Coating T&T's Arms Issues

by Sheldon Peter Waithe

It’s about time that the Government got serious about the abysmal arms issue in T&T, displaying a willingness to put talk into action with a seldom seen pace and passion, to eradicate the existing problem plaguing the nation. Proof, that an issue can be recognised and that regardless of its tradition, its history and significance to the country, there is the bold courage to tackle it head-on.

Unfortunately for the population, in this instance the ‘arms’ being referred to are the Coat of Arms, not the guns and bullets—pistols, semi-automatic, automatic, armour piercing; take your pick, we have as much variety as your fully stocked supermarket shelf laden with imported goods—that erode our population daily.

But timing is everything and the heightened patriotic season that is the period between Independence Day and Republic Day, offers the perfect opportunity to waylay into those three offending Spanish ships (together with the less-mentioned British knight’s helmet), while our own Trinbagonian ships fail to intercept the arms entering the country.

Is it the politics of distraction or misplaced priorities? A little of both, with a small dose of delusion, lest we forget that crime is, arm, under control.

That being the case, it is the perfect time to address those pesky relics from colonialism such as those three ships. Maybe changing thehand-me-down British-influenced police uniforms will be next on the agenda. Oops, we tried that already …

While the chest-beating patriotism of the Coat of Arms issue segues perfectly into the wake of Independence Day champagne glasses being raised in celebration as the murder toll marches onwards to 450, 500 and beyond, while the entirely predictable contagion of murders in Tobago continues unabated, we continue to coat the arms issue with distraction.

Despite a new high-profile appointment, the same drivel is being rolled out by the national security entities to citizens. Nonsense such as the Government knows the population’s trauma over violent crime, further highlights how out of touch the national security apparatus are presently, which means that there is worse to come.

They keep using the keywords such as ‘intelligence-driven’, yet their statements and refusal to tackle issues at the source, offer evidence of their distinct lack of intelligence and their attempts to insult ours.

No citizen ever looked at the present Coat of Arms and got traumatised, but the arms in this land traumatise people every single day.

They continually coat the arms issue when no mass importer of guns is arrested, when port scanners are underutilised or shunned, or when there is no attempt to target the mechanics behind gun importation and distribution.

Yet we are asked to swallow the belief that there are proper initiatives in place to reduce crime.

Hollow words cannot fill a stomach hungry for meaningful action.

No targets are being set—at least publicly—for the reduction of murders and by extension, the arrest and eradication of the gangs that make up the 55 per cent of the murders taking place (Ministry of National Security figures). Vague statements state that effective proposals are being implemented, without timelines, without details on responsibilities and jurisdiction, but they are supposed to provide assurance.

Within days of announcing the intention to change the design of the national Coat of Arms, the reasoning behind the decision was provided, as were details on further reading material to support said decision, an artist was chosen, while some details of a phased implementation were also given. You want assurance of a process, there’s your assurance (and proof of priorities).

Never mind that there is the ambiguity of continually leaning on elements of the same archaic governance infrastructure from our colonial past, that is reflected in those three ships, despite the continued assurances of constitutional reform.

Are we to expect complaints of ‘jacka**ness’ that no matter what a government tries to do to improve the nation, it is met with criticism? Again, timing is everything. A nation that is embroiled in the daily erosion of a civilised existence does not want the distraction of a Coat of Arms matter.

But the fact that it is given such priority is telling. As is the fact that this is largely a dictatorial decision, not made because of some wave of national fervour and outcry— as there is with crime—or because there was wide-ranging consultancy with the population, or dare we hope, the practice of a referendum.

Such a deed as changing the national Coat of Arms should be at the tail end of a national restructuring exercise, as the culmination of a drastic turnaround in the manner in which we govern ourselves, earn our revenue, treat our citizenry, practice smart spending, create accountability and most important of all, live within the right to a secure environment. Then, you can have the crowning moment of changing the Coat of Arms as the ultimate symbolism to instil national pride for a T&T that stopped the rot and brought its country back under some semblance of control.

In the haste to distract, they have got it the wrong way around. Or maybe they haven’t, after all, you’ve just read close to 900 words on the subject matter, while multiple murders will occur this week and we will once again be subjected to further attempts to coat the arms issue in T&T and convince us of being in control, while we wave our own arms in despair.

Sheldon Waithe is the Creative Director at Communique Media Services Ltd website: communiquett.com