What fate for new police vehicles?

THE EDITOR: The proposed acquisition of 2,000 vehicles for the police service has echoed through the halls of government and the streets of TT.

On the surface, this initiative appears to be a step in the right direction – a move aimed at revitalising our beleaguered law enforcement capabilities. However, as we delve deeper, questions arise that merit urgent attention. These inquiries are not merely procedural; they strike at the heart of accountability, effective governance and, ultimately, public safety.

First and foremost, what measures are in place to prevent the negligence and mistreatment of these new vehicles? The tragic reality is that previous purchases have often ended up not as tools for enforcement, but rather as metal carcasses, languishing in graveyards like the one in Wallerfield. This raises serious concerns about the foreseeable future of these 2,000 vehicles. Will they all face the same fate shortly after distribution?

Moreover, we must consider the apparent lack of clarity on maintenance protocols. Without a robust plan for both immediate and long-term maintenance, these vehicles are poised to follow the same downward trajectory as their predecessors. What was the true purpose of establishing VMCOTT? It is crucial for the Government to specify the responsibilities and systems that will ensure periodic checks, preventative maintenance, KPI (key performance indicator) for downtime and swift repairs.

Our law enforcement officers deserve reliable transportation but also consequential action for negligence; our citizens deserve the assurance that they are protected by a fully operational police force.

Additionally, the process surrounding the tendering of these vehicles warrants scrutiny. When will the open tendering process commence? Ensuring transparency during this phase is essential to quell any suspicions of favouritism or corruption. Citizens must be assured that the procurement process is fair and competitive.

Furthermore, we need clarity on the availability of foreign exchange to the bidders. Gaining timely access to forex could significantly impact the quality and functionality of the vehicles procured.

Let us not forget the historical context in which we find ourselves. The lament that “we have no vehicles to attend to crimes and surveillance” has become a familiar chorus, one that resonates with frustration and disbelief.

The millions spent on vehicles in the past have often gone unaccounted for, underscoring a pattern of inefficiency and wastefulness that cannot be ignored. Citizens must remain vigilant and question the efficacy of these expenditures.

As we consider this recent initiative, it is imperative for citizens to be discerning. We must not be misled by political rhetoric or reassurances that lack substantive backing. The call for enhanced policing should not merely become another opportunity for political promises that fade into hollow statements. Accountability must be at the forefront of this endeavour.

In conclusion, the proposed purchase of 2,000 vehicles presents an opportunity for transformation within the police service. However, without a strong foundation built on accountability, proper maintenance, transparent tendering processes, and real action to address historical shortcomings, we risk repeating the mistakes of the past.

The citizens deserve better than mere political rhetoric; they deserve real, effective change in their policing infrastructure. It is time for all stakeholders to rise to the occasion and ensure that realities match the promises made.

ELIJAH MOTIERAM

via e-mail