Stop stalling on Police Bills

SCIENCE, Technology and Tertiary Education Minister Colm Imbert condemned Opposition Leader Basdeo Panday for trying to obstruct passage of the Police Reform Bills because as Prime Minister, he knew this legislation was crucial to any government’s efforts to successfully combat crime in Trinidad and Tobago. Speaking during debate in the House of Representatives yesterday, Imbert slammed proposals made earlier by Panday which Government had to accept, in order to obtain Opposition support for the Bills. Recalling the legislation’s history, the Minister declared: “When he (Panday) tabled the legislation in Parliament (in 2001) he knew exactly the purpose and intent of the legislation. He understood it. He knew what it would do, the problems it would solve, what it would achieve.

He knew all of that in 2001, and yet he comes now in 2004 and pretends not to understand what this legislation is all about.  Three years, the country has been dealing with this matter. A Joint Select Committee was appointed under this administration. That dragged on for more than a year. Delaying tactics (by the committee’s UNC members). In the meantime, the country is crying out for a more effective, better equipped, better managed, more pro-active Police Service. The country is crying out for that over that three-year-period and the Member for Couva North is asking for more time? More time to do what?” Imbert said with his 30 years in government (including six years as prime minister and head of the National Security Council), Panday “had all the in-depth knowledge about the security issues in this country (including problems with the Police Service and Police Service Commission) but he wants time now.”

He recalled that the Bills were created under the former regime and condemned them for trying to shift “the space-time continuum” to make the nation believe that they never supported the legislation in the first place. Imbert said despite amendments offered to the UNC by Attorney General John Jeremie, the UNC was unwilling to meet the Government halfway and Panday had “disowned his own offspring (the Bills).” Imbert said Panday could not accuse Prime Minister Patrick Manning of trying to use the legislation to appoint a police commissioner when he, as prime minister, brought legislation to Parliament and used the UNC’s parliamentary majority “to extend the term of a commissioner of police who he was happy with.” The Minister rejected Panday’s proposal for an elected President of the Republic as a pre-condition for UNC support of the Bills.

“Our constitutional history from 1962 coming up is replete with examples where Presidents have demonstrated their independence, that they understand the provisions of our constitution. The fact that electoral college elects the President is merely a step in a chain of events that leads to an institution which is completely immune thereafter from the person that elects them.” That is our constitution,” he declared. Imbert added that the UNC knew that fact all too well on December 24, 2001, when then President Arthur NR Robinson (elected by the UNC) decided to appoint Manning as Prime Minister. He also congratulated the Santan Dharma Maha Sabha for making “a completely, constructive and mature contribution” to the debate on the Bills.