COP vs UNC ole talk... (Now really)

A letter was published in yesterday's Guardian entitled 'COP vs UNC ole talk' that purported to speak on behalf of the People's Partnership and focused specifically on the rumors of internal problems and strife within the ruling coalition.

I was reading the paper while having lunch seated at the counter at Adam's Bagels in Maraval, savoring a gastronomically delightful 'sancoche' that was so lovingly made it was literally transporting me to the heavens.

So perfect was that bowl's offering I would have proposed to the cook right there and then if she wasn't already spoken for.

The title of the column grabbed my attention (as I have an almost scientific interest in the subject) and I settled in for a good read with some good soup.

The writer opened with some sensible sounding logic saying (quote) - "Rich with conspiracy theories much to the delight of an audience entertained by mystery, we Trinidadians/Tobagonians relish the political gossip. The theatre of politics is nothing more than everyday political gamesmanship that is played in every country, in every political party, and in every society, since time immemorial. Folks, we are the audience, and our wisdom to recognise politics in play is essential to differentiate between substance and ole talk. The coalition is in fact a partnership of (primarily) two independent parties. I think the confusion embedded in the propaganda is in not recognising the difference between the Government in power and the political parties that make up the Government. Marriage, like our government, is a partnership of individuals who come together as one union, yet both uniquely balanced by their individuality. There is no cause for concern or alarm with this natural occurrence, because it is a normal constituent of the structure that makes up a coalition. However, overzealous political antagonists attempt to pollute the UNC/COP marriage for their own selfish reasons in contempt of the people’s will. Politically, it is altogether correct that each party stands united in government, while recognising its own party identity. The rumours of divisions is an invention by those who either fail to understand or refuse to accept that the coalition is a victory of, by, and for the people, and it is the people who voted 21 (UNC) to six (COP). " - (unquote)

That paragraph made so much sense, I was lulled into believing that this tone of equal rights in a marriage of governance was the substantive tone of the commentary, and, halfway into my lunch, continued my journey into this article.

The writer went on to say - (quote) "Should the parties decide to completely merge to become one political entity, or not, does not detract from the success of the People’s Partnership Government. It appears that the only relevant argument provoked by some, and fuelled by obstructionists to the people’s government, is that the UNC, having the clear majority in Parliament, is the proverbial “big brother” in the Partnership." (unquote)

Eh?

The dawning of the intention pricked a nerve and, so sudden was the awakening of the concept I accidentally dropped my spoon.

What a subtle twist of logic, the segue was so smooth one could find themselves mistaking outright rape for the end result of a passionate night of romance.

The wait staff, being quite understanding of the mishap, had me up and 'supping' in no time.

He went on - (quote) Perhaps there is some truth to this argument, or not. Either way, it is the electorate of our land, not the politicians or political pundits, that decide who will govern our nation; and the people’s votes decided that the UNC is in the majority. I trust there is validity, in defence of the UNC, by virtue of its clear parliamentary majority, that it has earned the right to be the “chairman of the board.” (unquote)

The illusion now shattered and the intention of the assault on reason (complete with the use of fuzzy logic) out in the open, my lunch lost its appeal and, pushing my soup away, I finished the reading just to see how low this was going to go.

(quote) For some depreciators, 21-6 equates to co-chairmanship, co-prime ministership, and co-everything. In my view, the “co-equivalence” formula imagined by the opposers is evidently baseless, and is the root cause of the noise and gossip. Perhaps there is room to debate this co-sharing equivalence. However, there is no precedence of law or historical record (that I know of) where a majority government ignores the people’s will and relinquishes its right to govern, in the majority. (unquote)

We had plumbed the depths.

The writer was a UNC activist pretending to speak for the People's Partnership, but his real intention was to put the COP and its own activists firmly in their place.

Where was that place you ask?

Read on.

(quote) Sound and decisive leadership and good governance practices require a chairman to govern the people’s business, and the UNC is the rightful leadership substantiated by its parliamentary majority. And by extension, the Prime Minister’s right by virtue of her office to lead the coalition government should not be challenged, but rather supported by the coalition partners in agreement. (unquote)

From a strict UNC perspective the idea was clear; 'we make it so who want to leave now could leave', but heavy on the reminder that life would be better for you if you stayed.

Like the wife in an abusive relationship, the Congress of the People's membership was being shown the options, stay or leave, but don't question the way I love. Besides, a lil licks now and then doh hurt nobody, is just keep people in dey place.

This is dinosaur politics.

Is it that the UNC just cant learn from history or is it that they won't?
Is 1988 and the Club '88 experiment too far removed from their memories for them to understand how close a trip to Opposition, or worse, total disintegration is?

I for one do not see this New UNC construct surviving long in Opposition as they have no moral center and nothing binding the major players and nothing of substance (except maybe indian time now) for the members to defend.

Not wanting to ascribe motives to the writer of the piece, I believe he was being knowingly disingenuous and was willingly twisting the facts, not only to force them to fit, but to get us all to agree.

I don't.

A handful of peas could never be referred to as 'almost a pelau' by no stretch of the imagination, and without the rice and chicken will always remain just a handful of peas with their pelau ambition squashed.

Or to quote one of the the Founding Fathers in his dismission of Jamaica - "one from ten leaves nought."

This slow diminishing of The Congress of the People is NOT Ok with the members of the Party and the Leadership would do well to listen to what is being said on the ground.

Morphing into one big happy UNC family is NOT an option, and New Politics will seek its expression elsewhere.

They behave like the COP is just a reaction to Panday and an aberration in real politics, but the Party is much, much more than a refusal to sleep with the devil for power.

It represents a maturing of an electorate, the dawning of power in the hands of a new generation disconnected from Butler and RIenzi, educated and informed, more at home in the boardroom than in the canefield or oilfield.

The greatest achievement of the last General Election is the 'trendiness' of Public Life now, and the willingness of youth from all walks of life to immerse themselves in the process.

If the Ganges met the Nile here, it met for drinks in a lounge built on the foundations of a history this generation feels no real connection to and, unswayed by tribalism and racism, are intent on sailing the ship of State based on goals defined in Universities not in Gayelles.

The Congress of the People represents much more than 'Government by any means' to many people, and their desire for a change from racial and other dividers will not be denied.

This discussion is NOT over and will NOT be stifled as long as the United National Congress and its members continue to play subtle 'one-upmanship' with the members of the Congress of the People.

If the purveyors and defenders of dinosaur politics were to look up, they would see the meteor of their extinction arcing through the atmosphere right about now.