Tobago was finally ceded to the British in 1814 after being a colony of the Dutch, French and the British at various periods since having been "discovered" by Christopher Columbus at the end of the 16th century. In 1888, Tobago was annexed to Trini-dad, its nearest neighbour, by the British, no doubt in order to lighten the cost of administering the island from London. The relationship between the two islands has always been and, unfortunately, continues to be that of "master\servant." Of late, after much agi- tation by representatives of its population, it has been accepted that this relationship ought to be one of equality with both islands "walking side by side" rather than "one behind the other"-a maxim which was given recognition by the late Sir Ellis Clarke, President of T&T, at the opening ceremony re-establishing the Tobago House of Assembly by Act No 40 of 1996.
Act No 40 had attempted to put in legislative form what was thought to be representative of the Tobagonian, resident and overseas. Within the last 70 years or thereabouts (at least since the 1950s), there have been attempts to define the administrative relationship between the two islands. Opinions expressed have varied from "internal self-government" to what has now been stretched to "autonomy." There is also a "muted" notion of "independence." One suspects that were Tobago not now so dependent on Trinidad financially, a call for independence would have been more vocal. Having noted the existence of an "independence lobby," a word of caution is in order. This school of thought points to the status of islands in the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS). Proponents of independence for Tobago point to the comparative size and resources of Tobago and members of this grouping.
Sight may have been lost that, notwithstanding their independence, the states of the OECS have seen it expedient and desirable to establish and to strengthen common institutions and mechanisms. Thus, given these imperatives, independence for Tobago from Trinidad (for want of a more appropriate connotation) is a "no-go." What follows, therefore assumes that, despite what, to them, is the present unsatisfactory relationship, the vast majority of Tobagonians will, after sober consideration of the issues, reject the path of complete independence and seek to maintain the integrity of the unitary state while accepting a clearly-defined notion of "exclusive responsibility." The public of T&T has been made aware of the existence of three or four reports which are purportedly to have studied the matter at hand and have come up with a certain consensus as to the way forward for Tobago and, indeed, Trinidad.
This writer has not seen these reports. However, if this has not yet been done, it would be fitting if they were to be published in the national newspapers. In any event, given the importance of this matter, it would seem appropriate for the public to be apprised of the manner whereby the consensus was arrived at. Thus, were the contributors to the consultations indeed representative of the population of Tobago? Did the patrons of the John Price and Edwards bars in Charlotteville and Mason Hall respectively have an input? What of the fisherfolk of Parlatuvier and Castara? It would certainly add to the credibility of these reports if information such as this, by pointing the way, were forthcoming. Notwithstanding what has just been said, this writer is clear that his own empirical observation has led him to conclude that there is a strong desire among Tobagonians to break, once and for all, the "master\servant" and dependency syndrome relationship and to take charge of their own affairs in so far as, by so doing, the unitary state of T&T is not compromised.
Despite the relatively long and seemingly harmonious relationship between the two islands, it is clear that differences of culture and life-style have remained. This points to the need for different approaches to the manner of governance between them. It is in this context, if for no other reason, that there exists a need for separate institutional arrangements for governance. Hence the raison d'etre for the THA Act, Act No 40 of 1996. The THA Act establishes the "Functions of the Assembly" as being "without prejudice to Section 75(1) of the Constitution." It must be noted that this sub-section gives to the Cabinet "general direction and control of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago." It seems, therefore, that the Government in Port-of-Spain can overrule or modify any action which may be taken by the THA in relation to Tobago although the THA Act specifically states that the THA "shall, in relation to Tobago, be responsible for the formulation and implementation of policy in respect of matters set out in the Fifth Schedule" of the Act.
It appears, therefore, that this "exclusive unsupervised powers" of the THA must be based on those areas of government which are clearly "Tobagonian." Further, those areas which do not require a central government input ought to be fully within the purview of the THA. To give effect to this, not only would amendment to sub-section 75(1) be required, but also there would be a need for these powers to be entrenched in the Constitution. Furthermore, there would be a need to review the provisions of both the Fifth and Sixth Schedules, some of which make the THA nothing but a "revenue collector" on behalf of the central government. Thus, one would tend to feel that such items as customs and excise, telecommunications, international transportation, licensing, marine affairs (including fisheries), postal services and the international maritime exclusive zone, all which have an international dimension, ought to be within the purview of the central government and should find their way within the Sixth Schedule.
Now item 1 of the Fifth Schedule (Finance) grants to the Assembly "the collection of revenue and the meeting of expenditure incurred in the carrying out of the functions of the Assembly." One is not sure what this, in fact, means in present circumstances as it sees the Assembly having to trek to Port-of-Spain in order to have its budget passed by the Minister of Finance prior to having its provisions included in the national budget. An Assembly which, it is envisaged, would be vested with "exclusive powers" must be given the "tools" to finance those laudable areas over which it would have "exclusive responsibility." There would therefore be a need to put in place mechanisms whereby the Assembly would be enabled to indubitably finance the "functions of the Assembly."
In this regard should the residents of Tobago be not subject to paying income tax to the central government and thereby giving to the THA a free hand to raise other revenues within Tobago itself? "An Assembly without powers to tax is no Assembly at all." It is only thus that those who may be voted into office at the Assembly would be made answerable and accountable. Finally, 2013 will mark 125 years of the union between Tobago and Trini-dad. Would it not be a hallmark were this "marriage" to be consummated before December 31, 2013? All should work assiduously towards achieving this goal.
THOUGHTS
• The relationship between the two islands has always been and, unfortunately, continues to be that of 'master\servant.'
• The vast majority of Tobago-nians will, after sober considera-tion of the issues, reject the path of complete independence.
• There exists a need for separate institutional arrangements for governance.
Errol OC Cupid
Trincity, Tacarigua