Who is popular today?

RUDY CHATO PAUL, SR

I READ where Minister of National Security Fitzgerald Hinds is seeking to push through a bill dealing with “rooting out corrupt officers” from several institutions by relying on biometrics and polygraphs.
For the record, I have no problem with rooting out corruption, wherever it may exist. However, after having studied our society for the last 27 years, since my involuntary repatriation, as a sociologist, I am of the view that the root of the all corruption in this land can be found among politicians. This is not denying that corruption exists elsewhere, namely in the police, the coast guard, regiment et al.
The issues here (they are not problems) are as multifaceted as the issues themselves. One of the many challenges is in the mere definition of “a problem.” Problems affect a few people. Issues, on the other hand, affect a wide segment of society. So, crime, traffic, flooding, healthcare, water, etc are not problems; they are issues.
While this definition may seem trivial, when the rest of the world hear “problems” they think of isolated cases where a few people are affected. This is as misleading as calling a table a chair. While one can indeed sit on the table, that does not make it a chair. But back to the corruption.
“Corruption” has been synonymous with TT from as far back as I can recall, much like the water issue. We have a reputation that precedes us, whereas we are known in other jurisdictions as “Trickydadians.” Existing side by side with corruption, however, is its co-defendant, “incompetence.”
I am of the view that corruption gets blamed in too many instances when it was merely incompetence at work. Given a choice even I would prefer to be called corrupt than incompetent. Being corrupt introduces a level of intent, whereas with incompetence you are on your own.
The incompetence can be found in the selection or the hiring process. State institutions, like the TTPS, regiment, WASA, TSTT, et al, have a history of “hiring” particular individuals, namely friends and family members.
A careful analysis of any of these institutions reads like a family business. Father, brother, sister, brother-in-law, nephew…And then there are “political recommendations” made for those who were “street captains,” etc during an election. Many of these individuals find themselves on state boards, where they can now “eat a food.” And they remain clueless. That, in part, explains the massive, collective incompetence.
Seems like Hinds just pulled a Columbus and “discovered” the concept of biometrics, which has been around for decades. For the record, I have no issue with seeking out integrity in the public sector, or private sector for that matter. But from as far back as I can recall, I heard that “fish rots from the head.” To be putting the burden of testing for integrity on members of the various law enforcement agencies, while ignoring elected and selected politicians, is putting the cart before the horse.
I am aware of a study years ago which said that TT has/had the highest level of mistrust among the citizens. We simply do not trust anyone, especially those occupying offices at the highest rungs of the societal ladder; starting with the politicians, and the legal fraternity. The level of mistrust for those holding political office way surpasses that for members of the TTPS, the Coast Guard, PCA, et al. To pretend otherwise is to be disingenuous at best.
Hinds has no credibility in calling for anything, least of all issues of integrity. He could not even make the team when Patrick Manning lowered the bar to a mere “level head and common sense.” He reveals his incompetence each time he speaks, and he has no business in public life.
The post Putting cart before horse appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.