Democracy in Crisis...

The collapse of the Church at Guanapo is proving to be an excellent metaphor for what is taking place politically in this country and is such a perfect Freudian slip, I could not help but use it to frame the context of this article.

It is getting difficult to keep track of the political plays since the internal elections in the UNC triggered unprecedented change in the National politics, but it feels like one can't look away for a moment before another crisis appears.

One cannot help but notice that the People's Partnership is failing at the task of Governance, is appearing quite rudderless in most circumstances, and almost forces the obvious question:

Has Kamla found out to her and the country's peril just how big a bite she bit off for herself?

With such a wealth of experienced politicians at her disposal, some of her Cabinet appointments were questionable at best, disrespectful to the Partners in the coalition at worst, but I acceded to my colleagues requests to 'give her a chance' and i held my tongue.

I can no longer guarantee that position as some of those same appointments are beginning to fail to the detriment of the nation, and we cannot be caught fiddling while everything comes down around us.

Mr. Anand Ramlogan, in his substantive role as Attorney General and in an apparent fit of righteous indignation, has embarrassed his Office and that of the Commissioner of Police by alluding to having the Commissioner fired over his (the Commissioner's) failure to act to 'protect' (guard) the mystery church site at Guanapo.

Neither Mr. Ramlogan nor the Cabinet he is a part of has that authority, and his rash outburst and subsequent backpedalling made him appear quite foolish.

Did Mr. Ramlogan as Attorney General at any time formally request the Commissioner to have this 'private property' at Guanapo guarded by public officers at the people's expense? Can he (the AG) legally use the Police Service in this way?

That this church contributed in no small way to the former ruling Party now finding itself in Opposition is documented history, but what is worse is the way everybody has treated this particular item of controversy since the PNM's loss at the polls, and I tend to side with the Police Commissioner's position on this one.

The site has since been abandoned, and the details surrounding the issue are rather sketchy; the last Prime Minister is on record refusing to accept responsibility for the thing even while evidence to the contrary was coming in all around him, and since the election and change in Government, ALL parties, from owners to challengers, worshippers to contractors, and possible givers to potential takers have ALL passed the proverbial buck while rampant looting was allowed to take place.

I say again, I understand the Commissioner's almost 'hands off' approach on this politically sensitive 'hot button' issue, especially because his appointment IS NOT a political one, and IS NOT subject to the ranting of the Attorney General regardless of how impassioned he might feel at the time.
Regardless of the nature or temperament of the Office holders around him, he (the Commissioner) needs a cool head and a calm demeanor to keep the security of the ship of state in tact.
Mr. Ramlogan showed his personal and political immaturity when he attacked the Commissioner baselessly on National TV, and I sincerely doubt Mr. Ramlogan will survive the fallout of his actions.

As the lawyers say, he ought to have known better.

Now, where there was barely an issue, a new issue has been created that has to be dealt with delicately and decisively, and the entire structure of the Police Service is looking hard at the the political directorate to see where we go from here.

Should they (the Police Service) adopt a 'hard' stance to protect themselves from this new antagonistic dispensation? Or soft, as in the understanding that political neophytes are wont to make grave errors when left unsupervised, and Mr. Ramlogan's outburst was just that; the ranting of a man overwhelmed by the challenges of his Office.

What is needed here is an iron fist in a velvet glove.

I cannot see another way out of this other than Anand Ramlogan offering his resignation and Kamla Persad Bissessar accepting it, if the Government is going to have the Police Service as willing partners in their version of the 'War on Crime'.

There is no room for brinksmanship on this, and the nation cannot survive a 'passive aggressive' stance from the Police Service, especially with violent crime still the number one issue affecting quality of life in the country.

The other highly charged, if not explosive issue, is the appointment of Jack Warner to act as Prime Minister over the well liked and politically experienced Winston Dookeran.

This political gamble will not pay off for Kamla, and I wonder what motivated her to make such a crazy decision.
Is she so insulated from public opinion that she has no clue as to the feelings of the electorate on this divisive issue? Or is it that she believes her own rhetoric and is relying on catchy phrases and sound bytes to keep supporters in line?

Nothing good can come of this, and this silly play so close on the heels of what is sure to be a fiasco with the Attorney General's Office could very well bring down this Government without them enacting a single policy of their own.

Why?

Because appointing Mr. Warner to act as Prime Minister while he is still in breech of the Parliamentary Code of Ethics while that Code is still in force is tantamount to insulting that very institution and its Members and is nothing short of playing smart with stupidness.
Now that hubris has replaced convention, the National Policy is effectively 'rules were made to be broken'.
In one act, the 'anti crime Government' has empowered law breakers everywhere by the silliness used to justify keeping Warner in Office, while alienating the very people, the Police Service, needed to enforce the law.
I said it before and I will say again, Mr. Warner's role was to fade, to keep playing the role of Kamla's puppy, not to 'manishly' rush to be Prime Minister, acting or not, the people are NOT going to accept this, and that fracture will split the country and is only overshadowed by the one now growing in the coalition, and I don't see how that one can be undone.

When the lie is revealed the liar has no choice but to defend the lie.

The substantive lie here was always that the rules of engagement would be fair, and that mutual respect would be the bedrock principle of this hasty marriage of convenience.
At all times we knew this was bound to fail if only because of the players themselves and their long established personal agendas, but this political slight amounts to gross disrespect of the Leader of the Congress of the People, and, by extension, every single member of that Party.

I await his position and that of the Party on the matter.

Now, before you jump down my throat and accuse me of being anti-People's Partnership or a PNM sympathizer, please; as of this writing they (the PNM) are faring no better as a potential Government and that is why this piece is entitled Democracy in Crisis.

Dr. Rowley has been seen to be preparing for this moment since his initial challenge to Patrick Manning's leadership, yet once the role of Leader has been thrust upon him he is appearing ill equipped to take on that mantle and is looking far less than his usual dynamic 'take charge' self publicly.
Apologists have told me that this is a breakdown in the Party's Public Relations machinery, but isn't even that a function of leadership?.
Where is the decisive leadership team and action plan to challenge for governance anew, as well as the 'New Direction' to galvanize supporters that a new day has dawned and the Party is ready for all circumstances?

Are both of them, Kamla and Rowley, guilty of biting off more than they can chew?

This nation appears to be heading for a crisis as one institution after another is shaken or undermined by one political upheaval after another and one wonders how much more it can take before something gives.

I almost entitled this article 'Wow.'

Political observers and the man in the street are left to scratch their heads and wonder what is really going on here?

Who do we turn to should the whole thing collapse?

Really not trying to belabor the metaphor, but we need to put things in proper perspective quickly before the Ship of State runs aground. I fear we are in for some very rough seas,

Something to think about....