Tears of a Clown... (Show Me Your Motion IV)

On the second day of the debate into the motion of no confidence in the Government brought by the Leader of the Opposition and Member of Parliament for Diego Martin West, Dr. Keith Rowley, Prakash Ramadhar, the Member of Parliament for St. Augustine, the Minister of Legal Affairs and, most importantly for these purposes, the Political Leader of the Congress of the People told us two very important things. First, he told us that we must pay attention to what is being said, to understand what the words are saying and to also listen carefully to what is NOT being said, and, secondly, he told us that after the contribution by the Opposition Leader he left the Chamber, called his wife and wept.

He went on to say much more, but after those two things were said they kept going around and around in my head while he was speaking and I could not for the life of me figure out why. Usually when that happens to me it is because my mind thinks that there is something that connects the two thoughts, something that joins them either by its presence or by its absence, but what could it be? What could link those two seemingly disconnected thoughts?

Clearly what was missing was a question, something that he said or did not say which I was supposed to pay attention to as instructed, but what was it? What was the question I was supposed to ask? And then it hit me. Like a flood of illumination on a pitch black night I was suddenly standing in the bright glare of knowing.

Prakash wept.

And in that moment of clarity I understood what was missing, what he did not say.

Here was a man who has laid his bucket down for better or worse, tied the fortunes of all the members of his party and buried his navel string deep within the bosom of the Kamla Persad Bissessar led United National Congress, who had stood with her and them through the thick of good times, largesse and plenty, and through the thin times of some very questionable actions, decisions, judgements and behaviors on her part and on that of some senior members of her government, and here he was, weeping like a child, over allegations printed on some uncorroborated, flimsy sheets of paper.

Why?

The question screamed to be asked - why did you weep Prakash? Is it that, for the first time the reality of what you uphold dawned upon you? Were you humiliated by this revelation, this vision of what you were a part of and a party to? Was it that things to which you were privy, things that were done in the dark and in hushed tones had just been made public and the shame was simply too much to bear? Or is it none of that, just a simple gut feeling, a knowing that the inevitability had arrived, of what you knew these people were collectively capable of all along?

Growing up my father used to tell me, listen to a man when he is speaking too much, let him speak, at some point he will speak himself into trouble. Is that what happened here Prakash? Did you, in a rush to demonstrate to all and sundry that you were still somehow unblemished by all that goes on within that Partnership, that your hands were still clean that you forgot to cover your tracks?

I put to you Prakash Ramadhar that your tears were crocodile tears, self serving tears that you hoped the admission of would wash you clean in the eyes of the public and save you, as you were sure (as were the rest of us), based on what you had just heard, that the whole damned thing was about to come down.

Ask yourself in the stillness of your heart, how many of those tears were for the young men of scant means corralled like animals and jailed without evidence during the still unanswered state of emergency that you gave your name and the support of your party to?

Ask yourself also, how many of those tears were for the elderly, those that you knew you and your partners conspired to deceive, promised one thing in exchange for their vote and then reneged?

On behalf of the people of this beleaguered nation I say hold your tears, do not weep for us. Save them for those who have carelessly sown the wind to achieve power and riches, who will surely reap a whirlwind of tears in this life or the next. William Shakespeare said “To weep is to make less the depth of grief,” but men like you should get no such quarter. I have reminded you before and I tell you again of the maxim that the upholder is worse than the thief. Use this as a wake up call and make things right where you know them to be wrong. Either that, or play a mas, but stand like a man and face the music when it comes.

Seventeen Days in September... (Show Me Your Motion IV)

It was a wet Monday afternoon when the Leader of the Opposition stood up in the Parliament to prosecute his motion of no confidence brought against the government in his name, and no one in that House, in the visitors gallery or in front of televisions and computer screens throughout the country and around the world were prepared for what he was about to say. His un-animated lead in belied the fact that this motion was going to be different from all the others and might have real substance, and his uncharacteristic underplaying of this 'bombshell' indicated to me after the fact that he was well aware that, when he was finished, business as usual in Trinidad & Tobago was not going to be the same. In his hands he held aloft documents that alleged an exchange that took place over the course of seventeen days leading up to, including and following on from the Guardian expose that led to the public outcry against what became the Section 34 fiasco, that went on to allege the government's questionable and unorthodox attempts to contain this same expose and the concomitant fallout through some very shady means, and featured thirty one emails alleged to have taken place between none other than the Attorney General Anand Ramlogan SC, Prime Minister Kamla Persad Bissessar SC, the Prime Minister's security advisor Gary Griffith, and the then Minister of Local Government, Surujattan Rambachan themselves. These emails exchanges also allegedly called the names of a journalist, her high level sources (including but not limited to at least one high ranking official at the United States Embassy), the Director of Public Prosecutions, the Chief Justice, and the then Minister of Justice Herbert Volney.

It alleged that high level government officials were prepared to do whatever it took to 'kill' the story, including visiting personal harm on at least one journalist, of moves to have the Director of Public Prosecutions managed through electronic eavesdropping and neutered via a 'promotion' to the 'Bench,' and by the time he was finished the country was literally abuzz with rumors and allegations of misbehavior in the country's highest Offices, tales of intrigue that ran the gamut from cover ups, bribes, conspiracy and threats against persons, and, as was to be expected, the public's opinion on the veracity of the claims cleaved straight down party lines and did not require any further investigation or validation for or against.

Leading the charge in response against the damning allegations in a press conference called immediately after, the Prime Minister herself attempted to debunk the entire thing as fraud, and while she agreed that the email address listed was in fact hers, the email alleged to have been sent to and from it are total fabrication and were never sent by her. She also said that she had asked that Acting Police Commissioner Williams investigate the authenticity of the emails and take whatever action according to the law. And what of the Attorney General, the man alleged to be calling the shots as it were in the exchange? His screeching denial in the Parliament did little to calm the growing unease as he wasted too much of his time throwing mud back at the leader of the Opposition, attempting to make the entire affair appear a personal matter between the two of them.

So where are we as of this writing? Some glaring inconsistencies from my point of view, not to argue for or against, just to point out what is not making sense to me. The Opposition Leader claims to have had these emails in his possession for over six months, yet did nothing to verify if they were in fact the smoking gun he believed them to be so that they could be laid indictably at their owner's feet? This more than anything raises a flag for me. Also, at that time the de-facto leader of everything in that party and partnership was Jack Warner, yet during these highest levels of subterfuge and conspiracy his name was not called even once? Not even as someone copied in the exchange? Despite the fact that the very government was at stake? And he was the Minister of National Security?

As Niccolò Machiavelli is noted to have said - “There are three classes of intellects: one which comprehends by itself; another which appreciates what others comprehend; and a third which neither comprehends by itself nor by the showing of others; the first is the most excellent, the second is good, and the third is useless.” The Opposition is standing by their claims that these emails are the genuine article and that it is in fact a bonafide exchange, while the named government members are insisting that it is a fraudulent hoax for political reasons. So what are we to do? We need to think our way through this if we are to survive as a nation, not by speculation or bacchanal but through investigation to ascertain where the truth lies. Clearly this is a job for the cyber crimes unit if not for the intervention of some serious scientists from the FBI and Scotland Yard. In winding up his presentation the Opposition Leader called on the DPP to take action to protect citizens, and for President Anthony Carmona to move swiftly to appoint members to the Integrity Commission so that it could investigate the claims made. Dr. Rowley for his part appears to have gone all in on this bet and he needs to be absolutely certain for this to deliver a desirable outcome, otherwise he is going to lose very badly. 

To quote former Senator Professor Patrick Watson - “If those e-mails are true, it's the end of the government. If they are fake, it's the end of Dr. Rowley and the PNM. I look forward to the sequel.”

I find that i do as well.

Wasting Time (What David Abdulah Doesn't Get)

I attended the Movement for Social Justice's 'gathering' at the Diego Martin Community Center on Thursday evening despite having publicly said i would not go, just to have myself proven wrong, that this is NOT tired rhetoric, that the people ARE interested in the 'old time something' coming back again, that the best use for the labor platform is a rehash of the NAR and then COP's appeal to the disenchanted middle class, but sadly, no such luck.

That is not to say that the speakers are not enthusiastic or not making the effort to enunciate their vision, or that the few people gathered were not paying rapt attention, it is that this will not win David nor the MSJ any brownie points when the general election heats up in ernest and he HAS to know this if he has any political savvy at all. At best, at the very best if he continues along this path he may amass enough supporters to be worth tacking on as an 'appendage' similar to the United National Congress use of the Congress of the People, but then what of all this talk? Who knows better than David that when you're an appendage you show up for the camera ops, you smile and make nice and read from the prepared script, but other than that you work hard at not upstaging your host or you will find yourself exactly where David and the MSJ find themselves today, so what's the point of this exercise?

I looked around the room to see many of those 'professionally' opposed to the current regime uniting anywhere a competing tent is erected under the maxim that the enemy of my enemy is my friend, but even these have 'traditional' homes and will return thence when the bell is wrung, so why is the movement being hobbled preaching to someone else's choir? My every interaction with David Abdullah tells me two things: 1) that he is an extremely intelligent person full of real vision and compassion and, 2) that while he is an excellent leadership member and would be a strong asset in the frontline of any organization, he is not leadership material, not in a world where all the bets are 'all in' all the time. For some reason he fails to understand that the change he wants that will make him valid will not come before the next election, so he will not see Office as the principle leader, so that those same changes he wants to enact will not see the light of day, and this 'Catch 22' seems to escape him in his 'Wizard of Oz' approach, that if we all could only just believe we could make all our wishes come true. It doesn't work that way.

David is failing to recognize the unique opportunity that he has at his disposal, the combined power of labor, forces that could be harnessed and repurposed now as a political machine, not used as an end to attract the same tired has beens that could not get the COP into Office. Who is advising him on this fool's errand? Clearly there MUST be someone in the ranks to say hey, there's another way, yes? One can only hope. We ALL know that there MUST be a challenge to ethnic voting for the damn to burst and facilitate the change we all know that is desperately needed, but where are those magical votes to come from? We've ALL sat in those meetings that tried to get the Ganges to flow into the Nile, to merge a tassa drum with a tenor pan but it just will not work. And we've all played the numbers games of the youth vote combined with the elderly, and the disenchanted, and the middle class, and one from Column 'a' and two from Column 'b' to make up numbers, ad nauseum. After the blatant lie that was the COP experience, does David really think he has it within him to upset the order and change the tribal masses in a straight up vote? Someone said bigger cocks than he has crowed and ended up in a pot of pelau and perhaps someone needs to share the recipe with him. No David, the last remaining constituency is labor. They alone have the numbers and the means to change the order, but you must have a vision for them and for the country as a whole. And it starts with manning up to the established order, and what better time to expose the indecency of it than in the soon to be held bye-election in Chaguanas West? As in all elections there are chances that you may or may not win, but what will the message be to those looking for something different, something new? When next will you get this much face-time opportunity to spread your message into homes across the land on the evening news? Or to use the fora of debates to challenge the script? The idea of a labor party is an exciting concept and in my view the only real avenue from which change can come, but looking on and listening to what THIS version of the MSJ is selling, we are nowhere near there yet.

Heading Home, Sticky Business and Almost Home (Excerpts from O'Connor Street)

(Heading Home)

We got to school most days with Mrs. Young, but we got home everyday walking.

Rain or shine, whatever, put your bag on your back and step off, because we only had one choice – walk.

I got off the chair outside the Dean’s office as soon as the final bell rang and headed out the Pembroke Street gate.

Normally after school I’d meet up with a bunch of school friends (who were different to home friends) and we’d talk a bit and laugh a bit or do some silliness and wildness but only for a bit as the walk home wasn’t fun in the dark.

