Confusion over Caroni

THE CONFUSED flapping and floundering of the UNC Opposition over the Caroni restructuring issue reveals an intellectual bankruptcy within the party and its leadership that must be cause for concern. The party seems at a loss for coherency and conviction as it is caught between the plans it once had devised for Caroni — including the shutting down of the company — and the opposition it now feels compelled to make on behalf of its supporters in the sugar belt against the government's current proposals.

One was inclined to credit the Opposition with a serious and committed approach to the Caroni issue when its members demanded a national debate in the House, declaring that they would not support Government bills needing special majorities until such a debate was held. Apart from the emotion which the lot of sugar workers has always generated in their representative party, one felt that the UNC had important things to say about the Government's plans for dealing with the grossly inefficient sugar manufacturing operation. And we felt sure the country would be interested in hearing their side of the story.

Not unexpectedly, however, the UNC seems to be backing out of that fervent demand. On Saturday, at a public meeting in Couva, Prime Minister Patrick Manning invited the Opposition to file a Private Members' motion calling for a debate on Caroni and gave them the assurance that it would be given priority at Friday's sitting of the House. Yesterday's deadline for filing such a motion passed without it. Now we hear the UNC singing a different song. Instead of a national debate, they say the Caroni issue will be settled “on the streets”, issuing another empty and meaningless threat.

According to Couva South MP Kenvin Ramnath, the party has apparently lost its enthusiasm for seeking or arranging a national debate and, instead, is now blaming the Government for a “dereliction of duty” in not coming to Parliament with their plan for Caroni. As a representative of the sugar belt, Mr Ramnath no longer sees the need to force a debate on behalf of his constituents; rather, he is now content to fall back on the old and inane ploy of blaming the Government for its “failure”. The scenario has thus become clear: Mr Manning has called the bluff of the Opposition for a national debate and, as a result, he has exposed the flip-flop emptiness of their manoeuvres.

Indeed, in this episode, one may see not only the confusion of the Opposition but also how needlessly obstructive, how unnecessarily retarding to the country's progress, is the instinctive, irresistible and all-consuming compulsion to oppose for the sake of opposing. Will the Kidnapping Bill, urgently needed to deal with the rise in this atrocious crime, fall victim to this kind of foolishness? Our country needs a better quality of opposition than this. Parliamentarians of the UNC owe it to the entire society to seriously examine the operations of their party with a view to lifting its commitment and its vision above its traditional insular interests to one of concern for the progress and well-being of the national community. The time has come, it seems, for a new generation to take over the tired and worn-out leadership of the party.

Science and Technology Minister Danny Montano pointed out that Caroni is operating today in the same way as the company did 50 years ago, in spite of the rapid advance of technology. The Opposition should not want to follow that same syndrome, in spite of our considerable political development. Statistics of the stupendous losses being incurred by Caroni have repeatedly been given, but Senator Montano's observation that the sugar company has been losing $627,000 a day for the last ten years adds another bizarre angle to this horror story. Its end, which the UNC must accept, is long overdue.