How to end Emancipation $ woes

SOMETHING is wrong when money risks obscuring the meaning of African Emancipation Day, celebrated today, August 1.

Slavery was premised on the idea that human beings could be treated as commodities.

And this country’s first prime minister, Dr Eric Williams, is famous for his thesis in Capitalism and Slavery that the end of bondage came not because of moral enlightenment. Money drove slavery, money dictated its demise. Slavery, he argued, was abolished because it was no longer profitable.

So, it is deeply disappointing to see the squabble that has erupted between politicians and stakeholders since the July 25 opening of the Lidj Yasu Omowale Emancipation Village.

“Monies,” “allocations,” “tangible returns” – that has been deeply discussed instead of “freedom,” “reparations,” and “decolonisation.”

A volley of comments, press releases and social media posts from figures like Minister of Culture Michelle Benjamin, Emancipation Support Committee executive director Zakiya Uzoma-Wadada and opposition members Dr Nyan Gadsby-Dolly and Randall Mitchell has soured the mood.

Ms Benjamin thinks the committee can do better in getting people to its village in the Queen’s Park Savannah; the committee thinks the ministry can do better; and Dr Gadsby-Dolly and Mr Mitchell – not long ago in office as culture ministers – think Ms Benjamin can do better with timing and tone.

Seemingly endless has been the partisan tit-for-tat, which has eclipsed the holiday’s profound message of empowerment. That’s a shame.

But it’s not surprising. Perennial are the complaints about funding. African Emancipation Day, while unique, is not alone.

Disbursals for Spiritual Baptist Liberation Day and Indian Arrival Day have also in the past triggered clashes. Every year, it’s the same story for Carnival.

In a country as multicultural as ours, it’s astonishing we are yet to do better.

How to fix this?

We believe the entire African Emancipation Day imbroglio – and many others – might have been avoided had there been an independent entity dedicated to funding heritage holidays.

The Heritage and Stabilisation Fund should be reformed. The stabilisation component should be separated from the heritage component, which could finance cultural matters.

This heritage fund, perhaps administered by a body like the National Trust, which, by the way, has virtually no money now, could be seeded with a one-off injection of capital that generates its own returns. We’ve done this for the CCJ, a court we don’t use. Why not for culture?

Any shortfalls in funding could be covered by a tax-deductible corporate sponsorship scheme and lottery earnings. The entity could be audited by the Auditor-General.

Once all this is arranged, Ms Benjamin could invite the committee to a launch. The PNM could attend too, if willing. All could celebrate harmoniously together, as they should be doing today.