Were it not a tragedy of unimaginable proportions, the performance of former PP government minister Verna St Rose-Greaves in the House of Representatives over the brutal killing of six-year-old Keyana Cumberbatch could be described as one of the greatest pieces of melodrama the House has ever witnessed.
Now, please don't get me wrong and rush to get hold of my jugular. St Rose-Greaves, like the rest of the national community, was and is still mourning and in shock over the gruesome manner in which the life of this innocent child was taken by a beast clearly masquerading as a human being.Also like the rest of us, St Rose-Greaves is entitled to be emotionally moved by yet another incident in which one of the nation's youngsters was brutally savaged, presumably by someone whom she entrusted with her life.
But while the goodly lady, no doubt in a fit of uncontrollable, emotional rage, chose to express her feelings by disrupting the proceedings of the Lower House, was she right in choosing to do it the way she did?I beg to differ from those who believe she was right to perhaps shake the collective conscience of the parliamentarians towards the sad plight of a growing number of children who are being fatally and otherwise severely injured by their parents and/or guardians.
I am sure St Rose-Greaves is aware of the maxim which says it is not what you do but how you do it and as a former member of the Parliament she must be aware of the sanctity of the institution, and getting up and shouting to all and sundry is definitely not a sign of respect for the august chamber.According to the account given by the Guardian's Yvonne Baboolal, St Rose-Greaves attempted to enter the Parliament barefooted and was stopped by a police officer. Since when is anyone allowed to enter Parliament shoeless?
http://www.guardian.co.tt/digital/new-members