Penalty for removing coat of arms ships?

THE EDITOR: It appears as though the British authorities have had enough of the low dodges and false declarations of some TT nationals and are now making it harder for us to enter their country.

Imagine that is where we have reached and we were once governed by Britain and are still a Commonwealth country. Imagine that the torch to open the Commonwealth Games was first sent to TT in the Caribbean leg and now just like that we have been dealt a slap in the face. What a paradox, and indeed a tangled web we have weaved for ourselves.

Could this be a backfire of our decision to remove Columbus's three ships from the coat of arms and replace it with our musical instrument, the pan? Do the UK authorities see this as a further step in the direction to break all ties from what was once our closely associated "land of early governance" way back in the colonial days? If it is indeed so, then it's a very high price to pay for a trivial act of replacing one symbol with another.

In any event, allow me the opportunity to address another connected issue on this matter of UK visa imposition. The immediate comment from Foreign and Caricom Affairs Minister Dr Amery Browne is that it is a "disproportionate move by the UK government in relation to the issue at hand."

While it may be so because there is a very small group of individuals who take advantage of the visa-free travel to that country, I am compelled to ask all government ministers, "Is that the only matter within your radar that is disproportionate?"

When we talk about disproportionate distribution of resources and treatment within TT, we must also address the issues of salary hikes (one man gets an over 40 per cent wage increase while others get a meagre four per cent); property tax where different citizens with the same size houses, in the same street, have to pay varying amounts; unfair water distribution where some people get water on a 24/7 basis and others once a month; different measures of justice for the rich and privileged and another for underprivileged.

This to the extent that some never face the courts at all while others have to dig deep in their pockets to pay hefty traffic fines. Imagine you have to pay a fine of $1,000 if you make a mistake and drive up a no-entry road while another driver gets away with drunk driving because she is a police officer. That is what the ministers should look at when they want to talk about what is disproportionate and what is not.

Our lovely paradise is fast becoming a hell and we need to stop, look at what we are doing and make changes before it is too late. It is only a matter of time before other countries take a cue from the UK government and put stringent measures to keep our citizens out; even the innocent and fair-minded will be made to pay.

WKS HOSEIN

Couva