations; a leader (Orville London) clueless about Tobago's chances of breaking free from its crippling stasis and too cynical to motivate the right kinds of political action; much disaffection in the hierarchy; and a total absence of real politics.
The DAC is regrouping, optimistic about picking up both the parked NAR vote and the disaffected PNM vote, the former more substantial than the latter. It is clearly an election outfit with no structure that has had time to work, but with personas that have been on the political scene for generations. It is therefore going to rely heavily on the persona of Charles to pull off a victory, and immediately one has visions of a onemanship that contributed significantly to the ouster of the NAR in the last election. More troublingly, if you listen to what he has been saying on his energised platform, Charles does not see himself as having done any political wrong in the NAR's loss of power. Rather, he sees the judgment of the electorate as having been flawed. And so one gets the sense that there is no remorse, no repentance, no learning, accompanied by the dread that it will be more of the same if the party wins.
And yet he is the leader with the real politics. This time around he and his pick-up side are yet to show me a vision that could take Tobago out of its stinking morass, but he had plenty of vision in his four years at the helm - far, far more than London and the PNM. He set up the PRDI that set about gathering and analysing data to facilitate planning in Tobago. He came up with an extensive development plan and had policies on every front. He invoked the Dispute Resolution Commission and won a decision on budgetary allocations for Tobago (which the PNM rolled back). He set up a scholarship scheme to build the knowledge and innovation capacity of Tobagonians and keep them in the island (make a distinction between establishment and management!). He set about branding Tobago through the abortive Ring Band initiative.
And his politics was uncompromisingly one of agitation and respect for Tobago's development, not failed backroom negotiation and public silence, capitulation, and acquiescence. He played the politics out in the full glare of the public, demanding respect for Tobago's rights and aspirations, and was prepared to argue case after case. It seems that one of the big reasons he left the NAR to set up the DAC again was to move out from under the administrative authority of a moribund, no-appeal NAR in Trinidad and be free to agitate for Tobago's development in a way that London, trapped both by PNM protocol and personal political attitude, could not and cannot do.
With London's lack of politics and vision, we have had a mere minding of the store and a walking behind Trinidad - a use of donored funds to shamelessly maintain the status quo when so many fundamental things need changing. The observation may be grievous, but it is not particularly ungenerous since even he would be challenged to point to a single development in Tobago over his four years that speaks significantly to any of Tobago's chronic problems. He would be even more challenged to show ways in which Tobago has caught up with Trinidad over the last four years, the theme of catching up now laughing in his face. But with Charles' politics and vision, we saw the beginnings of much-needed fundamental change - beginnings miserably arrested, if not wiped out, by London's shopkeeping.
The last time I heard London speak on Tobago's development was at the reunion of the Class of '82 of Signal Hill Senior Comprehensive, and he confirmed my unflattering reading of him. He repeated his 'mantra' about Tobago developing but leaving capacity-challenged (and, possibly, shiftless) Tobagonians behind, and shied away from saying how what policies his administration had developed to tackle the problem apart from talking about it.
So Tobago will be going to the polls one more time, but to accomplish what? To vote back the PNM and keep the silly, pointless status quo in place? To replace the PNM with a DAC that is still to show, even at this late stage, its vision for really transforming the island?
I submit that there is no point voting if you cannot be convinced that Tobago's fortunes will begin to be fundamentally changed in clear and unambiguous ways in the next four years. And we need more voices to say so and to say so as stridently as possible. It is time the futility stopped.
^^ Back to top
|