Jesse Ramdeo

Se­nior Re­porter

jesse.ramdeo@cnc3.co.tt

Po­lit­i­cal sci­en­tist Dr In­di­ra Ram­per­sad does not be­lieve the Gov­ern­ment’s de­ci­sion to can­cel this year’s In­de­pen­dence Day pa­rade will have any sig­nif­i­cant po­lit­i­cal fall­out.

Speak­ing in the wake of pub­lic re­ac­tions to the an­nounce­ment, Ram­per­sad said while the move has sparked dis­ap­point­ment in some quar­ters, it is un­like­ly to car­ry long-term con­se­quences for the ad­min­is­tra­tion.

“I am not dis­count­ing the sig­nif­i­cance of the pa­rade. I don’t think it is po­lit­i­cal­ly fa­tal. The Gov­ern­ment is just four months in and they have a lot of time to build po­lit­i­cal cap­i­tal, po­lit­i­cal clout and that mat­ters most in elec­tions. What is com­ing next is a lo­cal gov­ern­ment elec­tion. I re­al­ly don’t think the can­cel­la­tion of the mil­i­tary pa­rade is go­ing to sig­nif­i­cant­ly  af­fect the out­come of the lo­cal gov­ern­ment elec­tion.”

Cit­ing se­cu­ri­ty con­cerns dur­ing the on­go­ing State of Emer­gency, the Gov­ern­ment an­nounced that this year’s In­de­pen­dence Day Pa­rade, fire­works and of­fi­cial func­tions will be re­placed with a Na­tion­al Day of Prayer and Re­flec­tion on Au­gust 31.

The event, in­tend­ed to unite cit­i­zens of all faiths and back­grounds, will fo­cus on seek­ing guid­ance and strength dur­ing what the Gov­ern­ment de­scribed as “a chal­leng­ing time,” while en­cour­ag­ing na­tion­al re­flec­tion on the coun­try’s progress and fu­ture, a state­ment from the Min­istry of Home­land Se­cu­ri­ty said.

Dur­ing an in­ter­view on CNC3’s The Morn­ing Brew yes­ter­day, Ram­per­sad fur­ther ar­gued that vot­ers tend to be in­flu­enced more by is­sues of gov­er­nance, ser­vice de­liv­ery, and the cost of liv­ing than by sym­bol­ic events. 

“We al­so have a nine-day won­der in this coun­try. This is gen­er­at­ing de­bate, but I am not sure to what ex­tent the pop­u­la­tion is so en­gaged. I be­lieve there are oth­er is­sues con­cern­ing the pop­u­la­tion right now- one is mon­ey.”

The po­lit­i­cal sci­en­tist al­so cau­tioned against mis­rep­re­sent­ing the Gov­ern­ment’s po­si­tion.

“I don’t think the rea­son is be­cause they are un­pa­tri­ot­ic. I think we are twist­ing the di­a­logue some­what, the nar­ra­tive, and they pre­ferred two rea­sons, and I think these are two sol­id rea­sons. Now there is ev­i­dence sur­fac­ing of threats to Gov­ern­ment min­is­ters’ lives, and the oth­er is the cost, and this is the one I am most in favour of. The cost of these events and whether they are re­al­ly worth it.”

And, econ­o­mist Prof Roger Ho­sein not­ed that giv­en the coun­try’s cur­rent eco­nom­ic stand­ing, he was in sup­port of cost-sav­ing mea­sures.

“As far as I am con­cerned, when I look at the dif­fer­ence be­tween the re­serves and ex­ter­nal debt be­ing about a mi­nus one bil­lion US dol­lars, that to me sounds all kinds of warn­ing bells, and so I don’t have any is­sue with the fact that the Gov­ern­ment is try­ing to save.” 

He, how­ev­er, warned that mon­ey saved should not be bad­ly spent else­where. 

Mean­while, Joseph Toney, for­mer min­is­ter of na­tion­al se­cu­ri­ty, has voiced his sup­port for the Gov­ern­ment’s de­ci­sion to can­cel this year’s In­de­pen­dence Day pa­rade and ban the as­so­ci­at­ed fire­works.

“Giv­en the ad­vice pro­vid­ed to en­sure the safe­ty and se­cu­ri­ty of the top of­fi­cials of the var­i­ous arms of the State, I sup­port the can­cel­la­tion,” Toney wrote. “More­over, the can­cel­la­tion saves mon­ey, which, though small, can be used for more use­ful pur­pos­es in our coun­try.”

Toney, who has held posts in the Na­tion­al Al­liance for Re­con­struc­tion, Con­gress of the Peo­ple and now the UNC, crit­i­cised com­men­ta­tors who ques­tioned the Gov­ern­ment’s move.

“A Gov­ern­ment has lit­tle choice when pre­sent­ed with se­cu­ri­ty ad­vice. The on­ly re­spon­si­ble course is to ac­cept it if they are se­ri­ous about the safe­ty and well-be­ing of all cit­i­zens, par­tic­u­lar­ly the top of­fi­cials of the var­i­ous arms of the State,” he said.

He al­so sug­gest­ed re­view­ing the prac­tice of hold­ing the pa­rade ex­clu­sive­ly in Port-of-Spain. “Why not ro­tate the event to oth­er re­gions each year, giv­ing cit­i­zens across the coun­try, es­pe­cial­ly chil­dren, a chance to par­tic­i­pate?”