Eliz­a­beth Gon­za­les

PDP leader Wat­son Duke’s an­nounce­ment that he will sup­port the To­ba­go Peo­ple’s Par­ty (TPP) for the up­com­ing THA elec­tions has drawn mixed re­ac­tions in the Rox­bor­ough/Ar­gyle dis­trict he rep­re­sents. Most of the res­i­dents there wel­comed the de­ci­sion, while oth­ers be­lieve Duke tar­nished his own cred­i­bil­i­ty long be­fore re­turn­ing to Far­ley Au­gus­tine’s cor­ner.

Guardian Me­dia spoke to sev­er­al res­i­dents in Duke’s dis­trict yes­ter­day, one day af­ter his very pub­lic en­dorse­ment of TPP leader Far­ley Au­gus­tine. While the ma­jor­i­ty wel­comed the de­ci­sion, a small­er group ques­tioned his sin­cer­i­ty and po­lit­i­cal tim­ing.

Sab­ri­na, a Rox­bor­ough res­i­dent, de­scribed the shift as dis­ap­point­ing.

“I think Wat­son is just mak­ing a mock­ery of him­self, sor­ry to say,” she said.

De­spite this, she said she still in­tends to give Au­gus­tine an­oth­er chance.

“Far­ley, up­lift Rox­bor­ough, please and thank you.”

Pen­sion­er Ken­rick An­drews al­so crit­i­cised Duke’s re­ver­sal, say­ing it hurt his rep­u­ta­tion among sup­port­ers. An­drews said he once re­spect­ed Duke but be­lieves the con­stant shifts and pub­lic dis­agree­ments have erod­ed trust. “I used to re­spect Wat­son, but this is sui­cide. I think that is the end of Wat­son,” he said. He added that many peo­ple now view Duke as “un­trust­wor­thy.”

Duke start­ed the Pro­gres­sive De­mo­c­ra­t­ic Pa­tri­ots in 2015. Dur­ing his an­nounce­ment on Mon­day, he shied away from pro­nounc­ing on the fu­ture of his par­ty and whether he would be re­con­test­ing his seat.

But most res­i­dents sup­port­ed Duke’s en­dorse­ment of Au­gus­tine, say­ing the po­lit­i­cal di­vide be­tween the two men nev­er served To­ba­go well.

Among them was El­lis Clark, who said the re­newed re­la­tion­ship is a pos­i­tive step. “The best thing they ever do is get back to­geth­er again. Wat­son should have al­ways been sup­port­ing Far­ley.” He said the split weak­ened the PDP and cre­at­ed in­sta­bil­i­ty in the dis­trict.

An­oth­er res­i­dent, Karen Archer, agreed that Duke played a role in the po­lit­i­cal ten­sion.

“He should have done that all the time. He make a fool of him­self,” she said. How­ev­er, she be­lieves his re­turn was un­avoid­able. “Now he re­alise he had no oth­er choice but to give Far­ley his sup­port.”

Some res­i­dents viewed the en­dorse­ment strict­ly through a po­lit­i­cal lens rather than a per­son­al one. John Beck­les said uni­ty is the on­ly way to strength­en the an­ti-Peo­ple’s Na­tion­al Move­ment vote. “Well, that’s a good move. We want con­trol of the place. We want PNM out of here. Every­body go­ing yel­low and black,” he said. Beck­les be­lieves the en­dorse­ment helps pre­vent an­oth­er split in sup­port and votes.

Tony Marc­hand al­so wel­comed Duke’s move to re­pair the re­la­tion­ship with Au­gus­tine, say­ing it im­proves the TPP’s chances. “He was sup­posed to do that long time. As long as he’s with us, we will pros­per plen­ty bet­ter,” Marc­hand said. He hoped Duke and Au­gus­tine would work to­geth­er to “build this To­ba­go, sweet To­ba­go nice.”

For Carl Si­mon, Duke’s en­dorse­ment re­flects hu­mil­i­ty and growth. “It’s one of the best moves. We all make mis­takes. Once you hum­ble enough to re­alise you make a mis­take, you are wel­come back,” he said. Si­mon said many sup­port­ers will ac­cept Duke once he re­mains con­sis­tent.

An­oth­er res­i­dent, who did not wish to give his name, said the de­ci­sion is about po­lit­i­cal sur­vival. “That is a good move be­cause we want con­trol of the place,” he said. “We have no choice again, we don’t want PNM back in To­ba­go.”

The To­ba­go House of As­sem­bly elec­tions are a month away on Jan­u­ary 12, 2026. Duke has in­di­cat­ed his in­ten­tion to cam­paign on be­half of the TPP, but there is no word just yet on when that would be­gin.