There was Clayton (he had an operation to remove a testicle, and he was a bit of a bad ass so you left the testicle jokes alone); Ryan (how do you ever describe this boy? Ryan had a smile that told you in varying degrees just how bad things were about to get. The more he smiled, the bigger the trouble. Every single time I ever left the school without permission it was with Ryan); Nigel - (our resident nerd, every gang needs one and he was ours - Nigel wore glasses as thick as the bottom of a Coke bottle and generally behaved nerdy); Dirk (skittish as a manicou, closet alcoholic from the age of ten); Manuel (my closest school friend, was a little weird in his views of stuff and his stories, but his heart was in the right place and you could tell that right from the start); Dirk’s brother Glen (who was even crazier than his brother Dirk, what was wrong with that family?);   Robert – (now there was a loose screw. Robert became part of our crew through sheer persistence even though he was a year below us), and a couple of the other usual suspects that came and went from time to time. This was my crew. We ate lunch together and hung out together after school.

We weren’t really a gang, but we’d stand up for each other in a fight.

Today, because of the licks episode, I really did not feel like seeing them as I wasn’t in the best of moods and I had a headache from all the crying.

I walked down Pembroke Street, turned right onto park Street, past the vendors, the hustlers and the vagrants, the madmen, the not so mad men  (the soon to be mad men practicing their madness) and walked the six blocks midtown to Tragerete Road where the real walk began in earnest.

Tragerete Road ‘began’ off Park Street at a place called ‘Green Corner’, although don’t ask me why as there was nothing green anywhere on the corner.

It was, however, a major transport hub, and it was always busy with the com-ers and the go-ers of the afternoon head home rush.

I continued my walk two blocks down Tragerete Road to the Strand cinema, on to the gas station, then empty building, empty building, completely dilapidated building (we in a recession, and these things happen in a recession, people does just ups and leave), car park, corner, and the longest unbroken expanse of my walk - the Lapyreuse Cemetery.

On and on and on and on it went.

I’d walk for what seemed like forever dragging my finger lightly along the stone wall, my fingers skipping over imperfections only to land and continue. I’d do this until one finger got too hot and then I’d switch fingers, sometimes I’d use a stick, other times I ignored the wall completely. Yet it went on and on oblivious of me and my feelings towards it.

If my walk was half an hour, the cemetery wall was a good  fifteen minutes.

It (finally) ended on Colville Street, and I’d turn left on Colville and right on Roberts Street, which is where Woodbrook officially began (O'Connor Street was located in Woodbrook, a perfectly laid out grid of streets and parks that formed the community in which I lived). There were about fifteen blocks left to walk at this point, but they were only two house lots wide at the top so the distance wasn’t that bad.

Walking home was safe; rarely would you encounter ‘undesirables’, and you could generally time your walk to avoid them.

One day I wasn’t so lucky.


(Sticky Business)



I was well into the ‘Woodbrook’ end of my walk when I spied these bigger boys, three of them (one Indian, two African) from the ‘Junior Sec’ walking towards me, laughing, whooping, and eating mangoes.

The ‘Junior Sec’ (Mucurapo Junior Secondary School) was (to me) the worst school in the whole country and had the reputation of having the baddest of the bad boys.

I would cross the street to avoid one ‘Junior Sec’ boy, but three? I knew there was going to be some crap to deal with.

I only hoped they didn’t take my school bag or my shoes, as then I’d have to deal with my father when I got home, and when you lost something important like a school bag full of books or your school shoes, well, he would go from angry to murderous in three seconds, and when he gets to murderous he would ask questions and not wait for you to answer them but slap you as an answer, so the more questions the more licks, so I’m thinking I am going to have to fight all three of these boys to defend my bag and shoes, as that would be easier than dealing with my father.

Three blocks between us now, I was fully concentrating on them but they didn’t notice me (as yet).

I walk on, purposefully, thinking if I looked like I wasn’t scared they might think I was real bad too, because I would have to be, approaching one Indian and two Africans from the ‘Junior Sec’ on my own.

I would have to be either bad or mad, and people tended to leave both bad and mad people alone.

Two blocks apart, they were laughing and whooping with each other and I was walking like I knew something other people didn’t know and the whole street was quiet; No cars, no other people walking, just me heading west to O’Connor Street with one possible stop along the way, a collision heading east.

One block between us and the laughing and the whooping drops in volume as the louder of the two Africans notices me and gives me a big part of his attention.

If I stop now it will only get worse, because it was too late to try to run away.

The second African looks at me quizzically and I’m thinking maybe my mad/bad act is going to work. Start thinking maybe I should jump around with my hands in the air and scream like a crazy man as they pass just to keep everyone to himself.

But that could be a bad idea, because if I didn’t sell it right they might beat me up just for fooling with them.

We were on the same block now, me heading west, the three of them heading east, and nobody talking yet and they walking and I walking and they reach right up to me and I see my space between the Indian and African number one and i turn my body to pass between them when the Indian put his whole hand on my chest and stop me in my tracks and say...”but you ent seeing we or wha?"

Everyone seemed to look at me, waiting for an answer, and I couldn't come up with one.

"You is a very bad man or wha?” and it dawns on me right there that even if I said yes I wouldn't be fooling anybody today because truth be told I was really small for my age, and though I was not what you would call a coward and would stand up to any fight, this one was not going to go my way and we all pretty much knew it.

African number one chimed in “Unless he’s a madman, mad people doh watch where they going and he have to be not watching cause he woulda see we...” which I guess made sense, and I thought if we debated long enough I could escape in the confusion.

I was about to offer my opinion on the two choices when African number two said...”allyuh ent see he just want some mango?” and with that he took the mango he was eating and rubbed it all over my face and in my hair and on my clothes.

Just like that.

And just like that it was over.

Indian removed his hand from my chest and let me go and the three of them walk off laughing at their accomplishment and whooping in earnest.

I was angry.

And I realized I was trembling down both legs.

I made myself walk on, going to put it behind me and find a stand pipe to wash this mango juice off of me when damned if something didn’t hit me smack in the back of my head and I turned around in my astonishment to see a mango seed skating across the pavement and African number two jumping up and down laughing hard.

I guess it was he who threw the mango seed and was enjoying the end result of his prowess.

I turned around and walked off; two blocks from home, tears streaming down my face in anger; sticky mango juice all over me, and I just wanted to get home away from this whole horrible day.


At least I still had my schoolbag and shoes (which was a really good thing), but I left all my dignity three blocks away from home.


(Almost Home)



The street sign used to say O’Connor Street, but someone stole the sign.

Only the pole was there now, and that pole was good enough for me as my fingers lightly wrapped around the smooth cold steel in mid stride turning the corner, happy to be turning onto O’Connor Street, almost home.

Past the corner house where Robert the retarded boy lived (Robert was like a small child if you talked to him, but he had a beard and a mustache and he was strong like an ox), past two houses of people we knew only by name (not everyone on the street was ‘social’ like us), past the man who used to ring the church bell house (didn’t know his name, but he was like the oldest man on the whole street and I think he lived alone and used to keep to himself except when he used to leave his house to go and ring the church bell), past Louis Gillman Thomas’ house (people said he had some money, but he was a ‘Outside’ child, and I thought that meant he used to live outside when he was a child, and I used to think that was so cool), past the Kowlessar’s, the Brash’s, the Champoon’s, cross the street and I’m Home.


I open the gate, up the five steps, into the gallery, into the house and my sister Faye Ann sees me and says “What happen to you?” which got my mother’s attention and she looked out of the kitchen to see and hear if this should interest her.

When she saw my mango stained face and clothes, I guess she decided it did.

After a short but intense interrogation, my mother put on her shoes and told me to come with her, and then I realized that me and my mother were going to find these boys.

We walked full strides, me skipping every couple of steps to keep up with her, and we covered about ten blocks in quick fashion when I spied the three of them standing on a corner talking to a girl.

My mother had a sixth sense about these things and she asked me if those three boys was the three boys and I said yes and we kept walking, a little faster now, and in no time we were right up on them.

My mother grabbed my right arm and pushed me forward and asked the three of them at once who did this to her son.

The girl backed off and kept backing off and must have left right there and then because we didn’t see her again.

The three of them took a step back in a sort of semi circle and was sort of sizing the situation up when my mother lifted up her leg and took off her shoe and asked who did this to my child this time more forcefully and people started to gather around and the Indian pointed at African number two and my mother hit that boy ‘clunk’ in his forehead with her big wooden clog and his hand went up to his face and I think he was in shock because he didn’t move an inch when she hit him ‘clunk’ again, this time in the back of his head.

He was looking a little queasy and confused and African number one just took off running and didn’t look back and Indian opened his mouth to say something and got my mother shoe full in his mouth and he stumbled back and my mother watched those two boys and told them that the next time they see her child walking down the road cross the friggin street or she coming in their school to look for their ass.

Indian was crying now because his mouth was bleeding and African number two was still looking a little unsteady from the two clog lash in his head, and my mother grabbed me by the same arm and turned both of us and we headed back home.

My mother could be a little protective like that sometimes.

The Game of Thrones... (The Beginning...)

The history of the Seven Kingdoms tell of a time called 'The Great Upheaval,' the time when Lady Kamla of the Orange House did endeavor to challenge the Mad King for rule of all the Kingdoms, but first she had to slay her father the Silver Lord, known to the peasants and the field hands alike as the Drunken Master. And it came to pass that she did come to slay him and claim his Throne, and all his allies and former

Banner-men, including Sir Roodal and Sir Suruj both Orange by birth, Sir Vassant and Sir Tim, men without color or allegiance, and Sir Anand (who would later become Hand of the Queen) all swore allegiance to their new Queen; and in the final act the Orange colors were torn down and her own Yellow flag raised upon the ramparts, declaring herself Queen of the East. They say it was this move more than any other that caused the remaining loyalists to capitulate, all swearing loyalty to Lady Kamla but many also in secret to the Dark Knight, from whom it was known her new power flowed. With the former King's Banner-men now loyal and at her side, and together with the armies of the Dark Knight, Lady Kamla mounted a surprise attack on the Throne. The defeat of the Mad King was swift and severe, his armies routed, his Balisier pennants torn from the castle walls and he himself injured in the battle, fled to the Kingdom of the South to hide in exile while the Yellow flag was raised all over the Seven Kingdoms.

But that is not the whole or the end of our story, for the Great Upheaval had not yet begun.

It was written that three harvests into the reign of the Yellow House omens would appear heralding the coming storms, where birds of prey would fall dead from the sky in their hundreds. At that time the Dark Knight was dethroned by his former banner-men now turned enemies and, badly wounded, swore loyalty to the Yellow Queen even as he began to make plans to challenge her for the Throne. The house servants and the field laborers in despair over the confusion threw their lot behind Sir David and made him their Peasant King to challenge for the Throne for the new peasant army, but it is said the Queen had a spell cast upon him to keep him disoriented and unable to lead. His allies, the Knights of the Round Table gathered to swear to common cause under Sir Keith of the Rowley House, loyal servant of the South and heir to the Mad King's armies, together with Sir Ramesh, the former Hand of the Silver King and promised Hand to Sir Keith should he secure victory for the South against the Queen, agreed to common purpose.

It is here our story begins.

Under advice from the Queen, Sir Wade, Leader of the Hallowed Hall did announce an open season on the Seat of the Dark Knight and it is said the very next evening the moon went dark in the sky. Now the Great Upheaval began in ernest and the people of the Center, those formerly of House of Orange
and also of late newly sworn fiefs of the Yellow House found their loyalty commanded from both sides. The Royal Fool Prakash from the Jester College, whose own loyalty was always available to whoever held most power, made a play for the Center but was quickly humbled by the Queen and made to swear fresh loyalty or face exile. Like the Small Fool of the Smaller Court Anil of Columbiana before him, he left the Queen's audience disgraced, freshly gelded and a threat no more. The Peasant King Sir David, seeing the ease with which the Fools were dispatched bowed out of the challenge for the Seat of the Black Knight, abandoning his former allies of the Round Table to face him on their own.

