REFORMING THE CONSTITUTION - Part Two

 

I had promised to set out my ideas for reforming the Constitution as I tend to look with a great deal of scorn upon those who just criticize but do not put forward their own solutions. The premise that I have based my ideas on is that I am looking for a way to give more power to the ordinary person in controlling his/her life, and therefore controlling the politicians.

Looking at the various systems in place around the world, I have come to the conclusion that there is really no need to 'reinvent the wheel'. With  a few tweaks here and there the American system could work very well for us and achieve my goal of controlling the politicians. Let me explain:

There are 41 constituencies in the country (39 in Trinidad and 2 in Tobago). What if we divided each seat in two and abolished local government. Why do we need so many local councils in any case? The mayor of Miami presides over about 4 times as many people that we have in a land area that is roughly twice as large as ours! We could the elect (let's call them) Congressmen who would face the polls on a given day once every two years. The Congressmen would have all the responsibilities of the present local councils (garbage collection, etc.) but because they would be in Parliament they would have a modicum of control over their own budgets. And because they are only elected for two years if anyone doesn't perform to the satisfaction of the voters then he/she can be bundled out of office fairly quickly.

But because two years is a very short time we could have, say 41 Senators who would serve for six years in the original constituencies. But  one third of the Senators would face the polls every two years. So (to use a rather ridiculous example) if as a Senator I campaigned for a new law to make all men have to wear green pants, what would you say? When I face the polls this year I go down in a rather ignominious defeat over this stupid green pants issue, which, of course, would not be surprising. In the meantime, as a fellow Senator who will be facing the polls in two years after I have been defeated  and who has been supporting me on this issue (whether it is for loyalty to me or the political Party to which we both belong) seeing my defeat on this issue, you will quietly drop it. In two short years you will certainly not want to lose your seat and therefore would probably abandon it. And guess what? The voting public would have won!

I would have an executive President elected once every four years and a Cabinet that was appointed by the President but which would have to be approved by the Senate.

This system (which is basically the American system) admittedly has its flaws. We are witnessing some of them right now with Trump's refusal to accept his defeat and his appealing to the baser instincts of the American people. But, as I said in the beginning, we can 'tweak' it to suit us. Certainly, it would be better than what we have now which is (to paraphrase Winston Churchill) an effective dictatorship punctuated once every five years with democracy.

You realize, of course, that this proposal would effectively eliminate much of the powers of a prime minister under our present system. This proposal as a result will, more than likely, never see the light of day.

TIME TO GET SERIOUS ABOUT REFORMING THE CONSTITION

 

If somebody came down to Trinidad today from another planet he would be forgiven for believing that a general election campaign was in progress and not just a local government election. On both sides there is a clear discussion of national issues (crime, the economy, corruption, etc.) but there is little or no discussion about local issues. To be fair, there have been some minor criticisms about the state of the roads and the potholes that litter all of the country's roads, but other than that there has been nothing. We have all heard the criticisms of the leadership of the two main parties and some have even tried to turn this local government election into a referendum on who is more popular - Kamla or Rowley.

Perhaps it is time to start thinking AND talking seriously about constitutional reform. Seriously. Why do we have Local Government? All the councils are effectively under the control of the Minister of Finance, who is effectively under the control of the Cabinet, which is effectively under the control of the Prime Minister, who is effectively a law unto himself/herself. So? Why do we, for example, have a Port of Spain City Council or  a Siparia Borough Council? 

And if it is true that there is ONLY ONE reason for politics and Government: to make life better for the people - then why is it that most people when they go to the polls, simply vote for exchange rather than real and substantial change? What are the substantial PHILOSOPHICAL differences between the PNM and the UNC - apart from the belief that this one or that one 't'iefes' more?

Again, for example, in the last debate on procurement in both the Senate and the House of Representatives NOBODY, not even any of the Independent Senators, provided any clear and workable solutions that could effectively help to stem corruption. I challenge anybody to tell me in clear and simple terms what  an outside observer would say on listening to the debate in Parliament as to what the differences in PHILOSOPHY are on this issue between the PNM and the UNC. I tried and failed. Essentially, the debate boiled down to 'stealing is wrong and we're against it'. And that was it! From all sides!

It is now definitely and absolutely clear that our present Westminster-type constitution just ain't working. Put another way, if something were to happen tonight that eradicated and destroyed everything so that when we woke up we had to start from scratch would you be happy to put the exact same system back or would you want to do something else? Most people vote for the 'something else' option. But we are not doing that!

Because I tend to be scornful of people who just criticize and provide no solutions of their own, in my next post I will give my ideas as to how the Constitution should be changed. Here's a teaser: abolish local government. I'll say why I think so and with what and how I would replace it. In the meantime, do you have any ideas? Or are you satisfied with what we have?

THE BANKS AND THE POLITICIANS

 If there is one sector of the business community in dire need of reform it is the banking and financial sector. In developed countries like Canada and the United States there is serious bank legislation that effectively prevents collusion and and absolute control of an individual's finances. For example, if money is sent to you from abroad very often the bank will charge you the same amount as it cost the person who sent it. Why? What cost has the bank actually incurred for receiving YOUR money? Answer: none! But it is a nice way to make an extra buck, isn't it?  Do you know that if the banks did what they are doing down here in, say, Canada, that the directors would all go to jail? But, dream on! That ain't gonna happen here. 

Again, if you have a mortgage which you have paid off in full, the bank has to execute a release of that mortgage which has to be registered. Now, tell me, in whose interest is it to have this release done? Yours, right? but if you get your lawyer to prepare the release the bank will send it to THEIR lawyer for approval. And YOU have to pay their lawyer for this service. Why? Why should the bank care if your lawyer made a mistake on the title to your land? They've got back all of their money with interest! So if they want to hire a lawyer for that, shouldn't that be  for their account?

These are just two examples of how the general public is being ripped off every day by these greedy dogs. But the list goes on and on. Why was it so very easy for my son in University in Canada to open a bank account there before he started attending the school but down here you have to jump through hoops in order to open an account? Why do we have to provide all kinds of personal information when we want to do some business through a bank down here? And don't tell me that its because of the Financial Institutions Act (FIA). Other countries have the equivalent legislation but they don't make it difficult for the general public. So? Why? Why are the lines so long at the bank? They don't exist in the big countries.

A local government election is coming up next month. But neither of the two main political parties are putting forward any proposals to make life better and easier for the people. Instead, it is clear that money talks. Bank profits have gone up in this guava season but not one politician has asked why! Why haven't the politicians tackled this? Isn't the only reason for government is to make life better for all of us? Who is going to make our lives better? What EXACTLY are they promising? and yet, we continue to vote for them and the banks continue to rip us off secure in the knowledge that neither side will interfere with their conduct which is downright criminal.