Clik here to view.
Last week, I dealt with the issue of understanding Tobago’s disadvantage. This week, I want to address the issue of internal self-government for Tobago. One of the very fundamental issues that has now emerged in the aftermath of the unsuccessful attempt to enact amendments to the Republican Constitution in January 2013 to introduce internal self-government for Tobago is the question of Tobago’s right to self-determination.
The result of the THA election in January 2013 effectively halted the progress of the bill that was seeking to amend the Constitution to introduce internal self-government for Tobago. As a consequence of that, the THA undertook to seek a consensus among different political entities on the island with a view to arriving at a position on the subject of internal self-government. There was also an inter-ministerial team from the Central Government that was engaged in dialogue with the THA on the matter.
Unfortunately, the issue remains unresolved and will obviously have to be addressed by the new Government. According to the PNM manifesto which has now been accepted as an official government policy document by the Cabinet:
“Under the PNM, PNM Members of Parliament are mandated by the Tobago Council to pursue the following objectives: Engage the national government to facilitate efforts to achieve Democratic Self Government for Tobago, in keeping with the aspirations of the people of Tobago….” (PNM 2015 manifesto, p.71).
Based on this policy commitment, the issue of internal self-government for Tobago will be addressed by the new administration in Port-of-Spain. The administration in Scarborough will need to find a mechanism to translate all of the discussions and prescriptions that have been made over the last eight to ten years into something palatable for the population.
This will not be an easy task as there are varying options on the table and different pathways to accomplish different interpretations of what may constitute internal self-government.
Perhaps, one of the issues that should arise must be the issue of Tobago’s right to self-determination. Should the central Government and the THA come up with their preferred formula or should there be a greater inclusion of the Tobago population in the process in order to permit the people of Tobago the right to make a choice as to the kind of political system under which they would want to be governed which would permit them to preserve and protect their unique social and cultural identity as part of their own development?
These are challenges that have clearly emerged over the years of debate, dialogue and discussion. Such an approach would bring a high level of legitimacy to the process that can cut across political and other divides.
Underneath all of these competing agendas and issues lies a common core of values on which there is clear agreement. It is inevitable that there will be political challenges because the topic is by its very nature a political one. However, genuine concern for the undoing of historical injustices of the past that have placed Tobago in a very disadvantageous position in relation to Trinidad must have a collection of agreed formulae.
There is an undercurrent that people in Trinidad do not understand the plight of the average Tobagonian to access goods and services from the State. At the same time, there is also a psychological blind spot that promotes a culture of speaking about “Trinis” which absolutely excludes any semblance of identity for Tobagonians.
These are not issues over which political points should be scored, but rather should present an opportunity for genuine understanding and explanation.
The Tobago House of Assembly should not be put in a position whereby, on an annual basis, it must look forward to hoping that its guaranteed allocation of 4.03 per cent of the national budget will be allocated to it because of a formula determined some years ago by the Dispute Resolution Commission. The Chief Secretary of the THA, Orville London, told the media last Monday that the allocation of 4.4 per cent of the national budget to Tobago was “not unfavourable.”
Perhaps, there could come a time when Tobago, by virtue of a new model of governance for the island, would be in a position to earn its true revenue potential from oil and gas around the island. Its legislators and administrators would have to be made accountable to an assembly that should have the requisite institutional strength to review and reprimand any infractions committed against the Tobago population.
The Tobago reform issue has gone through two iterations (1980 and 1996) on the road to a place of genuine internal self-government that will hopefully remove the effects of the imperial and post-imperial disadvantages.
The argument for self-determination is designed to seek a legitimate formula that (i) will recognise and respect the desires of the population of Tobago, (ii) will preserve its unique social and cultural identity, (iii) will deliver a system of government that reduces dependence on Port-of-Spain and delivers final decision-making authority to Scarborough, and, (iv) will ensure the implementation of adequate scrutiny of these enhanced powers in a way that delivers genuine accountability and transparency.