Now with the chief players assembled to lay claim the Seat of the Orange House, and with the gauntlet firmly thrown, the line was drawn in the sand; Sir Wade announced that ninety days hence, the games would begin, the winner would take claim the House of the Center and would be welcomed to a Seat in the Hallowed Hall, if not in service to the Court or the Queen. With this new development the Queen ordered that a public meeting be called and, in the company of her loyalists and Banner-men, put out a call for her strongest champions and bravest Knights to make themselves available to do battle with the

Dark Knight and his armies.

They say that the tomb of Lord Rienzi, the founder of the Orange House shook violently that night, and the peasants, seeing the signs that were written down and passed from hand to hand across generations, found themselves in a frenzy. Now it was begun, and as the Dark Knight stood alone outside the Orange Court waiting for his challengers to be announced, preparing to do battle with foe and former friend alike, the people braced for the coming storm.

The Dead Horse Theory... (How NOT to Govern Sensibly)

There's something called 'The Dead Horse Theory,' it's the tribal wisdom of the Plains Indians that has been passed on from generation to generation and it instructs that, "When you discover that you are riding a dead horse, the best strategy is to dismount." Sounds simple enough.

The present government of the Republic of Trinidad & Tobago seems to have opted for a sort of 'opposite' approach to that logic however, and since May 2010 other strategies 'other than' dismounting have been employed, strategies such as:

1. Buying a stronger whip – If less is more then surely more must be more than more, right? So if it's good to have Ministers in the Cabinet, why not have the largest Cabinet per capita in the world? With thirty two Ministries we are second only to India's thirty nine, but if we had a similar sized population as our Asian counterpart's estimated one billion people, we would have required a Cabinet of one hundred and fifty seven thousand Ministers. Can anyone say roll call?

2. Changing riders – Hire Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj as Attorney General. Or, if Ramesh is unavailable, settle for an AG who wants desperately to be Ramesh when he grows up.

3. Appoint a committee to study the horse – This is where Prakash Ramadhar seems to come in. How does he not yet get that the leadership keeps sending him out on big 'missions' to keep him occupied and quiet is beyond me, but I'm sure his family played the 'quiet' game and hide and go seek with him a lot as a child.

4. Arranging to visit other countries to see how other cultures ride dead horses – This is the Kamla model. When in doubt, travel.

5. Lowering the standards so that dead horses can be included – How we came to have people like Anil Roberts and Jack Warner in the Parliament in the first place. To say that their behavior challenges decency is to understate it, but we would hate to behave like, uh, them, in our estimation.

6. Reclassifying the dead horse as living-impaired – Create a Ministry of Arts & Multiculturalism to institutionalize racism while preaching national unity and wonder why we all can't 'just get along.'

7. Hiring contractors to ride the dead horse – And if it makes no difference if these contractors are real or made up out of thin air, then Emanuel George may just be the man for the job. Capable of holding three way conversation with two imaginary people at the same time, Emanuel has made up fictitious Companies that appeared so real last time the UNC was in Office we still have them short listed for tenders and consultancy.

8. Paying consultants to tell you the horse is dead - Or your girlfriend to teach them manners. Or basketball. Or ballet. No one does this better than the UNC's Ernie Ross it appears, and he never seems to run out of those hair brained schemes that 'just might work.'

9. Harnessing several dead horses together to increase speed – Chandresh Sharma, Roodal Moonilal and Stephen Cadiz. Nothing else needs to be said.

10. Providing additional funding and/or training to increase the dead horse's performance – Glenn Ramadharsingh. So far the rough estimate is that he, through his Ministry of Silly Walks, has spent roughly thirteen million dollars per homeless person in the country trying to solve the problem of homelessness without actually spending any of that money on anything that might actually give the homeless a home.

11. Doing a productivity study to see if lighter riders would improve the dead horse's performance - This is why Makandal Daaga, Clifton De Coteau and Rupert Griffith have jobs, why they can get a public salary for doing exactly what, nobody knows, and why no one seems to question it.

12. Declaring that as the dead horse does not have to be fed, it is less costly, carries lower overhead and therefore contributes substantially more to the bottom line of the economy than do some other horses - This is the exact 'gobble-dee-gook' non-speak that got Winston Dookeran promoted up the financial ladder until he ended up as the Minister of Finance, where it turned out that he had not a clue as to what he was saying all along.

13. Rewriting the expected performance requirements for all horses – Doesn't Bhoe Tewarie do this sort of thing well? I mean, right now he's running a program called 'Spatial Development' and no one seems to know what exactly that is about but no one wants to ask in case it's real.

And finally.....

14. Promoting the dead horse to a supervisory position – This is what was done with the 'retired' Minister of Health Therese Baptiste Cornelis, who went on to make us the laughing stock of the entire United Nations, which took some doing in an Organization that has Iran, Zimbabwe and North Korea as members.

No, the Dead Horse Theory makes far too much sense to be entertained by this lot, and even though the performance that they give us is poor, one must never overlook the sheer entertainment value they bring. We plan to explore other policies that govern their governance in the near future, policies such as the Wet Water Conundrum and The PR vs Deliverables Juxtaposition. Stay tuned...

A Question of Ethics... (Why Some Things Can't Work)

The acceptable definition of ethics is – 'moral principles that governs a person's behavior.' The Trinidad and Tobago Transparency Institute (Transparency) has made recommendation that Government should establish an ethical protocol for members of the Cabinet which includes an agreement that any Cabinet member facing serious allegations must step down, which was clearly a recommendation made without much understanding of the nature and culture of our local politics and politicians as they would have understood that a rule like this could ruin a government and empty the Cabinet overnight.

That is not to say that they are all crooks, but so many are alleged to be and, according to this rule, that would be sufficient to have them demit Office. As a case in point, if there was a rule like this in place Dr. Glenn Ramadharsingh would not have been able to join the Cabinet due to dogging allegations of wrongdoing at the University of the West Indies while in charge of some fund or other. Former Justice Minister Herbert Volney was alleged to have been so notorious and mischievous in his previous incarnations, with some allegations so damning he might have been barred from even saying the word Cabinet. Former government Minister Jack Warner has alleged that current Works Minister Suruj Rambachan was a raperman and surely that would have been enough under these rules to keep him out, but this accuser himself is so riddled with allegations of corruption, alleged to have done everything from misappropriate funds, rig elections, corrupt organizations and steal property we would never have had a Minister Jack Warner, not even as a punchline to a joke.

Based on this criteria alone we would never have had a Minister Dr. Keith Rowley if for nothing other than allegations that as Planning Minister many paid for his signature with property. Former Health Minister John Rahael would never have seen the corridors of power if allegations of impropriety and misconduct were the yardstick, current National Security Minister Emmanuel George who is known as the 'Ghost Whisperer' in some circles over allegations that he has 'made up' people with whom to negotiate when he was helping to bring water for all would also be barred. The then water Minister himself would not have been allowed in the building, as would the current Minister of Transport Chandresh Sharma of the Blue Light fame. Men like Anil Roberts, Prakash Ramadhar and Winston Dookeran who did everything in their power to remain free of allegations while in search of position, changed so drastically once achieving Office that it would have been a case of in through the in door to go out through the out door without stopping for tea. Stacy Roopnarine might still have been allowed into the Cabinet with a push, but if allegations alone were the criteria for exclusion her husband would have had to pick her up by the curb, so heavy are the allegations that he has 'prospered' through marriage by the state. The Attorney General himself is rumored to have become something of a property magnate since achieving Office, but becoming filthy rich does not seem to be the exclusionary criteria, only the allegations of ill gotten riches. With this rule in place would any of our prior Attorneys General have been given the nod? Would Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, Keith Sobion, John Jeremie and Glenda Morean have passed muster? And what of Prime Ministers? What if allegations of impropriety are swirling about the Prime Minister him or her self? Would they too then be excluded from the Cabinet? Because surely and without exception, none of them would have been allowed in, not the Father of the Nation, not the Chamber man, not the Ogunu of Iffe, not the Silver Fox, certainly not the new Father of the Nation, and then we end up here, with a current Prime Minister so riddled with accusations and allegations she would have had to govern from Timbuktu.

No Transparency International, while the intent is laudable, there is no practicality for such an initiative in a country so riddled with questionable politicians and office seekers. We would do better to insist that if sufficient evidence exists for a charge to be laid then perhaps, but on the provision of an allegation? We would end up with a Cabinet of two janitors, the Red House gardner and the tea room tea lady making law.

Disgraceful Politricking and a Circus in Chaguanas...

With the MOTHER of all motorcades an embarrassing flop, with both the People's National Movement and the Movement for Social Justice opting not to contest the seat and with the deflated Congress of the People (despite remaining a partner in the coalition government) expressing a desire to, the people of Chaguanas West must be concerned as to how they ended up in this most uncomfortable of positions, being forced to be ground zero of a national referendum on disgraced FIFA Vice President, disgraced UNC Party Chairman, disgraced Cabinet Minister and disgraced Member of Parliament Austin Jack Warner, while simultaneously fighting for adequate representation in the Parliament after the circus leaves town. Cast in a damned if they do, damned if they don't scenario where Warner is concerned, surely the constituents must be wondering how they come to be abandoned to this position in the first place? Could the UNC have not found a better means or theatre to act this purging out? And what of the other established and aspiring national parties, the People's National Movement and the Movement for Social Justice? Have they relegated the people of Chaguanas West to irrelevance unworthy of zealous representation? Far from being an internal UNC matter as many would like to have us believe, what happens to Jack Wanner's political future could never be as important  as the future of the constituents themselves and, more than anyone else, the PNM will feel a backlash of epic proportions from the east indian community in the future for this callous abandonment. Why would Dr. Keith Rowley make such a foolish mistake? Is he afraid of Jack Warner and what Jack may have on him that would be exposed in the cut and thrust of a hotly contested campaign? If that is the case then surely he needs to step down as political leader as he is hobbling the party by ducking for cover. For the MSJ this will materialize as an unforced, self inflicted, fatal wound when the dust surrounding the personalities settles and will expose that party as nothing more than an 'anti-Kamla' group. For all the work Abdullah did preparing himself for the big stage and promoting himself as a national alternative, now that the stage is being set to so openly flub his lines is embarrassing when compared to what the same Kamla had to accomplish in a mere three months in 2010 and one that he and his party may never recover from. The COP's play is a bluff as they have neither the personnel nor the finances to engage a protracted ninety day campaign at this level and, being the only ones with an acceptable reason for staying out of the fray in the first place out of 'respect' for their partner in the Partnership, Prakash Ramadhar used the issue to again demonstrate his complete lack of political savvy. Had that party voted WITH the PNM on the Warner motion or even abstained two weeks ago the people might have been tempted to look in their direction for leadership here, but as it is they remain the same waffling, self-promoting group looking to fight causes from the sidelines hoping to benefit from the results by default.

So what now? Enter Vassant Bharath as King Slayer, as David to Jack Warner's Goliath, unleash questionable party financier money against misappropriated football development money and let's get ready to RUMBLE.

