http://www.trinidadexpress.com/20150531/editorial/the-govts-scorched-earth-policyThe term "scorched earth policy" is one taken originally from the lexicon of military warfare and refers to a situation in which a retreating army deliberately destroys any and everything in the area from which it is retreating so as to leave nothing which might be useful to the advancing enemy.
The term was subsequently adopted in business to denote a "takeover prevention strategy in which the target company seeks to make itself less attractive to hostile bidders by selling off assets, taking on high levels of debt or initiating other activities that may damage the company if it is purchased."
It would appear that the present Government is now extending the meaning of the term to the sphere of politics and government. That is the only possible explanation for its haste in bringing before the Parliament, in the last few days before it is prorogued, a slew of bills which can only be described as highly controversial and contentious.
The Government in the last few days has introduced the Industrial Relations Amendment (IRA) Bill, the Cybercrime Bill, and the State Land Regularisation of Tenure Amendments Bill, all of which contain provisions so radically extreme that, if passed, they will be certain to ignite serious protests from various stakeholders and throw the relevant areas of national life into utter turmoil.
The Industrial Relations Amendment Bill, for example, contains such draconian provisions that it has succeeded in bringing together, in opposition to it, both labour umbrella bodies, ie Natuc and Fitun, as well as the Employers Consultative Association.
These three bodies are unquestionably the major stakeholders in industrial relations in this country and their relationship has traditionally been one of antagonism and contention. To see them now unite in opposition to this Bill is a testament to the destructive and disruptive potential of the provisions contained in it.
One provision in particular is aimed like a dagger at the heart of trade unions. This is the provision which allows an employee, who does not even have to be a member of a union, to apply to the Industrial Court for the decertification of that union.
The Cybercrime Bill is no less draconian in its own sphere. According to Alison McKenzie, executive director of the International Press Institute, the bill contains "some problematic provisions that would lead not only to the criminalisation of legitimate journalistic activity but also (to the) disregard (of) fundamental journalistic rights and principles."
One such provision is contained in Clause 21 (2 and 3) of the proposed Bill. This clause states that "anyone who damages the reputation of another person; or subjects another person to public ridicule, contempt, hatred or embarrassment, commits an offence", and faces fines of $100,000 and/or up to three years in jail. Let us not mince matters here. Under this provision every independent and reputable columnist in this country, including yours truly, could end up in jail.
The latest monstrosity to be delivered to Parliament by this Government is the State Land Regularisation of Tenure Amendments Bill. This Bill has been in the works for many years. Now suddenly, three weeks before Parliament is due to be prorogued, the Government introduces it for debate with one drastic and utterly irresponsible change. The Bill, which had previously allowed persons who began squatting on designated State lands prior to January 1, 1998 to have entitlement to the land, now changes the date to June 13, 2014.
This means that thousands more squatters will be entitled to state lands than previously intended. In other words, with that change in date, the Government proposes to give away thousands of acres of state lands to squatters. And if you think this is an exaggeration, please note that the Bill places no limit on the size of the plots which would be regularised nor does it even confine such regularisation to nationals of this country.
What is to be noted is that with all these bills the Government presented no white papers nor did they hold any consultations with key stakeholders. What becomes clear therefore is that the Government deliberately sought to bring these bills to Parliament in the most clandestine and surreptitious manner possible, a design aided and abetted by the irresponsibly foolish strategy of the PNM Opposition to boycott the Parliament.
What is also to be noted is that if these bills should pass into law then the Government, should it win re-election, has, with malice aforethought, armed itself with weapons to use against its enemies. And if it should lose the election then it has left its successor a blackened terrain on which only turmoil can grow
Poll