Leave Parliament in Red House

THE EDITOR: Society of Architects notwithstanding, the citizens will stoutly oppose any attempt to tamper with existing centres of Parliament and Justice, save for internal renovation designed to improve efficiency. Suggestions that the Red House cannot be internally modified to accommodate an even larger Parliament with modern facilities smack of architectural self interest. Should merit be established in the latter assertion, however, it would represent the most valid argument for the immediate downsizing, to significant taxpayer advantage of that centre of expensive mediocrity. With a population of 1.3 million people, a Cabinet expanded to 30+, exclusive of recycled consultants, advisors and assorted hangers on is unjustifiable — save as sinecures for family, friends and down at heel party hacks. Their contribution to the national well being, negative to date, bears no relationship to the burden they represent to the economy, save as a measure of contempt for the electorate.

To suggest that having expanded the number of pensionable parasites swilling at the public trough the citizen is now expected not only to accept the abuse of our historic centre of government but must fund more generous accommodation for the aforementioned — in the interest of more “efficient administration” — is not merely the addition of insult to injury but begs the following: when has Patrick Manning ever provided us with efficient government? How can he, when his mentor and sole exemplar omitted the page on effective administration from the blueprint which has been Manning’s only guide in office. Were it not for Robbie in ’01 and Abu in ’02, he would assuredly by now have been political history.

JOHN  VERITY
Port of Spain