And what happens next? History will be recorded by the victor, rewritten to make the reactive plays appear clairvoyant and well thought out, a cloak of decency will be draped over what was nothing more than a naked grab for power, and we will all pretend that this was never about the advancement of criminal enterprise under the mask of politics. Questions still need to be asked of the entire Partnership government though, including the COP, MSJ and NJAC as to funds they may have received from the Warner war chest in the lead up to the 2010 election. If they did, then how much and under what circumstances? And if yes, were not both MSJ and the COP on record prior to the Fyzabad accord warning of Warner and his ill gotten gains? And if exposed as having benefitted from those same gains after the fact, are they not now exposed as nothing short of hypocrites to whom the ends are much, much more important than the means or the words they say? In my view this purge ought not to end with Jack Warner and the people of this nation should insist on it. Others benefitted, facilitated and conspired to be part of an ongoing criminal enterprise, and these persons must also be unmasked to show their own disgracefulness and be made to answer both in the public domain and, If possible and wherever applicable, in a court of law.

PLEASE NOTE:


So, today's column was based on the premise that the PNM was considering opting out of the Chaguanas West bye-election so as not to assist Jack Warner inadvertently, but since i put this into the public domain i understand that the idea is not being given any serious consideration and so the premise will not arise. That said and as a correction I need to acknowledge this new development and advise that the premise can no longer be relied on as fact unless and until any such development is announced by the party. Seems i may have jumped the gun and treated as a forgone conclusion what is still a fact finding discussion with no decision made other than to contest the seat. In the pursuit of integrity i have no choice but to send this out chasing after the initial column to put it to rest. Any inconvenience caused is regretted.

Phillip Edward Alexander

Desperately Seeking Relevance... (Exuberance, COP Style)

'Ebullience' is defined in some places as 'Zestful Enthusiasm,' in others as 'high spirits' and in others still as being 'cheerful and full of energy.' If recent media reports are to be believed it would seem that Jack Warner's unprecedented move to resign from everything and seek a 'fresh mandate' from his constituents is having an 'ebullient' impact on the former politically dead, especially if the announcements coming from certain camps over the weekend is any evidence to go by.

Case in point -  political leader of the Congress of the People Prakash Ramadhar said to the media with a straight face at the press conference after his party's national executive meeting that the COP 'was not afraid of anybody, could contest any seat it wanted, and was 'eyeing' Chaguanas West.' Now, I don't know if they were chasing their white rum with 'mannish water' at that meeting or if Prakash deliberately set out to make a joke, but since it was said  everyone who has heard it are either laughing hard or out loud, with many asking if Tommy Joseph is on the COP National Executive or if Prakash is trying out for a career in comedy. In other words, no one takes him or the party he leads seriously anymore, not after the deceit of 'Marlene-Gate' where he traded feigned umbrage for positions for COP members, not after his defense then turn around on the appointment of Reshmi Ramnarine, not after his stony silence over the still unanswered state of emergency and most definitely not after his being named as a prime player in what has become known as the Section 34 fiasco and his lack of answers as to his role in that matter since. His waffling over the soldier police Bill and his recent flip-flopping on his call for the removal of Jack Warner while refusing to support a motion raised in the Parliament that said exactly that are all considered classic Prakash-isms, and outside his ever shrinking sphere of influence he (Prakash) is either considered a political joke or a washout depending on who you talk to. His new found exuberance may be built on a world without Warner, but if he believes for a second that that means the Prime Minister now has more need of him than ever he must really take her for a fool. In a world decided by political capital neither Prakash nor the COP has any, and if you can say one thing about Kamla Persad-Bissessar, she understands this.

Let's look at reality for a bit; of all the Congress of the People Members of Parliament, not one has a sure shot at retaining their seat with Carolyn Seepersad Bachan being the only hope of the lot. Ramadhar himself knows that all that bluster wont serve him if the UNC decides to 'take back' that safe St. Augustine seat and contest it because then he (Prakash) will surely lose. For all the talk he is giving Warner the reality is true that while Jack served his constituents, Prakash barely visited his, and even if he were to start today it would be of no effect as the party that many voted for as a symbol of hope is now believed to be a con by which recycled has beens and some questionable individuals such as Bhoe Tewarie and Ganga Singh could find themselves back on the national political stage. But back on point, were it not for the heavy handed spite of former Prime Minister Patrick Manning and his refusal to allow Pennelope Beckles to contest either of the two eastern seats that screened and approved her we may never have heard of Anil Roberts, Lincoln Douglas or Rodger Samuel as members of Parliament, because were it not for a decided PNM voter campaign to 'push back' at Manning, those seats would have gone to the PNM as they will in any election called now or in the future. Penny's back, and the people of Arima are waiting with a joyful noise to have her back among them. So then, what of the architect of 'New Politics?' The man most credited with deceiving the nation with this People's Partnership nonsense? What will the people hold in store for the former political leader of the COP who promised to be the people's 'watchdog' in Parliament? The smart money's on a routing and a disgracing but then surely Winston Dookeran has to be savvy enough to know that he deserves that, right? You would think so, but then there is talk of a plan within the COP to give the PM an ultimatum now that she's against the ropes so to speak, that she either increases the stocks of the Congress of the People within the partnership or they will collectively walk. Perhaps Ramadhar needs to be reminded of what happened to his colleague Anil Roberts, the last COP member to find his 'marbles' as it were and threaten the Prime Minister with a resignation. Rumor has it that he had to go back begging to keep his job with tears in his eyes, and that his marbles are now on her desk in a jar.

RE-ENGINEERING OUR CONSTITUTION FOR PARTICIPATION AND PERFORMANCE by Timothy Hamel-Smith

RE-ENGINEERING OUR CONSTITUTION

FOR PARTICIPATION AND PERFORMANCE

Introduction

This presentation is divided into two parts: In Part 1, I set out the challenges which we face in terms of our present Constitution and options that should be considered in terms of constitutional reform to overcome such challenges. In Part 2, I outline the principles which I believe should underlie the reform of our Constitution.

If it would be helpful, I would be happy to submit relevant statutory provisions from various Constitutions referred to in this Presentation which may be considered for implementation into a reformed T&T Constitution.

This presentation makes recommendations for reform of the Constitution with respect to the matters which appear in the following Sections of Part 1, which for ease of navigation are hyperlinked):

SECTIONS	HEADINGS
1	Governance System for Optimal Performance
2	Separation of Powers – Separating the Executive from the Legislature – Appointment and Approval of Ministers
3	Representing the People – Parliamentary Committee System
4	Democracy and Elections – Review of Political Systems
5	Electoral Systems Compared and Election of a Prime Minister
6	Head of State – Criteria – Voting Process
7	Appointment and Role of Independent Senators
8	Term Limits for the Prime Minister
9	Fixed Election Dates
10	Institution of National Economic and Development Council to recommend funding allocation and national policies in specific sectors
11	Local Government
12	Instituting a Political Ombudsman and matters relating to Party Regulation and Financing
13	Procurement and the Mandate to introduce Procurement Legislation
14	Director of Public Prosecutions and the Anti-Corruption Investigation Bureau
15	Auditor General – Expanding and Deepening the Role
16	Service Commissions and Delegation of Powers
17	Caribbean Court of Justice – Constitutional Court
18	Referendums and Methodology
19	Duties and Responsibilities of Citizens
20	Achieving a Participatory Democracy – Institution of a National Civil Society Board

PART 1 – RECOMMENDATIONS FOR REFORMING CONSTITUTION

1. Governance System for Optimal Performance

1.1 In my view the Parliamentary System is the starting point from which to make an assessment of what is working well under our Constitution in terms of the governance operations, what is dysfunctional and what we can do to improve the system. Without creating a performance, results oriented system of governance, our democracy will not flourish and the development of the Nation will stagnate. As part of such reformation membership of Parliament has to be treated as a full time professional occupation and members must be compensated as such, understanding that there ought to be a discount against comparable roles and responsibilities in the Private Sector due to the public service nature and role of Parliamentarians.

2. What is working well? In my view one of the bulwarks of our democracy, providing a vital check and balance in our Parliamentary System, is the role played by our Independent Senators (See Clause 2.8 - Independent Committee to review Ministerial Appointments, for further enhancements for role of Independent Senators). As a result my strong preference would be to retain a Non-Executive President, being the Office through which Independent Senators are appointed and also playing a vital role in making other constitutional appointments (see Section 6 and Clause 10.3 (appointment of members of the National Economic and Development Council) for recommendations on Election and Role of President).

1.3 The structure of our Parliament, as currently configured, makes it far less effective than intended under the Westminster Parliamentary System which we adopted in 1962. The key functions of members of our Parliament are: (a) as Legislators, (b) in relation to members appointed as Ministers, carrying out the Executive function of the Government, and (c) oversight of governmental and administrative actions through serving on Parliamentary Committees. As I explain in Clauses 2.3, 2.10 and Section 3, the current configuration does not allow for the satisfactory performance of these functions.

1.4 In re-engineering our system of governance, I believe the following recommendations will allow for the key functions of government and parliament to be optimized:

(i) on any occasion for appointment of a Prime Minister, (consistent with our 1976 Republican Constitution) the President to appoint as:

Prime Minister

(a) the Leader in the HOR of the Political Party which commands the support of the majority of members of the HOR; or

(b) the member of the HOR who, in the judgment of the President, is most likely to command the support of the majority of members of the HOR; and

Opposition Leader

1. the Leader in the HOR of the Political Party (minor variation from the current section 83) who, in his judgment, is best able to command the support of the greatest number of members of the HOR who do not support the Government.

(ii) Separation of the Legislature from the Executive. The Prime Minister may nominate such individuals as members of Cabinet from among either members of Parliament or persons who are not members, but any Member of Parliament who is nominated to serve as a Minister will have to resign his seat, subject to limited exceptions if considered desirable. Persons so nominated for Cabinet posts by the Prime Minister will have to be screened and approved by a Committee(s) of Independent Senators. (See Clause 2.8 for more details on this proposal).

(iii) Parliament to consist of approximately One Hundred (100) full time Non-Executive Parliamentarians, with Fifty (50) members in the House of Representatives (HOR) and Fifty (50) members in the Senate. This arrangement will allow for the proper functioning of the Parliamentary Committee System which is an essential element in the oversight process of Executive and Administrative action, including review of legislation. (See Section 3 relative to Committee System).

4. The Electoral System to achieve this Parliamentary arrangement necessitates a Proportional Representation system of voting utilising an alphabetical Listing method. Each Political Party presents two lists:

(a) The HOR List consisting of up to 60 candidates for seats in the House of Representatives;

2. The Senate List consisting of up to 36 candidates for seats in the Senate.

This List Method will allow for substitution of members who resign their seats in Parliament to become Ministers (and in other circumstances) from among other candidates on the HOR or Senate Lists of the same Political Party as such resigning member.

4. At every General Election each Political Party would be entitled to such number of seats in the House of Representatives as corresponds with the percentage of votes cast for that Party, with the members being selected by the respective Political Leaders of the Parties from among the candidates on its HOR List, subject to such Political Party winning at least 5% of the votes cast at the General Election.
5. The President will appoint the following persons as Senators:

1. Fifteen (15) Senators (Independent Senators) listed by the President and submitted to the Clerk of the Senate prior to the holding of the General Election, chosen by him acting in his own discretion or from among nominees of the National Civil Society Board(See Section 20);
2. Twenty-six (26) Senators (Government Senators) nominated by the Prime Minister from the Senate List(s) of the Political Party(ies) forming the Government, of whom one (1) shall be nominated for election by the Senate as Senate President;
3. Ten (10) Senators (Opposition Senators) nominated by the Leaders of the Political Parties in opposition to the Government from their respective Senate Lists, in proportion to the ratio (rounded up or down to the nearest whole number) of votes cast for each such Political Party at the General Election, for any remaining Senate seat, a Senator nominated by the Leader of the Opposition.

