Yes, a change in strategy, PM

THE EDITOR: A cursory reading of newspaper reports revealed that the address by the Prime Minister at the opening of the St Clair Police Station on July 8 touched many emotional chords and evoked several diverse responses.

Dr Rowley began by acknowledging that criminal behaviour is a major social issue. While stating that “poor parenting” was a major contributor, he also concluded that a military-style approach was not the solution since such intervention would not lead to correction or guidance.One newspaper took issue with the “poor parenting” reference. Its Sunday editorial posited that “today’s problems of school violence and youth criminality have their roots in the policies and strategies adopted by governments going back about 50 years.” It questioned further the impact of the surrounding environment and financial expenditure on behaviour patterns.

One writer, referring to recent protests by residents of East Port of Spain or East Dry River (EDR) following questionable killings by the police, surmises that “this situation is not a case of poor parenting; it is a working-out of the cockroach philosophy.” He argues that “every successive government has mamaguyed the Laventille people. They are lectured and despised.”

He went on to detail significant contributions of Laventillians including their demonstrated loyalty to the PNM while not equally benefitting from the oil and gas boom. He added a debt is owed to EDR residents and non-payment/neglect will only result in continued protests and violent actions.

Several other commentators expressed support for these views.

Finally, perhaps the strongest and most controversial contribution came from an article headlined “Poor parenting or PNM abandonment?” What I find most poignant is the expression “you can’t run from what you own.”

The writer opines that “the problem with the PNM is that it feels no ownership for Laventille or East Dry River.” He continues, “The PNM turn their backs, heaping scorn on the people there, like calling them poor parents.” And asks, “But is the answer poor parenting, or is it not PNM neglect and abandonment?”

He laments the fall and degradation of Laventille when compared to other more developed communities and suggests that the options are good schools or the Remand Yard, but not the current type of schools since many are under academic watch.

He identifies the need for a “Laventille renaissance, driven by commerce.” He also proposes an urban renewal project with respect to housing from Port of Spain to Cocorite and warns that the PNM should stop taking the corridor vote for granted.

The million-dollar question is: are these writers correct? Has the “corridor west” been neglected by the political party they have supported for decades?

To me, this question viewed through different lens can provide different answers. While Laventille and EDR appear underdeveloped, past PNM administrations addressed the basic needs of the corridor by providing jobs on the port, the public sector, Special Works, etc. Subsidised housing was provided throughout, eg Diego Martin, Barataria, Mt Hope, Maloney, Bon Air, Malabar and La Horquetta, to which Laventille and EDR residents were given access.

Given the limited availability of flat land in Laventille and the population density, high-rise residential complexes were constructed in EDR. Modern technological/vocational schools were established in Morvant, Laventille and Beetham which have not yielded the expected results.

Some commentators believe the lack of foster parenting for at-risk children was mainly responsible for this non- achievement. Therefore, a shift in strategy may be the answer. While I applaud the Government’s announcement that it intends to pump greater financial resources into tackling social issues, I am excited by the proposal of a Laventille renaissance.

I think the PM should give serious consideration to this recommendation.

D THOMAS

East Dry River