A fox in the vineyard

Few politicians can claim to have known the ups and downs of local politics as ANR Robinson can. From being Dr Eric Williams’ heir apparent to being generally considered as a political spent-force and “has-been,” Mr Robinson on occasion, has either been the “main man” or “the cornerstone” that the political builders had apparently rejected.” At a time when Robinson seemed to be lost in the local political wilderness, so to speak — courtesy Eric Williams and his PNM, one Sean Harribance (a local soothsayer) publicly stated that, “Robinson would one day become Prime Minister.” Despite general skepticism, Harribance was prepared to stake his reputation on his “prediction.”

It has all come to pass, and more. ANR has been through a number of crucial tests and trials. Perhaps one of his more crucial tests was when it fell to him to cut the Gordian knot after the 18-18 deadlock. Selwyn Ryan had publicly advised, on the eve of the general election, that President Arthur NR Robinson should not go to bed the night before the election without having a clear plan of how he would deal with an 18-18 election result. In which event, could the President bring to bear the wisdom of a Solomon and the patience of a Job? President Robinson called in PM Basdeo Panday and Opposition leader Patrick Manning and tossed the ball into their court to come up with some, hopefully, statesmanlike solution. Some hope! Patrick Manning stated publicly that the trio (Robinson, Panday and himself) had among them (collectively) a century or so of parliamentary experience and he couldn’t think of a group more equal to the task. Now it’s not unknown for the “mountain to labour” and produce the proverbial mouse — even when two “Bo-rats” are involved. To cut a long story short, after much “negotiation” Manning and Panday emerged from Crowne Plaza hotel to take questions from the press and inform them and, by extension, the wider public that they had an amicable “limited agreement” which would hereafter be known as “the Crowne Plaza Accord” and would presumably carry the status of “a solemn gentleman’s agreement” or some such thing. Some agreement, some gentlemen!

Panday all but “hugged and kissed” Manning as the Bas waved away the members of the press with the seemingly patronising words to Manning: “Come on, kid, let’s go home,” or words to that effect. As the Chinese say, “A picture is worth a thousand words.” But it wasn’t long before one fellow was describing the other as “a born-again demon” and was himself being characterised as exhibiting “the machinations of a demented mind.” But I’m getting ahead of my story. The country must have breathed a sigh of relief when the political deadlock appeared to have been resolved. As I watched those two “would-be world class statesmen in apparent agreement and warm embrace,” I simply couldn’t avoid a somewhat financial extravagance as I committed myself to, “A penny for their thoughts” — no matter that the penny should be shared between the two — based on my evaluation on possible quality of effort. The two “seasoned politicians” appeared to have reached agreement on the choice of Speaker of the House and that they would accept whoever was the President’s choice of Prime Minister. “Bingo!” I blurted, “Wonders never cease,” and there can be no objection to a “new beginning” even if, in the short run, “it’s better to bramble you, my dears.”

Now, did the President really have a plan or was he just hoping that “good sense would prevail?” We shall never know for sure. Did the President, in his deliberate constitutional discretion pass the mantle on to Mr Manning or was it a case of “divine intervention?” as has been suggested. According to the constitution, as I understand it, it was the President’s prerogative “to appoint, as Prime Minister the person who in his judgment could command a majority in the House.” The President had this constitutional prerogative and could simply have stated his decision. I know that I sound naive here and seem insensitive to the delicate and far-reaching political and social ramifications, having regard to the “ethnic polarisation: and the history of the awkward relationship and “pitched battles” between Mr Robinson and Mr Panday over a long period, even preceding the Presidential/Prime Ministerial contretemps. The president accused the Panday administration of “a creeping dictatorship” What he did not say is that it was a “A kleptocracy in full gallop.”

Of course, the President didn’t help matters by couching the reason for deselecting Mr Panday in favour of Mr Manning with his personal interpretation of the preamble to the constitution and “moral and spiritual values.” Panday’s supporters were quick to assume and/or pretend that the President was casting aspersion on other people’s “moral and spiritual values.” Incidentally, there was no dearth of unsolicited advice as to what decision the President should make or not make and the basis on which he should act. Some suggested that the President should summon the two gentlemen concerned and knock their heads together until they reached at a feasible political arrangement. Personally, I wouldn’t have expected anything more dramatic than “a loud hollow sound,” from that exercise. Panday favoured a coalition government with presumably co-prime ministers. Manning dismissed that as “wishful thinking.”

Although Panday publicly claimed that whoever reneged on the Crowne Plaza Accord would “pay a heavy political price,” he, aided and abetted by Kamla Persad-Bissessar, used the bogus excuse that the proposed Speaker was closely aligned to the PNM and had actually appeared on their platform. All that is now purely academic but the President subsequently, in a speech, told Manning that, “we were once on the same side, then on opposite sides and are now on the same side.” Of course, one cannot read too much into this outside of the context in which it was said. If John Humphrey is to be believed, President Robinson might have, at least, unwittingly led Panday to feel that he was “a shoo-in” Prime Ministerial choice. If so, then the “Silver Fox” might well have been out-foxed or, perhaps, outfoxed himself and a seemingly disoriented fox is not only content to shout “sour grapes” but has vowed to “destroy the vineyard” that probably explains all that claptrap about “civil disobedience and non-cooperation. Nuff said!