4. In the General Election, before aggregating the total number of votes countrywide for purposes of determining the percentage of seats won by each Political Party in the HOR, the votes of each of the 41 Constituencies in Trinidad and Tobago shall be counted separately to determine which Political Party won the highest number of votes in each such Constituency (‘Constituency Votes’). The Political Leader of each Party which wins seats in the House of Representatives shall assign responsibility for the constituencies in which it has received the highest number of Constituency Votes, to such of its members in the HOR as the Political Leader shall appoint.

2 Separation of Powers and the Executive

2.1 I have referred to the issue of separation of powers in relation to the question of an Executive President. This separation is an important check and balance in our system of governance. In jurisdictions in which the numbers of Parliamentarians are far larger than ours, it is usual to find that the numbers of Members who do not form part of the Executive is substantial. In this way the Executive does not overwhelm the Legislature in terms of numbers and backbenchers can play an important role, both as Committee members and even expressing independent points of view.

2.2 In small jurisdictions such as ours this is not the case and the members of the Executive in Parliament are dominant in terms of numbers. In this sense the Westminster System we have adopted simply cannot work as was intended with particular reference to the Committee System as described above. Moreover the powers of the Prime Minister in the Parliamentary System of government is said to be even greater than those of an Executive President such as in the United States of America. In small societies the powers of the Prime Minister are magnified given that, not only does the PM choose who will form the Cabinet but to a large extent has significant influence, if not decision making power, whatever the provisions of a political party’s constitution may provide, as to who will be the candidates for general elections.

2.3 Added to this is the fact that Ministers of Government are expected to fulfil multiple roles, all of which would be impossible for any single individual to perform successfully, or at least without the supportive machinery which is available in more sophisticated and larger jurisdictions. A Minister’s role includes: (i) responsibility for his/her Ministerial Portfolio; (ii) Constituency Representative; (iii) Legislator; (iv) Parliamentary Committee member; and (v) Cabinet member, to mention nothing of his family life. This system in my view sets up a Minister for failure in one or more of the roles assigned to him/her and the Country must suffer by extension. It is clear to me that we cannot continue to perpetuate this system and expect the Parliament to properly perform its oversight role and for the Executive to achieve the development goals to which we aspire. While the strict Westminster System may work in countries which have very large numbers of parliamentarians in my view it does not work for a country of our size and population.

2.4 So what should we do in order to meet this challenge? I believe that this challenge opens up new opportunities to introduce governance arrangements which are tailor made to suit our Society as we embark on the next 50 years of Nationhood.

2.5 It is therefore vital that we create mechanisms which would allow for a better separation of powers as between the Executive and the Legislature and which would create the environment in which Ministers could focus their energies on the most important of the roles which they are required to perform.

2.6 To achieve these objectives within the context of our inherent limitations I am convinced that members of the Executive should not be members of Parliament, which would of course allow for the separation of powers which are more akin to those found in the Presidential forms of government. If we are to consider retaining some members of the Executive in the Parliament, then I suggest this should be limited to up to four (4) individuals, such as those holding the portfolios of Prime Minister, Attorney General, Finance and National Security. The question is how can we achieve this without introducing the type of deadlock as has become endemic to the Presidential system of government?

2.7 One approach would be for the President, where there is an occasion for the appointment of a Prime Minister (usually after a General Election) to appoint as Prime Minister, the Leader of the Political Party which commands or is likely to command the support of the majority of the elected members of Parliament (See 1.4 (i)).

2.8 The Prime Minister would then nominate individuals to serve as Ministers within the Cabinet who are considered competent to fulfil the ministerial portfolios intended to be assigned to them. A special committee(s) of the Independent Senators sitting in private and acting in accordance with provisions to be incorporated in the Standing Orders (the Independent Committee) will review consider and approve or disapprove the fitness of the nominees to perform the designated Ministerial portfolios. This review process, in the initial stages anyway until some level of confidence in the procedure is gained, may not necessarily require the attendance and questioning of the nominee but may be conducted through any individual designated by the Prime Minister to represent the nominee. Query whether the same review and approval process by the Independent Committee ought not to be applicable to persons appointed to serve on statutory boards and State Enterprises.

2.9 The Prime Minister and any elected member approved by the Independent Committee as a Minister shall be required to resign as a Member of Parliament before taking up his/her ministerial appointment (save for up to four (4) members (see Clause 2.6) who retain their seats if considered advisable). This proposal would only be feasible if the list system under proportional representation were adopted (see Clause 1.4 (iv) ) so that the place of any resigning member could be taken up by another individual on the Party List from which he was selected.

2.10 This arrangement with respect to the Executive would have several benefits, including: (i) achieving a separation of Executive from the Legislature; (ii) permitting Ministers to focus exclusively on their Ministerial Portfolios and Cabinet responsibilities; (iii) allowing for a greater number of Parliamentarians being available to serve on Committees and therefore greatly improve, when combined with membership, for instance, by representatives of the National Civil Society Board, the Parliamentary oversight process; (iv) avoiding the potential gridlock which occurs within the United States Congress by allowing for the Prime Minister to be a member of the Political Party which commands the majority support of Members of Parliament; (v) introducing the opportunity to appoint the best possible individuals to serve as part of the Executive (as occurs in the United States) with the added benefit of the review provided by the Independent Committee; and (vi) allowing for members in the HOR to be constituency representatives (see 1.4 (vii)).

2.11 In this way Ministers would be able to focus exclusively on their ministerial portfolios and their performance would be judged solely by their successes in this arena. Additionally the Prime Minister would be in a position to choose those who potentially are the best performers from a far wider pool of individuals, indeed without reference to party affiliation. Parliamentarians could then focus on their core duties as legislators, committee members and representatives of their constituencies.

2.12 In answer to those who share a concern that such Ministers have not been voted for by the People, it should be noted that in the Executive Presidency model there is no requirement for members of the executive to be chosen from among elected parliamentarians although in the United States the nominees for such posts are subject to scrutiny by the Senate. I believe that this latter check and balance could best be achieved by having our Independent Senators conduct reviews of the Prime Minister's nominees for executive office via the Independent Committee (see Clause 2.8).

3 Representing the People – Committee System

3.1 The key functions of parliamentary oversight are described by the Inter-Parliamentary Union in its Article on “Tools for Parliamentary Oversight” as follows:

◆ to detect and prevent abuse, arbitrary behaviour, or illegal and unconstitutional conduct on the part of the government and public agencies. At the core of this function is the protection of the rights and liberties of citizens;

◆ to hold the government to account in respect of how the taxpayers’ money is used. It detects waste within the machinery of government and public agencies. Thus it can improve the efficiency, economy and effectiveness of government operations;

◆ to ensure that policies announced by the government and authorized by parliament are actually delivered. This function includes monitoring the achievement of goals set by legislation and the government’s own programmes; and

◆ to improve the transparency of government operations and enhance public trust in the government, which is itself a condition of effective policy delivery.

3.2 Committees are also an entry point for citizens’ involvement in parliamentary business. Experts can be heard in, or become advisers to, parliamentary committees. Committees can invite interested parties to hearings or invite members of the public to give evidence. Public hearings held by parliamentary committees have the potential to be a vehicle for informing the public on policy issues and the parliament’s work on those issues.

3.3 It is clear then that one of the key roles of our parliamentarians is to have oversight of executive action both in terms of legislation and performance of governmental functions. The most significant way in which this is achieved is through Parliamentary Committees. Regrettably over the last 50 years the Committee system has not worked in the manner in which its role is envisaged in the Westminster System which Trinidad and Tobago has sought to adopt.

3.4 I believe that the main reason for this shortcoming is that the number of parliamentarians available to perform this function is woefully inadequate. In New Zealand a recent commission recommended that in order for the Parliamentary Committee system to work effectively one would need, in addition to members forming part of the Executive, a minimum of 100 Parliamentarians. In Trinidad and Tobago the number of non-executive Parliamentarians available to serve on Parliamentary Committees is about 45 members, in other words we have less than half of the minimum number required to achieve an effective Parliamentary Committee system.

3.5 In light of this, one approach would be for our Constitution to provide for at least 100 non-executive Parliamentarians. The fact that we have a population of about 1.3 million, as compared to New Zealand with about 4 million, does not diminish the volume of work required to be performed by Parliamentary Committees.

3.6 Alternatively we should consider the recommendation to introduce non-parliamentarians in the work of Committees made in the February 2012 Report commissioned by the European Union Delegation on “Activities on Strengthening Parliamentary Practices in Trinidad and Tobago”. In that Report it is stated that “The problem facing Trinidad and Tobago is similar to an issue facing many small country parliaments: the membership of parliament is not large enough to support multiple committees and the number of members who sit on the committee is limited. One option is for a mandatory minimum membership of backbenchers and executive members. Another option would be to make use of non-members in the work of committees, something which is used in other jurisdictions (for example Jersey, Guernsey, Denmark and Papua New Guinea).” ….”The current government has taken the approach that the JSCs should be chaired by one of the nine independent Senators and this practice has undoubtedly assisted the work of the committees and reduced the amount of partisanship. However, there is no assurance that this excellent practice will continue beyond this Parliament. Adding this practice to Standing Orders of both Houses would ensure continuity”. 

3.7 A complimentary approach would be to extend membership of Parliamentary Committees to representatives nominated by the National Civil Society Board. In that way we would not have to increase the number of parliamentarians beyond the current quota of 41 members in the House of Representatives and 31 members (inclusive of the presiding officer) in the Senate. However this is likely to perpetuate the idea of part time service which ultimately is to the detriment of the Committee System.

3.8 My preferred approach would be to structure our Parliament so that we have about 100 Non-Executive Parliamentarians, say 50 members in the House of Representatives (plus an elected Speaker) and 51 members in the Senate (of which one (1) is elected Senate President). This arrangement can be introduced if we determine to have a system of proportional representation through a list system, in which any member appointed as a Minister within the Executive, would resign his seat in Parliament (save, if considered advisable, for up to four (4) Ministers holding specified portfolios). For the more detailed provisions see Section 2 under “Separation of Powers”).

3.9 In order to give a sense of the role which Parliamentary Committees can play I set out below some of the provisions in other countries. In some parliaments around the world provision is made for Committees of Inquiry. Regardless of which procedure is used to form them, all committees of inquiry share certain features:

◆ They have special powers of investigation.

◆ Their special powers can be employed only in relation to the immediate matters of inquiry, which can be very narrow.

◆ They can be established during the course of a legislative term or during a parliamentary session.

◆ They are set up by the chamber.

◆ After submitting a final report to the chamber within a certain period, the committee of inquiry stops functioning.

A committee wishing to conduct an inquiry or investigation must obtain permission from the full chamber. The rules of procedure can provide that a committee’s request to hold an inquiry is normally accepted, unless challenged.

Committees of inquiry may conduct fairly intensive investigations over a relatively short period of time, and have the potential to reveal facts that may be uncomfortable for the government. Unlike permanent committees, ad hoc committees of inquiry are established by a resolution of a chamber of parliament:

◆ The resolution fixes the duration of the committee.

◆ Ad hoc committees’ mandates are limited to matters specified in the terms of reference of the chamber’s resolution, and can be very narrow.

◆ The nature of the inquiry is specified in the resolution.

◆ A committee of inquiry can be smaller than ordinary committees, although the principle of equitable representation of parliamentary political groups is maintained.

Committees of Inquiry are usually equipped with more powers than ordinary permanent committees. Provisions relating to committees of inquiry are sometimes found in an annex to the rules of procedure or even in a separate legal document. In 14 Parliaments, evidence can only be taken in ad hoc committees of inquiry. Committees of inquiry are also accorded other special powers. In the German Bundestag, for example,

1) The rules of criminal procedure shall apply mutatis mutandis to the taking of evidence. The privacy of correspondence, posts and telecommunications shall not be affected.

