Tobago opposition parties in bitter fight for turf

CAMPAIGNING for the Tobago House of Assembly (THA) election has not yet started officially but already confusion reigns within the ranks of the opposition on the island. On one hand there is the National Alliance for Reconstruction (NAR), which once controlled Tobago’s affairs, with recently appointed political leader Cecil Caruth. On the other is the revived Democratic Action Congress (DAC), made up of a faction of the NAR membership, led by Hochoy Charles. The confusion has to do with efforts of the parties to resolve their differences. The move was initiated by the NAR, which claimed it had been urged to do so by its supporters and other concerned Tobagonians. “The NAR has acted upon every opportunity available to try and bring this impasse to an end, in the best interest of Tobago,”  party chairman Christo Gift said in a statement Tuesday.

Gift said since January 2003 the party had been ready “to get on with any serious discussions to resolve this matter.”  ‘It is noteworthy that while we have counselled patience and encouraged hope, elements in the DAC have relied on delay, misrepresentation, and at times deliberate falsehoods to win over support, and engaged in only shallow and cosmetic discussions with the NAR.” As far as the DAC is concerned, word on the ground is that “all are free to join the DAC.” It is hardly expected that the Charles-led DAC would “go back” to the NAR. Charles is on record as declaring that “there is no NAR, the NAR is dead.” Up to this week, Gift maintained that Charles had established a new party, while Charles insisted that on January 26, 2003 was a “name-change” from the NAR to the DAC. Gift argues that the meeting to effect the name-change was not legitimate under the NAR’s constitution.

Charles said the question of changing the party’s name back to DAC was first raised in September 2002 by way of a motion. He said the membership felt it was too close to the general election of the following month, and it was agreed that after the election the matter would be reconsidered. In December, Charles said, the matter was again raised during a meeting at Rovanel’s Resort and a decision was deferred to January 26. On that date, he claimed, the decision was taken by the NAR membership to change the name to the DAC. “It’s not Hochoy Charles, it’s the membership of the NAR that took the decision,” Charles said. He argued that it was the same way the original DAC’s name was changed in 1986 when the DAC, ONR, ULF, combined to become the NAR and defeated the then PNM Government 33-3. Gift stressed, however, that the 1986 situation cannot be compared to Charles’ name-change in January last year.

“If it is that all you did was change the name, Charles and others would have automatically retained the positions they held in the NAR,” Gift argued.It is against this background that the NAR and DAC are now trying to regroup to contest the upcoming THA elections.  At the heart of the matter at present, is a DAC meeting billed as the “DAC Homecoming” carded for this Sunday at the Scarborough Secondary School. Gift claimed Charles was “advertising the meeting as a coming together of the NAR and the DAC, when it is not.“The DAC meeting Sunday is to introduce their constitution,” he said. Gift contended that Charles was using his leadership position in Tobago to fool the people. “It is deliberate confusion! There is no joint meeting,” he insisted. “All of this is just a masquerade for what has always been the creation of a new party while using the name and banner of a party that was!” Gift hinted that the NAR would refer the matter to the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC). Charles however referred to the NAR as being “undemocratic and illegal.”