"New politics is more than just a catchphrase," states the manifesto of the Congress of the People. Among other objectives, the party took responsibility for implementing "the concept of transparency and accountability in government." It was to be the conscience of the People's Partnership; the voice that would safeguard the public interest. But what is this "new politics" that the COP preached so loftily about if it amounts to no more than polite acquiescence on principle?
The COP, a junior partner in the ruling coalition, is now begging Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar to take note of the fact that it believes that Jack Warner, a man it says with many questions to answer, should not be in the Cabinet. Having sold itself to the electorate on that basis and now copping out of taking bold and decisive action to bring about that new politics, the party's credibility has been seriously compromised in the eyes of the supporters who genuinely felt it could offer a new, third way in local politics.
It was clear from the start that the motion of COP executive member Vernon De Lima-to have the party leave the Government if its call for Mr Warner to be removed were ignored-had little chance of being accepted. Party leader Prakash Ramadhar had, in the gentlest manner possible, asked Mr Warner please to leave office.
If not, said Mr Ramadhar, "the question of whether he should be removed as Minister is in the hands of the political leader and Prime Minister and not the COP"-thus quietly absolving himself and party of any responsibility in the matter. But if the COP, as part of the Government, is not prepared to take a stand that could force fundamental change to the quality of governance being given to the nation, and is prepared only to engage in useless entreaties, then its principles are like straws in the wind and its espousal of new politics has little or no validity.
Moreover, this is not the first time that the COP has failed those who expected it to take the moral high ground in politics. The last time was when it subsided quietly over the San Fernando Mayor position. On that matter it waited quietly until the Prime Minister made a Cabinet reshuffle and utilised that opportunity to accommodate the party.
The lasting impression the COP leaves with the national community is that of a group of people who are willing to stay in office notwithstanding the damage to their party's credibility. In this regard, the COP is showing itself no different from the two major hegemonic parties and their politics that the COP has so roundly condemned.
Interestingly, before the Parliament was convened yesterday to repeal Section 34 of the Indictable Proceedings Act-which appeared to have no other intention of clearing the way for the release of UNC friends and financiers-chairman of the COP Joseph Toney seemed to have regained his voice.
He charged that the proclamation of Section 34 amounted to a breach of the undertaking given by the Government to Parliament that no part of the overall act would be made effective until and unless the infrastructure to support the legislation had been implemented.
This was "the most grievous contempt of the Parliament itself," states the release of the COP chairman. It "compromises the entire purpose of the act, which was to ensure swift justice as part of measures to improve the justice system and contribute to the fight against the horrendous crime situation affecting our society."
What will the COP do now about continuing to be in a government that has committed what its chairman has called a serious breach of parliamentary principle and practice? Will this increasingly enfeebled junior partner do anything at all?