2) Courts and administrative authorities shall be required to provide legal and administrative assistance.

3) The decisions of investigative committees shall not be subject to judicial review. The courts shall be free to evaluate and rule upon the facts that were the subject of the investigation.

4 Democracy and Elections

4.1 I have chosen the New Zealand experience as being relevant to us in Trinidad and Tobago as there population is less than 4 million people, yet New Zealand is considered one of the foremost democracies in the World. Often we look to jurisdictions with populations in the hundreds of millions forgetting that their systems of governance cannot be easily introduced into a vastly smaller jurisdiction such as ours.

4.2 I have set out in Part 2 (Clause 24.1) the criteria for judging voting systems identified by a 1992 Independent Panel in New Zealand when it embarked on a process to determine if New Zealand should change or retain its first past the post voting system.

4.3 The New Zealand Commission concluded that the Voters will have to make up their own minds on which criteria are important to them. Different points will be important to different people. In New Zealand it was decided to introduce a mixed form of Mixed Member Proportional System (MMP).

4.4 Under the MMP system every voter usually has two votes:

(i) One vote is for a Constituency Member of Parliament. There would be one Member of Parliament for each Constituency. This vote operates in the same way as our current first-past-the-post voting system – but it is used to elect only half of the total number of Members of Parliament.

(ii) The other vote is a nationwide vote, for a political party. Before an election each party publishes a list of its candidates so that voters can assess the candidates the various parties are putting forward; on Election Day voters choose between these lists of candidates. The other half of the total numbers of Members of Parliament are elected in this way.  If a vacancy occurs among List Members by death, resignation or disability the Commission chooses the next nominee on Party List subject to verification that such nominee is alive and still a member of party to which Member who created vacancy belongs.

4.5 See the Electoral Act 1993 (New Zealand) for Mixed Proportional Representation (Electoral Districts combined with List System).

4.6 South Africa in its post-Apartheid Constitution introduced a pure Proportional Representation System.

5 Electoral Systems Compared

5.1 The Wooding Commission put forward the following arguments for and against proportional representation:

5.2 Some people believe that proportional representation is the fairest and best way to hold elections for the following among other reasons:

(i) The division of a country into constituencies is seldom ever done in such a way that all parties accept it as fair. There is often the charge that a Boundaries Commission has favoured one side. Where there is proportional representation there is no need for a Boundaries Commission because there are no constituencies. An issue over which there is often much bitterness and resentment would therefore disappear.

(ii) Party leaders and their supporters would no longer feel frustrated because a fairly substantial popular vote in favour of their party has produced relatively few seats in Parliament. Party strength in the House would be a true reflection of party strength in the Country as a whole.

(iii) Each legislator would be a representative for the whole Country and not only for a particular area: hence he would work for all of the people and not merely for a restricted group.

(iv) Every vote counts. Even if cast for a candidate who fails to win a constituency seat it will help boost his party's total number of votes and thus increase the number of list members it can select. There will be no point in writing off any constituency because it cannot be won. Similarly in safe seats a party will have to work towards securing as large a poll as possible to increase its total share of the vote. This should promote participation.

5.3 Some of the arguments against proportional representation may be summarized thus:

(i) Proportional representation puts the legislator more firmly in the power of the party organization. Where he has a constituency which he has looked after well, the party may need him as much as he needs the party. He may be the only party member who can win that seat, and this gives him influence enough to question and challenge leadership policies when this seems necessary. When he is merely one of a list of candidates, his concern may well be to please the leadership completely so that his name is placed as near as possible to the top. In its Report the Wooding Commission recommended that the names on the List be placed in alphabetical order.

2. The close relationship which can exist between a representative and a voter in his constituency would disappear in such a system. A repre­sentative elected by a constituency is much more likely to fight vigorously the case of a voter in his constituency whose vote or whose influence he knows will help directly to decide his success or failure at the next elections. In its 1972 Report, in order to retain the connection between the Member and his Constituents, the Wooding Commission recommended a Mixed Form of Proportional Representation. This would be an area on which the people’s views should once more be sought and in particular whether the need for representation would best be served through the system of Local Government. It has been suggested that the question of representation can be resolved in the pure form of Proportional Representation by the Leader of each of the Political Parties in the House allocating constituencies which members are require to serve and represent.
3. Proportional representation tends to emphasise racial and sectarian divisions. Smaller groups, instead of merging into alliances, fight to get a sufficient number of votes to win direct representation in Parliament. In its Report the Wooding Commission conclude that: “It was under the first-past-the-post system that the two main ethnically based parties – PNM and DLP - emerged. The considerations which led to this division will remain unaffected by the introduction of proportional representation. It cannot be argued that the first-past-the- post system makes racial voting ineffective.”…….. “A fair system which favours neither group must certainly be the better course. Furthermore, our projection is that proportional representation may well help reduce racial voting”.
4. The effect of a multiplication of parties is often that no single party wins a clear majority. Coalition governments have to be formed in which policies are not clear and decisions are difficult. This tends to hinder development. In its Report the Wooding Commission concludes that: “The first-past-the-post system is no guarantee against coalitions”….. in the Federal Republic of Germany… where a mixed system of proportional representation has been in use for quite a long time, coalition governments have proved to be quite strong so much so that it is today one of the most prosperous countries in Europe”…… “The qualifying conditions that a party should win one constituency seat or obtain 5% of the votes should prevent the mushrooming of mini-parties not representing any recognisable interest”

5.4 In the final analysis in 1972 the Wooding Commission recommended a Mixed Form of Proportional Representation as the electoral system which it considered the fairest system and the one which best suited the interests of the People of Trinidad and Tobago. The Report concluded “as a system of democratic representation that it (the First Past the Post System) has its most serious faults. As has already been mentioned, where there are three or more candidates the winner may actually represent only a minority in the constituency. All the electors who voted against him could justifiably feel that they were not represented and that their votes had had no effect whatever on the result of the election”.

5.5 If we assume that my recommendations as to how the Executive should be configured (see Clauses 2.6 to 2.12 ) produces the optimum structure for performance and development of the Country, the question arises as to: “How would democracy best be served?”; and “What electoral arrangements need to be introduced in order to achieve the desired result?” I believe the governance and electoral arrangements which I have recommended in Section 1 achieves these objectives while satisfying the concerns raised by the Wooding Commission, including that relating to Constituency representation.

5.6 The underlying principle of democracy is that decisions that affect the people should largely accord with the will of the people. One way to improve the prospects of this is for representatives to be elected. The basis of representative democracy is that the collective views of the representatives reflect the collective views of the people. Proportional Representation (PR) is simply a more precise statement of this ideal: the proportion of representatives that hold a particular view should be roughly the same as the proportion of the people that hold that view. (http://economics.about.com)

5.7 If proportional representation is adopted it may be considered desirable that the Prime Minister should be elected not simply by members of a particular constituency, but by the entire electorate. The arrangements recommended in Section 1 achieve this goal as the votes of the entire electorate are aggregated together and the result produced by this method determines which Political Leader will become Prime Minister. This approach, albeit in a different context, seems to me to represent the consensus of sentiments expressed at the previous public consultations on the Constitution.

5.8 If the Commission decide to introduce a Mixed Form of Proportional Representation or to retain the First Past the Post Electoral System then I recommend that the Constituency Seats ought to be determined on a Preferential Voting (Single Transferable Vote) System as conducted in Australia. The adoption of the latter system for Constituency Voting, will ensure a majority candidate, if no single candidate gains more than 50% of the vote, rather than first past the post which can result in the winner representing a minority of the electorate

6 Head of State

6.1 The issue of whether we should have an Executive President has been explored in the public domain for some time now. On the positive side, it has been suggested that this would allow for an enhanced separation of powers between the Executive and the Legislature and permit Ministers of Government to be drawn from a wider pool of candidates. On the negative side fears were expressed that this would permit excessive power to reside in a single individual and there would not be satisfactory checks and balances in the system, although potentially it could result in deadlock between the Executive and the Legislature which appears to have happened in the United States of America. In either event an overwhelming percentage of the public appeared to favour that all citizens should have the opportunity to vote for an Executive President and voting should not be restricted to persons residing in the constituency of the Presidential Candidate.

6.2 I firmly believe that the check and balance which our Republican Constitution provides in the role of the Office of the President, with particular reference to the President's appointment of Independent Senators and other significant Offices, is extremely important and should be retained if not expanded.

6.3 Even if a system could be devised which would allow for Independent Senators to be appointed in the absence of a Non-Executive President I think that the role which our President can play in a plural Society such as ours is far too important to be eliminated. A Head of State, in the words of Michael Harris, should "embody, represent and speak on behalf of" the nation, remind us of our "best and highest ideals", and "assist in bringing together" a multi-ethnic society”. That is a most important role in the context of the problems which we face as in our plural Society but is not an objective which a partisan Executive President can achieve.

6.4 And as stated in the website of the Office of the President of Dominica “The President must be non-partisan with a special endowment to be objective in coming to a resolution on any matter. He should be able to effect consensus between political parties when no one else can. He is a symbol of national unity.

Where the general public is concerned, the President has to be a role model a person greatly esteemed with exceptional moral rectitude and high ethical standards. He also has to be a person of intellectual capacity who will know what he does not know and knows where to seek knowledge.

He must not be easily swayed by public opinion, but has the ability to listen and weigh carefully what is put before him before he acts. He must not be insensitive to the causes of the people.

He should have the capacity to be at ease at all levels of society and at the same time everybody should feel comfortable with him without violating the dignity of the office. A President has to be a people person who is sensitive to the needs and aspirations of the people. He must have the unusual ability to reprove people when they are wrong, yet understanding that he must be the person who is merciful.

He must understand the philosophies of the various societies, organizations and institutions that do so much to bring relief and show brotherly love. He must be humanitarian. He must be a public speaker with a public image that is above reproach”

“The above range of responsibilities would suggest that the Office of Head of State is a very important one as these duties are vital to maintaining the nation’s political unity and guaranteeing the constitutional powers. But the significance of the Office is far greater than that and can in no way be combined with the responsibilities of any other high office or function.”

6.5 In light of the above I am convinced that we should retain the office of Non-Executive President. As I have publicly stated on previous occasions, what is worth modifying is the system by which we elect our President. I do not believe that it would be practical to have a Non-Executive President voted for as in a General Election. However the voice of the People on such an occasion could best be expressed through the National Civil Society Board.

6.6 One option would be for the National Civil Society Board to put forward up to five nominees who in its view satisfy the criteria for President, such as those outlined above. The Prime Minister would then choose one of the nominees as the Presidential Candidate for election by the Electoral College based on a specified majority, say 3/5ths of the members voting. Alternatively the Prime Minister could put forward up to five nominees considered to satisfy the above criteria to the National Civil Society Board which would in turn nominate one individual from among such nominees as the Presidential Candidate for election by, say, 3/5ths of the members voting at the Electoral College.

6.7 Another option would be for the National Civil Society Board to put forward up to five candidates and the Electoral College would then vote, based on a preferential system of voting, for the individual to be elected President from among such candidates, subject to gaining 3/5ths of the votes of members of the Electoral College.

7 Appointment and Role of Independent Senators

7.1 At present the President, in his discretion, appoints nine persons as Senators “from outstanding persons from economic or social or community organisations and other major fields of endeavour”. Although these appointments are entirely within the discretion of the President one assumes that some prior consultation takes place with persons whom the President believes may be in a position to make appropriate recommendations. In this context consideration should be given to formalizing such consultation by introducing a role for recommendations to be made through the National Civil Society Board.

7.2 Additionally the areas of endeavour identified in the Constitution could be expanded to include other disciplines and different geographies so as to be more representative of all of Trinidad and Tobago, which no doubt is already considered an important factor but should be stated expressly.

