If you had a choice of living in one of two refurbished homes — a much bigger one that made critical decisions about how to run both itself and the other, and a smaller one that made decisions only about how to run itself with money donored by the bigger one — which would you choose? Suppose, further, that the two homes were separated by shared water and that the smaller home had control of more water than it did previously, which home would you choose? Suppose, finally, that both homes could raise moneys but that the smaller home could only raise moneys as allowed by the bigger home, which would you choose?
The Government’s green paper on constitutional reform, published recently in the Tobago News by the Law Reform Commission, refurbishes both homes, makes the smaller home better to live in in some respects, but ensures that the unequal status of both homes remains intact. Tobago would get enhanced “internal self-government”, which would redress the balance between the two islands.
I suppose it all has to do with the notion “internal self-government of Tobago”. From the way the Green Paper uses it, it means something like “Tobago running itself within Trinidad and Tobago, but with constraints imposed by Trinidad”. The meaning has three parts: “Tobago running itself” (part 1); “within Trinidad and Tobago” (part 2); and “but with constraints imposed by Trinidad” (part 3). In the notion, “self-government of Tobago” speaks to part 1 of the meaning; “internal” speaks to part 2; and everything else in the Green Paper speaks to part 3.
Everything.
The retention of a parliament composed of 40 persons from the Trinidadian home (the Speaker and 39 representatives) but only two from the Tobagonian home. The retention of a cabinet structure (only one Tobagonian representative would be guaranteed membership) that has control over the parliament and, consequently, the nation. The cabinet retaining the power to determine Tobago’s development and recurrent agenda, albeit with the legal constraint of a minimum percentage (6.9).The three lists of responsibilities — national, concurrent, and Tobagonian — with the Trinidadian home keeping control of the national list and exercising control of the concurrent list through its parliament, but with the Tobagonian home constrained by the Parliament in its control of both the concurrent list and the Tobago list(through budgetary and other overriding legal discretions). The establishment of a Tobagonian legislature composed of the Tobago House of Assembly as currently constituted but also of the president of the nation who would be given dissenting powers where Tobagonian lawmaking is concerned.
So, everything.
What’s the point of so-called new constitutional arrangements if the status quo of inequality remains the same? How can it be equal to keep a parliament disproportionately weighted in Trinidad’s favour making laws for the nation? How can it be equal to keep a situation in which that Parliament, through its cabinet, decides, subject to some legal minimum percentage, how much money Tobago should get to run itself annually? How can it be equal for a president elected by a Trinidadian Parliament and, hence, by a Trinidadian cabinet — a president in whose election the Tobago House of Assembly had no say — to dissent from laws made by the Tobago House of Assembly?
How can it be equal for the Tobagonian legislature to be lorded over not only by a Trinidadian legislature but also by a Trinidadian legislature doubling as a national legislature?
These “new” measures clearly cannot be equal, because equality is not the goal of the proposed constitutional reform. Read the goal again. It is “to amend the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago to enhance the internal self-government of Tobago” (emphasis mine).
I suppose it can be argued that the legislation does enhance self-government. It clears up Tobago’s areas of responsibility, doesn’t it? No longer can, say, a Minister of Works and Infrastructure claim that his jurisdiction includes works and infrastructure in Tobago, right? It increases the amount of money to be allocated to Tobago, right again? It apportions Tobago’s maritime boundaries, ent it? It enables Tobago to really make laws this time, not so?
But that is definitely — de.fi.night.ly! — not what I mean by “internal self-government”. What I mean is Tobago and Trinidad each governing itself in the way that each wants, but under a federal umbrella where each has equal law-making powers and each contributes to the establishment and maintenance of the federal mechanisms by agreed formulae. What I mean is an overhaul of Parliament, Cabinet and President as currently constituted, not refurbishment.
And what I mean — for Tobago most certainly, if not for Trinidad — is constraints by the people on executive power. I am talking about oversight and accountability mechanisms in respect of the way the Tobago Parliament would work, including a composition of parliament different from the composition of a cabinet or executive council.
The Green Paper therefore falls sadly short of my goal. It gives me refurbishment or enhancement when I want overhaul. It gives me parliamentary sleight of hand when I want two parliaments separately taking care of each island’s business. It gives me a colonial governor when I want a governor elected by the people and constrained by their wishes and ambitions. It seems to be telling me to hush my mouth and take little and live long.
It gives me the same stupid unitary state with three bogus legislatures.
So, with great regret, I would choose the bigger home!
(Source http://www.trinidadexpress.com/commentaries/One_state__three_legislatures-143755796.html)
