Prof: Give subsidy to all

Government should give subsidies to all citizens who invest in additional security systems “because we are all in a sensitive position when it comes to crime,” said Independent Senator Professor Ramesh Deosaran. He was responding to statements by the Minister of Finance and Prime Minister Patrick Manning in the Budget speech that tax credits would be provided to “business people and other persons in sensitive positions who are at risk and who install special security systems for their protection and the protection of their families.” But the Independent Senator argued that all citizens should be subsidised in the same way because “Everybody is at risk in this country.”

Deosaran said the Ministry of National Security was one of the most difficult ministries. He recalled that at one time during the NAR period, there were three ministers in that ministry — Herbert Atwell, Joseph Toney and Hochoy Charles. “And three ministers couldn’t deal with that ministry effectively. So you can imagine how difficult it is when you have only one minister,” he said. On the crime fleet, Deosaran asked: “Why are we not getting into the Pandora’s box, the Police Service? We have to get into that Pandora’s box, sooner or later to find out what is really wrong with the Police Service,” he stated. Noting that the PM also proposed to increase the strength of the Police Service by 1,000, Deosaran stated:  “We have to fix the Police Service so that we are not putting new wine into old bottles. On the think-tank set up by the Prime Minister, Deosaran wanted to know whether it would be professionally or politically driven. He said if it was going to be circumscribed by political considerations it would be a case of “Caesar to Caesar.”

He said the pressures on the Government on the issue of crime meant that there was “intense controversy” over  the issues of freedom verus security. Noting that fighting crime in a democracy was a very difficult challenge because “ as you move along one route, the question of civil liberties and police brutality arise,” Deosaran stated that the very nature of a democracy made it difficult to deal with crime as frontally as many people would like. He identified five stages through which citizens went in this regard. Stage one — where the Government is not responsible enough and expeditious in dealing with crime; stage two — in which the population became panic stricken; stage three — where the public called for hard-line policies; stage four —where Government sees these proposals as politically acceptable and stage five — which was a state of seige. He said he was pleased to note that the Prime Minister had exercised some restraint in this regard. Deosaran noted however that the crime plan presented by Manning lacked a blueprint in which a short, long and medium-term vision for action in the key areas of crime — such as crime prevention, suppression, detection — was outlined.