8 Term Limits for Prime Minister

8.1 At present the Constitution of Trinidad and Tobago imposes no limitation on the period of time for which a person may hold the office of Prime Minister. Section 76(1) of the Constitution simply confers power on the President to appoint to that office, the person who the President determines as best able to command the confidence of a majority of members of the House of Representatives, thus making it possible for a person to serve as Prime Minister for extensive periods once the precondition is satisfied.

8.2 It is recommended that the Constitution be amended, in order to limit the period of time for which a person may hold office as Prime Minister to periods (whether consecutive or not) which when added together do not exceed nine years, however, an incumbent Prime Minister shall not be required to vacate his office by reason only of the fact that after his appointment, he exceeds the nine year limit. This provision works in tandem with the provision which specifies a fixed election date.

8.3 This constitutional limitation is considered desirable in order to strengthen democracy by encouraging the infusion of new leadership at the highest level of Government as well as to encourage successorship within political parties. Similar time limitations have been imposed in relation to Heads of State or Governments in Commonwealth countries such as Dominica, Nigeria and South Africa and in other countries such as the United States of America, Mexico and Chile.

8.4 I believe we do a great disservice to our Prime Ministers to leave the option open to an unlimited number of terms as one would have to be less than human not to succumb to the hubris which surrounds such longevity in office as Head of Government.

9 Fixed Election Date

9.1 I recommend that a Constitutional amendment fixing the election date be adopted in order to level the playing field between political parties so that the incumbent Prime Minister does not have an unfair advantage by being entitled to name the date. The electorate, as well as the political parties, will know well in advance of the election date and cannot be taken by surprise, save in circumstances where there is a no confidence motion.

9.2 It is said that a Prime Minister can still manipulate the system by causing a no confidence vote to be initiated. This would be a very risky move by a Prime Minister and may in fact backfire and therefore is, in my view, unlikely.

9.3 Our Republican Constitution permits a Prime Minister to direct that the President dissolve Parliament at any time. Additionally if a vote of no confidence in the Prime Minister is passed in the House of Representatives the President is required to dissolve Parliament. An election must be called within three months of the dissolution of Parliament.

9.4 The amendment proposed will maintain the right of the President to dissolve Parliament if a vote of no confidence is passed but fixes the date when an election is to be held consequent upon the dissolution of Parliament following a vote of no confidence.

9.5 The proposed amendment will also in ordinary circumstances specify that Parliament fix the Election Date as, for instance, the third Monday in November of the fifth anniversary of the prior election. Such an amendment would allow for varying the Election Day in certain circumstances such as a conflict with a religious holiday.

10 National Economic and Development Council

10.1 It is said that in Trinidad and Tobago we have a winner take all system of government. As a result we have a situation where post an election it is nigh impossible to get a critical mass of people supporting the national agenda for development as espoused by the Government.

10.2 In this context I believe that there is a need to introduce a National Economic and Development Council as an independent institution under our Constitution. The role of this Council would include:

1. Recommending allocations of funding to (a) the Central Government and each Ministry, (b) the Tobago House of Assembly, and (c) each Regional Corporation and Municipality;
2. Developing policy recommendations for Energy, Education, Security and Crime, Health, National Service and other Portfolios which ought to straddle different administrations. In this way we will retain consistent policy directions in these matters with successive administrations and allow for the hard development decisions to be made away from partisan self-interest.

10.3 The members of the Council could be appointed by the President based on nominees recommended by the National Civil Society Board. The Council would be mandated to consult with the Government, the Opposition, Independent Senators, the THA, the National Civil Society Board and other stakeholders.

11 Local Government

11.1 I would recommend that we entrench in our Constitution the requirement to have legislation which makes arrangements for Local Government, the extent of the jurisdiction of local government bodies and provisions for their funding by the Central Government in an equitable manner (see recommendations on National Economic and Development Council, Section 10) so that we minimize the winner take all syndrome which tends to marginalize communities which are not supportive of the party which forms the Executive in the Central Government.

11.2 The local government level is the point at which people’s lives are impacted most directly and the opportunity to have a real interface between local government officials and people in the communities in which they operate and therefore true representative government. If we get the local government arrangements right then as a consequence we are likely to have a diminishing of the fractures in our Society.

11.3 It is worth reviewing the statutory provisions from the South African Constitution which could be adapted to local circumstances.

12 Political Ombudsman/Party Regulation and Financing

12.1 I am convinced that the time has come for our Constitution to mandate that legislation be introduced to regulate political parties and their financing and to introduce a Constitutional Office of Political Ombudsman. The role of the Political Ombudsman would be to ensure compliance with such legislation as well as a Code of Political and Electoral Conduct.

12.2 Indeed it seems to me that given the importance of political parties in the democratic process that the State should undertake to make funds available to political parties who, for instance, can demonstrate that they have achieved a minimum threshold of support from the electorate.

12.3 In this way political parties will become more sophisticated and would better position themselves to promote developmental ideas for the improvement of our nation and its people. All of this does not have to await constitutional change, nevertheless to my mind it is so fundamental to our development as a Nation that I believe that the obligation to have such legislation should be entrenched in our Constitution.

12.4 I would be happy to supply a model of a Code of Electoral Conduct which the Political Ombudsman would enforce.

13 Procurement

13.1 The issue of procurement falls in the same category as party financing, as in my view it is essential to our development as a Nation. Our Constitution should mandate that procurement legislation, which is effective and efficient while at the same time allowing for transparency and accountability, be made part of our laws. (See provision to that effect on South African Constitution below).

13.2 Similarly the Procurement Regulator, or whatever term is given to the individual with responsibility for regulating procurement, should become a Constitutional Office with the necessary resources and funding to enable such regulator to properly perform his or her functions, in much the same way as the Auditor General is required to be resourced.

13.3 (South Africa Constitution) Section 217. Procurement.-(1) When an organ of state in the national, provincial or local sphere of government, or any other institution identified in national legislation, contracts for goods or services, it must do so in accordance with a system which is - : equitable, transparent, competitive and cost-effective.

(3) National legislation must prescribe a framework within which the policy referred to in subsection (3) must be implemented.

14 Director of Public Prosecutions

14.1 On a fairly regular basis the DPP has lamented that he has no power to investigate criminal conduct with special reference to white collar crimes. It seems to me that the Anti-Corruption Investigation Bureau (ACIB) which now falls under the auspices of the Office of the Attorney General would best be placed under the control of the DPP so that he may direct and control their operations.

15 Auditor General

15.1 The Constitution at present only mandates the Auditor General to carry out audits of the public accounts and requires the State to provide adequate staff.

15.2 We need to amend the Constitution to (i) expand the jurisdiction of the Auditor General to include State Enterprises; (ii) permit the Auditor General to engage the services of external auditors; and (iii) require the State to provide appropriate financial resources to the Office of the Auditor General.

15.3 The Auditor General should also be empowered to conduct performance and value audits as well as investigative and forensic audits. Where suspicious circumstances arise during the course of an audit this would enable the Auditor General to pursue these more expansive activities. Query whether in appropriate circumstances the Auditor General should be mandated to refer such matters to the Director of Public Prosecutions.

15.4 The Auditor General is required to report to Parliament and this is a key oversight tool to assist Committees to perform their watchdog role. It is expected that with the appropriate financial resources and the ability to engage external auditors Parliament will in future be presented with up to date financial reports.

16 Service Commissions

16.1 Whatever the role intended for the Commissions as constituted under our Constitution it seems to me in their current mode of operation they are not the optimum arrangement for achieving the intended objectives. This is not intended as a criticism of the boards or staff of any Commission, as to my mind the real problem is that the Constitution does not have an appropriate structure for the roles of the Commissions. It has been said that the Commissions were introduced into our Constitution in order to protect the public service from politicians.

16.2 In the case of the Public Service Commission would not this same objective be achieved by having the role of the PSC being restricted to (i) the development of guidelines for the operations of Ministries; (ii) the appointment, supervision and regulation of Permanent Secretaries and their performance; and (iii) taking into account any report that a Minister would like to make regarding the performance of the Permanent Secretary?

16.3 The Permanent Secretaries would then have to account to the PSC for their performance and attainment of the objectives of the Ministry to which they are assigned. In such an arrangement the role of the Permanent Secretary (the de facto CEO of the Ministry) would include (i) managing the operations of the Ministry within the guidelines established by the PSC; (ii) advising on and implementation of plans to achieve the strategic goals and objectives set by the Minister; (iii) reporting to the Minister and the PSC; and (iv) ensuring effective human resource programs are developed and maintained to support the strategic goals of the Ministry (including recruiting heads of departments and other staff, performance management, training, succession planning, employee relations, and disciplinary action).

16.4 An appeal by any member of staff in relation to any dispute which arises, after exhausting all avenues for mediation, should perhaps best be referred to the Industrial Court, even if a special division has to be established to deal with claims by public servants. By this means we would have developed a system in which the Permanent Secretary has responsibility for matters relating to the staff of a Ministry, he or she being the person responsible for ensuring the performance of the Ministry, rather than the over centralised system involving Commissions in which authority is diffused and as a result no one has responsibility and no one is accountable.

16.5 Is Constitutional change required in order to achieve these objectives and bring the arrangements for the Civil Service and the Teaching Service in line with modern management practices? Section 127 (1) of the Constitution provides “A Service Commission may, with the approval of the Prime Minister and subject to such conditions as it may think fit, delegate any of its functions other than any power conferred by Section 129, to any of its members or - …….(b) in the case of: (i) the Public Service Commission, to any public officer ……; (ii) The Teaching Service Commission, to any public officer”.

16.6 In the context of the authority to delegate any of its functions by virtue of Section 127(1) it seems to me that there are no obstacles which would prevent these Service Commissions from delegating appropriate authority to public officers, such as Permanent Secretaries, and so achieve a modern management structure which would better foster performance and goal and outcomes oriented service. Moreover by virtue of Section 129(1) the Service Commissions, with the consent of the Prime Minister, may regulate its procedures and confer powers and impose duties on any public officer to better achieve its objectives. If thought advisable, relevant amendments should be made to the Public Service Commission (Delegation of Powers) (Amendment) Order, 2006.

16.7 The Commission may wish to review the South African Constitution relative to public administration which it may well want to adopt where relevant.

17 Caribbean Court of Justice – Constitutional Court

17.1 What should we do with the Privy Council? After 50 years of Independence should we cut the umbilical cord, the last vestige of our legal ties to the Colonizer? The Privy Council has served us well over the last 50 years and I am certain there are none who will reject such a statement, in light of the body of jurisprudence developed over the years in which the Privy Council has served as our final court of appeal.

17.2 To address that issue we must ask ourselves a number of pertinent questions as it relates to both the Privy Council and the Caribbean Court of Justice (which under the Treaty of Chaguaramas was intended to be its successor). Some of those questions include:

(i) Can the Caribbean produce or attract eminent judges in whom we can repose confidence as judges of our final court of appeal?

(ii) What is the calibre of judges serving in the Privy Council and the Caribbean Court of Justice?

(iii) How does the independence of the judges serving in the Privy Council compare with that of the Caribbean Court of Justice?

(iv) Would litigants repose the same level of confidence in the Privy Council as in the Caribbean Court of Justice?

(v) Will the UK continue to extend the services of the Privy Council as our final appellate court?

(vi) Would the cause of Caribbean integration be better served by having an indigenous institution as our final court of appeal?

(vii) Does the establishment of a Supreme Court by the UK as its final court of appeal change the equation?

(viii) Would appeals to the Caribbean Court of Justice be less burdensome and costly to the litigant as compared to appeals to the Privy Council?

