Can TT contain Manning’s ego?

THE EDITOR: At first, it was “The Prime Minister’s Committee against Crime.” The Committee turned its guns on hapless citizens, exhorting all to desist from crime — because “it’s against the law.” Advertisements were addressed to those trading in stolen goods, those guilty of child abuse, those engaged in corruption, those who drink and drive. No appeals however went out to murderers, rapists, or kidnappers.

Then for some reason, the Prime Minister withdrew his patronage from the Committee, the advertisements were simply signed “Committee against Crime,” and the PM’s official imprimatur removed. The ads were as silly as they were irritating to upright citizens. “Zero tolerance” however appeared to be the Committee’s focus. So why did Manning scamper after firing the first shots? His recent somersault from Mexico to Laventille may give a clue. Manning could talk the talk, but not walk the walk. “Zero tolerance” seemed too much for him. While the National Housing Authority, with soldiers at the ready, was preparing to enforce the law in an area bordering on lawlessness, Manning jumped in to rescue his Jamaat “pardners.” On Manning’s edict, an illegally built structure would remain. 

Manning is a “sorfman,” his bark worse than his bite. He is not serious about crime, nor the acceptable protocol for appointing a Commissioner of Police, nor the propriety of flying in private jets.  Good government is not Manning’s focus; his obsession is getting into the Red House to pander his ego. It tells us that in downtown Port-of- Spain and other hotspots, those soldiers displaying their firepower are only to frighten lawbreakers, not to enforce the laws. He pardons transgressors today, to count their vote tomorrow. At his post-cabinet media briefing, Manning articulated his philosophy of waffling between forgiveness and firmness when dealing with those who break the law. Never mind his $30 million anti-crime unit under Brig Joseph.  Manning governs not by principles, but as a roving “father of the nation” dispensing favours and justice such as he sees fit. It brings to mind my catechism lesson where Jesus said to his disciples: “Whose sins you forgive, they are forgiven, whose sins you retain, they are retained.”  In his inflated ego, Manning  understandably sees all his sycophants as his disciples, but does he see himself as Jesus?

MICHAEL J WILLIAMS
Maracas