The petition

The Right Honourable  Patrick Manning, Prime Minister of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago

Dear Prime Minister,

We wish to make some observations on the decision by Cabinet,  without public consultation, to move the Parliament of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago out of the Red House on completion of the renovations now in progress. The built heritage and institutions of a country often serve as strong unifying influences. In Trinidad and Tobago there are built structures dating back to the early part of the nineteenth century, some important for their architectural significance, some for their  profound historical and cultural associations. The Red House is the most important of our heritage buildings on two counts: firstly, its inner and outer architecture;  and secondly,  its intimate association with every phase of our history since the middle of the 1840s. For its historical significance and its architectural grandeur, our Red House has been listed by the Organisation of American States as one of the monuments of the Antilles. Its story needs to live in the minds of our children.

After the destruction of Port-of- Spain by fire in 1808, Governor McLeod on February 15, 1844 laid the foundation stone for new government buildings — two main blocks connected by a double archway much like the Red House of today. In 1848 the Council Chamber was formally inaugurated by Lord Harris, and thus began the history of the Red House as the seat of legislation and the people’s platform. Additions, alterations and ornamentations were effected in the 1890s. In 1897, as Trinidad prepared to celebrate the Diamond Jubilee of Queen Victoria, the buildings were given a coat of red paint and became for the public, “the Red House”.

The direct ancestor of today’s Red House was burnt to a shell in the Water Riots of 1903. Rebuilding began in 1904, and the new Red House with a cooling fountain in the centre of the rotunda was opened to the public on February 4th 1907. The Wedgwood Blue ceiling in the Council Chamber is only the most striking feature of an altogether remarkable interior design and fabrication. The Red House has always been the seat of law-making. The Government that first occupied the Red House, however,  was an unrepresentative Government consisting of the British Governor and his Council of Advice.

The Government that has occupied the Red House since 1961 is an elected Parliament. This democratic  take-over began in 1956 when Dr Eric Williams’s party won the majority of seats in the Legislative Council,  and it was completed in 1961 when a “Legislature”  was established, the name being changed to “Parliament” in 1976. The Red House has always been the home of Parliament, and according to the Constitution,  it is our people’s Parliament that is the Government. The Red House is the repository of deeds done, speeches made, and documents executed that identify crucial episodes in the heroic story of our evolution from Crown Colony or Imperial rule  to representative Government in 1956, then to Independence in 1962. We celebrate the “capture” of the Red House as a marker of the political evolution of our country. We cannot give blessing to any action that would deny the meaning of that process or turn a living institution into a relic.

It is before the Red House that people with causes have come for over a century. It is to this place that Tubal Uriah Buzz Butler marched to remind the Colonial  authorities of the human rights and economic needs of the people of our country.  It is at the Red House that the British flag was lowered and the flag of Independent Trinidad and Tobago raised in 1962. It is here at the Red House and in Woodford Square “the front yard of the Red House”  that people come in  the period of self-rule to address our legislators, and here that a major assault  upon our democracy was repulsed in 1990. Here on July 26, 1991 an eternal flame was lit and still burns to symbolise “the need to be ever-vigilant  in the protection of our democracy”. We cannot  close our eyes to the distressful meaning of the eviction of Parliament from the Red House.

It is hard to think of any good reason why the Parliament of the people of Trinidad and Tobago should be removed from its traditional home, why a building custom-designed for our Lawmakers should  be  peremptorily given over to other uses,  why the association between the people’s building and the “University of Woodford Square” should be disrupted without  consideration for the people’s views. Law may permit and Parliament may sanction but there are certain decisions that neither Law nor Parliament  should carry out without direct consultation with the people. The exterior of the building must be repaired and preserved but  that would not save enough of the architectural value of this building. The unique interior including the Parliament Chamber, originally the Legislative Council Chamber, the Justice Chamber, and the Rotunda are three features that simply cannot be converted to other uses without severe irreversible loss of  heritage.

The argument that more space may be needed in future for an expanded Parliament is unconvincing. The Red House is not fully occupied at present, and the vacant southern wing can more than accommodate a Senate Chamber if necessary. It is our considered opinion, based upon professional advice, that for the foreseeable future, the existing space in the  Red House can accommodate two Chambers and all the ancillary sections that need to be there. We also believe that the seating in the present Chamber can be re-designed without loss of heritage. We have noted with great concern that the Judiciary which would be affected, and the Parliament which would be shifted have not been consulted, either formally or informally. When the Cabinet makes a decision like this by itself,  the Judiciary and the Legislature are diminished, and the disrespect in  the action can easily stretch to the population as a whole.

We are convinced that the Red House, if fully restored, can serve for several decades and continue to grow as a national shrine to our ancestors who have built this country, and as an archway of vision of the future for our citizens yet unborn. Above all, it can and should be a strong unifying force for the present generation. We therefore urge you and your Cabinet to reflect on these views and reconsider the decision to break the organic and historical connection between the Parliament and the Red House. The proposed action would diminish both and deny the country of one of its greatest unifying elements. Signatories:  Peter Minshall, John Spence, J S Kenny, Reginald Dumas, Selby Wooding, Rudlyn Roberts, Val  Ramcharan, Earl Lovelace, Bridget Brereton, Gerry Besson, Brinsley Samaroo, Michael Anthony, KO Laurence, Father Anthony de Verteuil, Adrian Camps Campins, Rhoda Reddock, Diana Mahabir-Wyatt, Hazel Brown, Zalayhar Hassanali, Eden Shand, Pamela Benson, Gaylord Kelshall, Willi Chen, Kenneth Ramchand, Israel Khan, Eugene Laurent, Alex de Verteuil, Jennifer de Verteuil, Christine Miller, Molly Gaskin, James Aboud, Leroy Clarke, Pearl Eintou Springer, Valerie Belgrave, Meiling, Pat Turpin, Sharon Laurent, Kirk Meighoo, Dana Seetahal, Shamshu Deen, Clive Pantin, Joseph Fernandes, Rhett Gordon, Ravi-Ji, Harry Phelps, Brother Resistance