This year is the 100th anniversary of the first national elections in T&T. Coincidentally, it is also an election year. Most people in T&T do not even know we had national elections before 1956, but we did, in 1925, 1933, 1938, 1946, and 1950.
One of the many aspects of our history that we have been miseducated about is our political history. The PNM has basically erased the history of politics before 1956. This is wrong and extremely distorting. In fact, the foundations of our politics were laid from 1925 to 1956. In contrast, the founding of the PNM in 1956 by Eric Williams was explicitly against the foundations of T&T’s politics, to bring in a totally different vision.
From 1925 to 1956, politics were dominated by independents and parties that were based in very specific regions and ideologies. They were very exciting, with a number of prominent figures like Capt Arthur Cipriani, Adrian Cola Rienzi, CC Abidh, Sarran Teelucksingh, James Biggart, FEM Hosein, Timothy Roodal, Charles Henry Pierre, and Thomas Kelshall vying for seats where there would regularly be five, six, or even sometimes as many as 12 prominent candidates.
These included well-known calypsonians, businessmen, trade unionists, lawyers, and religious and community leaders—a variety that disappeared from the later era of post-PNM politics.
Contrary to PNM propaganda, although independents played a significant role, political parties did exist during this period, including the Socialist Party, the British Empire Citizens and Workers’ Home Rule Party, the Trinidad Labour Party, the People’s Democratic Party, the Independent Socialist Party, the Independent Labour Party, the Unionist Party, the United Front, West Indian National Party, Trades Union Council, Party of Political Progress Groups, Caribbean Socialist Party, the Butler Party, and others.
It was a very different political climate, with a great deal of diversity and participation. Indeed, our first ministerial government in 1950 was made up of Albert Gomes, Ajodhasingh, Victor Bryan, Norman Tang, and Roy Joseph—Trinidadians of Portuguese, Hindu, African, Chinese, and Syrian descent, from five different political parties.
They accomplished very much in their short tenure—including overseeing the construction of all the Hindu and Muslim schools up to that time, repealing the ban on the Shouter Baptists, establishing the Industrial Development Company, the Licensing Office, and much more—but they were effectively and spitefully erased from our history by Eric Williams. Indeed, our politics were more accountable and democratic then, ironically.
For instance, each member of the Executive Council (the precursor to Cabinet) was elected by the Legislature, not simply chosen by the head of government. Furthermore, unlike today, any member of the Executive could also be removed by the Legislature via a secret ballot. Eric Williams was utterly opposed to this system. He wanted to impose politics dominated by large national parties and “discipline”, as opposed to what he considered “anarchy” and “individualism”.
He wanted Government centralised on the Prime Minister and to reduce the diversity and variety in politics, in favour of a single, national vision. A long and bitter struggle emerged to transform the politics, and in 1962 only two parties went into independence: the PNM and DLP.
Indeed, for 33 years, the PNM was the only party that stood the test of time. All the other opposition parties faded away: the DLP, DAC, ONR, ULF, Tapia, and NAR. Only the UNC emerged as a stable political alternative to the PNM, being established in 1989. However, unlike the PNM, the UNC largely draws on T&T’s foundational political culture of diversity and variety. Recognising plurality and diversity has always been fundamental to the UNC’s politics.
In addition, the long politics of coalition, from the ACDC-DLP in 1971, ULF in 1976, the National Alliance of 1981, the NAR of 1986, the People’s Partnership of 2010, and the repeated calls for Proportional Representation—what Eric Williams perceptively called a “dagger aimed at the heart of the PNM”—are very much tied to this fundamental Trinidadian and Tobagonian culture of diversity in the political sphere, opposed to the PNM political culture of singular domination.
This long history is vital for understanding some of the major dynamics of our politics today. Questions about centralisation or decentralisation, about a unitary state or federal state, about a single national culture or a plural culture, about single parties or coalitions, about the power of the State vs the civil rights of the people, about the “port” vs the “plantation”—these are constantly recurring themes throughout our entire political history, with the pendulum swinging from one way to the other over time.
While I have objectively analysed this history for many years, I have eventually come to take a side in these century-long, continuously relevant political debates. This year, in our 100th anniversary of national elections, T&T stands at a crossroads, and we are all called to make a choice. I have faith that we will choose wisely and choose well.
This commentary was submitted to Guardian Media by Kirk Meighoo (PhD (Hull), MSc (UWI), BA (Tor) in his capacity as the Public Relations Officer of the United National Congress.
