On what the axe falls

Nov 13, 2009 Editorial

The demolition derby by the Ministry of Works, under its indefatigable leader Mr. Robeson Benn, continues apace and shows no sign of letting up. From Charity to Crabwood Creek (and soon possibly from the Pakaraima Mountains to the New River Triangle) the indomitable men from “Works” are letting no doubt remain as to the identity of the “our” in the patriotic song “This land is our land”. It is the government’s land.
There was a time, of course, when the “Ministry of Works” meant just what it says – the arm of the government that put up public “works” or structures that catered to the public good. Construction of wharves, sea walls, roads, stellings, etc., were all the responsibility of this crucial Ministry. Then in the 1990’s came the reforms of the neo-liberal, IMF/World Bank’s “Washington Consensus” which mandated flatly that construction was not the role of governments. “Works” were to be farmed out to private contractors – and the competition that was to govern the workings of the new class of contractors would guarantee that the “free market” created would be most efficient. Savings would overflow from the coffers of the treasury.
So what was this Ministry to do? The workforce dwindled and not so coincidentally, did the institutional memory on our public works. So we have a koker constructed on a bend created in a canal, because the contractor could not be bothered to excavate a buried punt to ensure a direct flow of water through the koker and into the ocean. Free-market profits and all that.
So what if the basic principle demanded that the rush of water, guaranteed by the direct canal to the koker, would help to clear the outfall? So what if the bend in the canal situated just before the koker would encourage siltation and demand more frequent cleanings? We could go on with floating wharves and so on but we are sure that every reader can find his/her own blatant example of contractors “learning on the job” when the remaining Ministry of Works employees lolled around twiddling their thumbs.
So the question became, what was the Minister to do while his charges worked on their thumb-twiddling techniques? A cynic may suggest that he could also join in the thumb-twiddling.
And while in the 17 years of this administration some Ministers of Works might have joined his charges – the invention of hand-held video games added a white collar cachet to thumb-twiddling – Mr Robeson Benn is obviously cut from a different cloth.
The son of a dyed-in-the-wool communist, named after another, Robeson was not one to just sit around. At some point he had an epiphany: given the responsibility for “Works”, if he could build them, why not break them? And we arrive at the decision to demolish “obstructions” on government reserves.
Now we are not suggesting that citizens ought to be willy-nilly breaking the law of the land. But in point of fact, we have a very intricate local government structure – regional, neighbourhood, village/municipal etc – that is supposed to regulate constructions within their bailiwick. In most instances where structures have been demolished by Mr. Benn’s motley crew, local permission was obtained. Have the authorities no responsibility for leading the citizen-lambs to the slaughter of Mr. Benn’s axe? Then again, contrary to the protestations of the frenetic Minister (doth he protesteth too much?) there are the glaring “sacred cows” in every district. This paper has taken time to point out a few and we invite readers to advise us of others that we know are out there.
Since the Minister commendably does not want to collect a paycheck for doing nothing, we suggest that maybe he can deploy his workforce to clear our reserves of the bushes and assorted wrecks of cars, minibuses and trucks etc., that present a clear and present hazard to every user of our roads.
Our President has just reminded us that we are no longer a down-and-out HIPC country – why tear down decorative structures that improve our image and leave eyesores in place that make us look so third world?