(ix) Would justice be better served by having judges who are more familiar with the societies and culture in which we live in the Caribbean?

17.3 I am convinced that an inquiry into matters raised by such questions would conclude that the Caribbean Court of Justice would better serve us here in Trinidad and Tobago as our final court of appeal. The problem I suspect is cutting the umbilical cord sounds so final. Some may ask: is the Privy Council not always right? Well the only reason that in a sense they are always right is that there is no further appeal from a Privy Council decision. The core question really is whether the reasonable man or woman travelling across the Nation in our maxi taxis reposes confidence in the Caribbean Court of Justice? And if not, how will we as a Nation ever reach that ultimate decision which would allow us to commit to that final act of Independence?

17.4 What that raises in my mind is the issue as to whether we can take the journey towards cutting the Privy Council umbilical cord in stages. In that light I would like to propose for consideration that we appoint the Caribbean Court of Justice as the court of origination and, better yet, the final appellate court as well, for the hearing of constitutional matters. Such a move would dramatically reduce the time taken for matters involving the Constitution, as all such actions would be initiated in the Caribbean Court of Justice without the need to go through the process of a hearing in the High Court and the Court of Appeal. If we wanted to do this in two stages then one could still have a right of appeal to the Privy Council in such matters, with a sunset clause of say 1 year after which the Caribbean Court of Justice would serve as both the court of origination and final appellate court for constitutional matters.

17.5 Such an approach would give us an opportunity for trust in the Caribbean Court of Justice to grow in the estimation of the public. I recognise that this recommendation does not conform to the Treaty of Chaguaramas and therefore it would be a matter for the Caribbean Court of Justice to determine whether it would accept jurisdiction over Constitutional matters as proposed. The truth is that Trinidad and Tobago, along with the majority of other CARICOM countries, have not conformed to the Treaty of Chaguaramas by adopting the Caribbean Court of Justice as their final appellate court. I would expect therefore that expanding its jurisdiction in this way should be welcome. Indeed it may be a measure which the other members of CARICOM which have not yet adopted the Caribbean Court of Justice, may elect to follow so that they too expand the jurisdiction of the CCJ in the stages which I have proposed.

17.6 The provisions relating to the Caribbean Court of Appeal with respect to Constitutional Matters can be adapted from the South African Constitution in which a specialist Constitutional Court is established.

18 Referendums

18.1 In furtherance of developing a participatory democracy one tool which would give the people a voice in important matters which impact directly on them would be to introduce a system in which referendums are permitted. To this end I would recommend that the Constitution include a provision that an Act of Parliament must prescribe a process for the calling of a referendum to ascertain the will of the electorate in relation to questions of public importance. This still leaves open the question whether such referendums should be binding on the Government or only persuasive and the percentage of favourable votes required to support any proposition.

18.2 It is of course very difficult to determine in advance what matters would fall within the ambit of a question of public importance. It certainly would be a brave, or foolhardy, government which would ignore the views of a significant majority of the people as expressed in a Referendum. In this context it may well be that the preferred approach would be to have non-binding referendums so as to retain as much flexibility as possible, yet appreciating that governments are more than likely to accept the results of a referendum supported by a significant majority of the electorate.

19 Duties and Responsibilities

19.1 Many of our commentators have made the point that we inherited a governance system in which the Colonial Governor exercised power without the people having the right to make any input and that in Trinidad and Tobago we have perpetuated that system of governance, where the people feel totally powerless once they have elected a government. As a result we have created a Society that has become totally dependent on Government without individuals taking responsibility for their own welfare. I believe that one starting point to reverse this cycle of dependency is to introduce into our Constitution an obligation on the part of citizens to observe and perform duties and responsibilities commensurate with the fundamental human rights and freedoms we enjoy.

19.2 By way of example the duties and responsibilities of citizenship might include matters relating to:

• Obeying the law
• Being a good parent
• Taking responsibility for oneself and one's family
• Being respectful of the views, culture, religion and customs of others
• Helping others in the community
• Protecting and enjoying our heritage and our environment
• Devoting ourselves to our education and enhancing our skills and potential
• Promoting harmony and the spirit of common brotherhood amongst all the people of Trinidad and Tobago transcending religious, ethnic or sectional diversities
• Valuing and preserving the rich heritage of our composite culture

19.3 In this connection see Article 51A of the Indian Constitution.

20 Achieving a Participation Democracy

20.1 As Sunity Maharaj has said in her column in the Trinidad Express of 24^th February 2013 “All over the Caribbean-and indeed the world - the search is on for a more functional political system that offers greater representation of individuals and interests”.

20.2 One avenue through which the voice of the people can be heard is through membership by citizens in Civil Society Organisations and I would urge us to embody within our Constitution mechanisms through which Civil Society Organisations can participate in making decisions which affect governance in T&T.

20.3 There is a growing trend towards members of the public wanting to have a greater say in the governance of the Country and not simply rely on their parliamentary representatives to represent their interests. Indeed we are short changing ourselves by not seeking out the collective wisdom which resides among our citizens. If we channel the views of citizens into the decision making process not only will we have better governance but as a People we will take more responsibility and be more patriotic in supporting the national interests and development of Trinidad and Tobago. The question is how does one achieve such people power which goes beyond electing a government every five years?

20.4 It would of course be impossible for any system of government to allow for the voice of each individual citizen to be heard on every single decision of government. However there is ample room to do better than we are doing now. One avenue through which the voice of citizens can be channelled is through their membership in civil society organizations, including bodies such as Village Councils, Community Based Organizations, Business, Professional, Religious, Sports, Cultural, Youth and Women’s Organizations and Credit and Labour Unions.

20.5 A system could then be devised, in the Constitution or through separate legislation, for these civil society organizations to form an umbrella body to be known as the National Civil Society Board.

20.6 The National Civil Society Board would perform functions with respect to the Central Government in specified areas of national life and in addition consideration could be given to assigning it responsibility for carrying out important constitutional roles such as, nominating candidates for Head of State and participating as members of Parliamentary Committees.

20.7 The mechanics for the formation of a National Civil Society Board can be worked out with Civil Society Organisations. The role proposed for the National Civil Society Board is further found in Clauses 1.4 (vi) (a), 2.10 (iii), 3.7, 6.5 - 6.7, 7.1 and 10.3.

PART 2 - PRINCIPLES

21. Fostering a participatory democracy

21.1 Our founding fathers underscored the well-known principle that our people are our most precious resource when they stated in the preamble to our Constitution that the People of Trinidad and Tobago: " have asserted their belief in a democratic society in which all persons may, to the extent of their capacity, play some part in the institutions of the national life and thus develop and maintain due respect for lawfully constituted authority".

21.2 I believe that in order to foster a better participatory democracy in keeping with the philosophical underpinnings of our Constitution, we must find ways to allow citizens to participate in the institutional life of our Country which will in turn engender a sense of belonging and patriotism and so promote nation building.

21.3 In the words of Anders B. Johnsonn, Secretary General of the Inter-Parliamentary Union, “There can be no democracy if we do not include all voices in decision-making” and further “The principle and practice of solving differences through dialogue is what sets democracy apart. Our ability to listen and understand is therefore, as important if not more so than our ability to express our opinion”.

22 What are the Objectives of a Constitution? (Adapted from Article by Dr. Anil Kumar Mohapatra)

22.1 Pandit Nehru’s statement on the Indian Constitution during debate in the Constituent Assembly (CA) on 8 November 1948 sounds very appropriate to be quoted here. Nehru said, "The Constitution is after all some kind of legal body given to the ways of Government and the life of the people. A Constitution, if it is out of touch with the peoples life, aims and aspirations, becomes rather empty: if it falls behind those aims, it drags the people down. It should be something ahead to keep people’s eyes and minds made up to a certain high mark. Remember this, that while we want this Constitution to be as solid and as permanent a structure as we can make it there should be a certain flexibility. If you make anything rigid and permanent, you stop a nation’s growth, the growth of a living, vital, organic people. Accordingly, our Constitution was drafted keeping in mind the expectations of the freedom loving Indians of that time leaving enough scope for its dynamism to cater to the needs of future generations as well."

22.2 Through our T&T Constitution we have sought to develop a democratic political culture. Democracy is an important objective which contributes to stability in the society and it secures the peaceful change of rulers. It allows dissent and encourages tolerance. It rules by persuasion, not by coercion. It stands for a constitutional government, the rule of law, inalienable rights of citizens, independence of the judiciary, free and fair elections, freedom of press and all the other fundamental human rights which we enjoy.

22.3 But a Constitution is really a lifeless instrument. As Granville Austin has very appropriately said, “Constitutions do not work, they are inert, dependent upon being worked by citizens and elected and appointed leaders”. What we need to develop is the right type of political culture for sustaining the Constitution.

23 Democracy

23.1 So what are the values exemplified by a democratic system of government? The following signposts or principles of democracy are advocated as being essential elements of democracy: Citizen Participation, Equality, Political Tolerance, Accountability, Transparency, Regular Free & Fair Elections, Economic Freedom, Control of the Abuse of Power, Accepting the Results of Elections, Human Rights, Multi-Party Systems, The Rule of Law, Bill of Rights (see http://www.lawanddemocracy.org/pdffiles/signposts.dem.pdf).

23.2 We should therefore measure any system of governance we seek to implement in our Constitution to the extent that they support such democratic principles.

24 Voting and Electoral Systems

24.1 One of the crucial decisions that will have to be made in any new Constitution is to determine what type of electoral and voting systems would best underpin our democracy. In making this determination I strongly recommend that we consider the following criteria (substituting Tobago for Maori Representation) for judging voting systems, which were identified by a 1992 Independent Panel in New Zealand when it embarked on a process to determine if New Zealand should change or retain its first past the post voting system:

(i) Legitimacy

Do people on the losing side accept the results? Does the community as a whole accept the voting system as the best possible basis for running the country?

(ii) Political integration

Does a voting system unite a country or divide it? Does it promote respect for different points of view?

(iii) Effective government

Can a government elected under a particular voting system achieve what it sets out to do? Will the government last, or will it fall because it does not have a majority in Parliament?

(iv) Effectiveness of Parliament

Will Cabinet dominate Parliament under a particular voting system? Does the voting system mean that Parliament can challenge and debate government policies in the way it is meant to?

(v) Fairness

Do political parties win a share of the seats that is similar to their share of the votes? Is there a marked difference between the number of seats some parties get and the votes they win?

6. Representation of minorities and special groups

How well are the interests of ethnic minorities and other groups such as business

people, workers and women represented in Parliament under various voting systems? How well are such groups themselves represented?

(vii) Tobago representation

Will a particular voting system help or hinder representation of people of Tobago? Are Tobagonians fairly represented in Parliament? How will different voting systems affect this? How will different systems affect the existing separate representation of Tobagonians?

(viii) Representation of constituents

Does a voting system encourage close links between people and their Members of Parliament? 

How easy will it be for constituents to get their ideas across to their Members of Parliament under a particular voting system?

(ix) Voter participation

Do voters understand how the system works?   Is the method of electing Members of Parliament straightforward or is it difficult to follow?

(x) Effective political parties

Will a voting system give us political parties that are too strong or too weak?  Will a particular voting system help parties listen to and act on voters’ views and concerns?

24.2 I anticipate that in its consideration of these criteria the Constitution Commissioners will compare several different Electoral Systems in order to determine what would be most suitable and best achieve the type of participatory democracy which will be in tune with the lives, aims and aspirations of the people of Trinidad and Tobago.

Respectfully

_____________________________

Timothy Hamel-Smith

Eleven Albion

Corner Albion & Dere Streets

Port of Spain

Mobile 680-5884

Email: timothy@trinidadlaw.com and timothyhamelsmith2@gmail.com