Hochoy Still in Focus
Hochoy Charles is no longer Tobago's Chief Secretary, but he still holds the spotlight in Tobagonian politics, along with new Chief Secretary Orville London, of course. CS London is making sure that he stays there with him for clear benefits of contrast and counterpoint.
A number of factors lost Charles control of Tobago, and they include one-manship, central government manipulation of funds for the Assembly, the financial adventurism of ADDA and Ring Bang, and lack of accountability. These factors are a combination. His one-manship is not separable from his adventurism in the handling of the Assembly's financial business, which is itself not separable from the Panday government's manipulation of how much money it granted to the Assembly and when it released that money. But if there is one factor that was responsible for that loss, it is the one-manship.
It is the one-manship that is apparently responsible for latest piece of financial adventurism on his part that has been revealed by his successor: the creation of a framework for the investment of some $10M US in a company called Granadillo (Granadilo?) without the knowledge (and consequently the approval) of either the Executive Council or the House of Assembly. This, incredibly, after ADDA and Ring Bang.
In response to the charge, Charles has said, among other things, that his Executive Council both knew and approved. But one of his former Secretaries, Max James, immediately countered his claim, stating very clearly that the Council never sat on the matter, that there were no Council notes to the effect, and that Charles was tarnishing the reputation of the Council in general and his (James') in particular. In other words, James is saying that Charles lied.
The one-manship is again evident in the revelation by the Task Force set up to review the funding of scholarships that some 75% of the scholarships granted were not authorised by the Executive Council.
The one-manship may have been exercised in the matter of ADDA, with the Executive Council ratifying afterwards; I don't know. But there is a strong public perception that it was exercised. In the matters of Granadillo and the scholarships, there is more than public perception of one-manship; there is evidence.
And London is making sure that both the perception and the evidence stay alive in the public mind. It must be remembered that it is he who broke the news of the ADDA scandal.
But why keep Charles in the spotlight? To eventually have charges of criminal conduct laid against him? Well, if that is the intention, the charges can only have a negative political effect on Charles since politicians do not get jailed in this country for corruption. Is it to bury Charles politically? Well, that depends on at least two things: 1) London being able to sustain the perception for four years, and 2) London and the PNM being able to work a politics that will benefit Tobago appreciably more than the politics of Charles and his NAR.
Keeping Charles in the negative spotlight suggests that London intends to occupy the positive spotlight, at least where the conduct of the House of Assembly's financial business is concerned. But if he is to realise that intention, one of the approaches he cannot use is that of one-manship. But how can he escape using that approach in light of the West Indian tradition of prime ministers, premiers, and chief secretaries seeing effective governance as the rule of one?
It seems that the historian in London intends to break that tradition by involving his Executive Council every step of the way in decisions on the conduct of the financial business of the Assembly. To involve the Council automatically in the decision-making process requires a deliberately different frame of mind from that which obtains in West Indian politics. Is London signalling the operation of this frame of mind?
If he is, will there then be no dictatorship of the chief secretary in Tobago during this PNM administration? Will the dictatorship of the chief secretary be replaced by a dictatorship of the executive council? And will Tobago then benefit from a cessation of central government manipulation of the process of allocation of funds to Tobago?
Are these the counterpoint benefits that London hopes to achieve from letting Charles share the spotlight with him?
Archives / Winford James Homepage / Previous Page
^^ Back to top
