Tobagonians urged to speak out on autonomy Bill

Economist Vanus James is advising the Tobago Forum of Political Parties to make the Tobago Bill simple and clear so Government cannot say no to self-government for the island.

Speaking during Tuesday’s sensitisation meeting on the Bill at the Works Lecture Room in Shaw Park, James said both Bill A and Bill B, (both which were creations of the Forum), and that Bill B – which was before the Parliament, has way too much information.

The session was hosted by the Forum of Political Leaders and follows a public hearing by the Joint Select Committee on the Constitution (Amendment) (Tobago Self-Government) Bill, 2018 on June 10 at the Victor E. Bruce Financial Complex. The Forum subsequently announced that it has written to the JSC seeking a meeting to discuss the omission of Tobago’s boundaries in the Bill.

James, in arguing for the Bill to be a clear and simple document on Tuesday night, said:

“What I think we ought to do in this Bill is simply recognise three things; recognise the rights of Tobagonians to establish a government of their choice here in Tobago, that is part of what the preamble recognises as the rights to establish a Tobago island government, but the Bill has too much details on that.

“Whether we should have chief secretary, Tobago People’s House, all that extra stuff, the stuff about the Tobago Service Commission, all that is going to cause contention in the Parliament that will lead to the Bill failing.

“If you want to get something passed, keep it simple and clear.”

“The other reason you have to think about the simplicity is if you put all of that detail you have in this Bill in the Constitution and five years from now you want to change, is all them little details you would be trying to change in Trinidad, in a Government with 39 Trinidadians and two Tobagonians. That is not supposed to be there to make trouble for us when we want to revise and clean up our governmental arrangement, that is Tobago people business… you shouldn’t give the Government of Trinidad and Tobago the right to define the structures of the rights of the Government of Tobago that we are comfortable with in Tobago,” James advised.

Environmentalist Kamau Akili, who supported dividing the exclusive economic zone equally between Tobago and Trinidad, as listed in the Bill, cited an instance where a Government minister was talking about the significance of deep-water drilling in what he said was an area 100 miles east of Trinidad, and its impact on economy of Trinidad and Tobago.

“It seems that mindset has not changed, 100 miles east of Trinidad, 50 miles south of Tobago; which one is it closer to Trinidad or Tobago, but the reference is Trinidad. The position of dividing the exclusive economic zone equally between Trinidad and Tobago, I support that position,” Akili said.

He disagreed, however, with the 11 miles of territorial waters that is proposed in the Bill.

“I have enquired, and I have been told that it is because of international law, we cannot divide the exclusive economic zone. That is an illogical position because the 12 miles territorial sea is part of international law also. So, if you can give us part of the territorial sea, which is part of the international law, why can’t we take half of the exclusive economic zone which is also under international law,” he said.

THA Chief Secretary Kelvin Charles, one of the members of the Forum, encouraged Akili to submit his position in writing to the JSC, and that he makes himself available to contribute at the next hearing in Tobago.

Charles added that, “The points that you have made are not inconsistent with the Forum, it is one of the reasons why we are saying as well that we would have to lobby the Opposition.

Resident Rex Henry also called for delineating of the territorial waters to be left out of the discussions.

“Why was it difficult to say in the document that, in developing a Government for Tobago, that you could leave the issue of territorial waters out of the discussion currently, which could be ticklish so that once you have attained governmental status, you could declare your territorial waters based on the issue of international law,” Henry argued.

Legal advisor for the Forum, Ingrid Melville responded:

“Tobago defining itself afterwards would not be possible in this context because Tobago will still be a part of the country of Trinidad and Tobago. So that, according to International law, Trinidad and Tobago is one unit and therefore 12 miles is measured from around Trinidad and Tobago. In addition to Trinidad and Tobago being one country, Trinidad and Tobago is what you call an archipelagic state, so that is why we are trying to get it included in the Bill,” she said.

At the JSC’s June 10 hearing in Scarborough, Camille Robinson-Regis had admitted that the definition of Tobago was removed in the Bill before Parliament.

“…we did remove the definition of Tobago, based on advice from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs in terms of International Law, so we did have to remove the definition of Tobago,” Robinson-Regis said.

At a subsequent press conference, Charles told reporters that this omission of Tobago’s boundaries was a point of contention and that

“the definition is important.” He said the draft legislation proposed what the definition should be but the Bill currently before Parliament does not address it the way the Forum would like.

Section 141A (11) in the Bill states that a Tobago Statute shall have effect in Tobago, Little Tobago, St Giles island, Marble island, Goat island, Sisters island and such area of the archipelagic waters of Trinidad and Tobago, including any islands, the seabed and the subsoil that lies within 11 miles from the low watermark of Tobago.