Roads are being paved, water is flowing in the pipes, the tassa drummers and rhythm sections are turning up the volume and the political temperature is rising in Trinidad and Tobago. All this can only mean one thing: elections fever.
After Prime Minister Patrick Manning surprisingly called a snap election on April 8, he kept the nation in suspense for eight days – for reasons known only to himself and, if mischievous tongues are to be believed, the person generally referred to as his ‘seer woman’ – before announcing that the general election would be held on May 24.
Even though many observers have been unable to discern any significant strategic advantage in delaying the announcement of the date, the vaunted machinery of the incumbent People’s National Movement has already rolled into action, screening and selecting candidates to contest Trinidad and Tobago’s 41 constituencies, and hitting the campaign trail with much sound and fury.
Mr Manning has launched his crusade for personal vindication with liberal references to the Bible and, in telling his devotees that he is the “most vilified” prime minister the country has ever had, he comes dangerously close to likening himself to the persecuted martyrs of olden times.
However, in acknowledging how many in the country feel about him, Mr Manning failed to address what might be the cause for such strong sentiments. Indeed, the Trinidad Guardian editorial of April 15 suggests that he “commit to some deep introspection during which he should ask himself why his style of leadership and his management of the country engender such negative feelings among so many people.” And in case the prime minister is unable to comprehend the reality of his position, the editorial offers assistance in listing some possible reasons for Mr Manning’s unpopularity: he is “disconnected” and authoritarian; he has neglected human and physical development in poor urban areas and the countryside; too many citizens lack for basic needs, especially running water; he has been unable to diversify the economy away from its dependence on oil and gas; he has squandered abundant financial resources; he has countenanced mismanagement and corruption, particularly at the Urban Development Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago; and he has failed to hold local government elections in four years. Others have also accused Mr Manning and his government of poor governance and failing to rein in runaway crime.
What Mr Manning has certainly succeeded in doing is focusing the spotlight squarely on his stewardship as prime minister over the past nine years and, perhaps most significantly, providing the opportunity for the unification of the twin-island republic’s fractious opposition parties.
On Saturday night, an opposition coalition was announced and a formal agreement was signed on Wednesday evening. The United National Congress, led by Kamla Persad-Bissessar; the Congress of the People, led by Winston Dookeran; the Tobago Organisation of the People, led by Ashworth Jack; the National Joint Action Committee, a pioneering group in the 1970 Black Power movement led by veteran activist Makandal Daaga; and the Movement for Social Justice, comprising prominent trade unionists under the chairmanship of the former president of the powerful Oilfields Workers Trade Union, Errol McLeod, have agreed to contest the elections, under the leadership of Mrs Persad-Bissessar. They are presenting themselves on a common platform, with a joint manifesto and the express intention of removing Mr Manning and the PNM from office.
Unsurprisingly, Mr Manning and the PNM are already attacking the alliance, pointing out that coalition governments have a dismal record of failure in Trinidad and Tobago, reminding the country of corruption under the UNC government of 1995-2001, and even taking personal potshots at Mrs Persad-Bissessar, Mr Dookeran and Mr McLeod.
Mrs Persad-Bissessar has in turn indicated that the “one common denominator in all those coalitions” is no longer present. She did not name him but she was, of course, referring to the divisive and manipulative figure of Basdeo Panday, who has finally read the writing on the wall and is not offering himself for re-election. In addition, his daughter Mikela and brother Subhas, and other loyalists, Ramesh Maharaj and Kelvin Ramnath, are certain to be culled from the UNC line-up, as Mrs Persad-Bissessar strives to present a new UNC to the electorate.
Nevertheless, as the Guardian editorial of April 18 signals, the coalition “has a lot of work to do to persuade the public that it is a viable political alternative as a unified opposition force.” Moreover, the editorial argues, the coalition cannot “rely on the results of the 2007 elections as any guide to their future prospects either. While the statistics of that election, which benefited from a 66 per cent voter turnout, suggest that the UNC (29.7 per cent of the vote) and COP (22.6 per cent) of two years ago would have been a potent force in combination against the PNM (45.8 per cent), that kind of arithmetic remains purely hypothetical.”
In other words, notwithstanding popular perceptions of Mr Manning’s fallibility and the rhetoric of hope and change of the opposition alliance, the onus is on the UNC-led coalition to present their leader as a credible alternative to Mr Manning, with a clearly defined manifesto for better governance, transparency and accountability, and sustainable and more equitable socio-economic development. And it remains to be seen whether the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago will look beyond race and tribe and vote on the issues. Otherwise, doing the election arithmetic may well revert to the patterns of the past, that is, calculating the swing vote in the marginal seats.
