the PRESENT trade dispute between Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago cannot be allowed to morph into a tit for tat for these two Caribbean Community (CARICOM) partners.
Grant you, there have been squabbles before in which Trinidad and Tobago has been pushed on the defensive, and where as well it has gone on the offensive – even to the extent of engaging the original jurisdiction of the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) in the context of “disputes settlements” under the Revised CARICOM Treaty.
In the present Barbados-Trinidad case made public last week, after months of frustration for the Pine Hill Dairy (PHD), a subsidiary of Banks Holdings Limited, the government in Port of Spain lost no time saying “sorry”, via the media, for the blocking of the company’s milk and juice products, and promising an urgent resolution.
However, the quick “sorry” note from then Minister of Trade Stephen Cadiz failed to placate officials of the BHL, and equally the Barbados Manufacturers’ Association (BMA). For them the minister’s apology was insufficient to correct the unjustified action and long delay in resolving the problem.
Even as the trade problem was being reported in the media in Barbados and Trinidad and Tobago, Mr Cadiz was to learn of his new portfolio as Minister of Tourism in a substantially restructured cabinet of Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
Mr Cadiz has been quite forthcoming in identifying his government’s Food And Drugs Division as a source for the problem that resulted in the blocking of milk and juices exported by the PHD.
Questions of immediate relevance would include naturally how long the problem was allowed to fester without necessary corrective measures by Trinidad authorities; further, to what extent Banks Holdings Ltd, or its subsidiary the PHD, moved to process the relevant objections/complaints, in accordance with the spirit and letter of the disputes settlement procedures of Chapter 9 of the Revised CARICOM Treaty.
On the surface, the PHD’s grievance has struck a positive response from the government of Trinidad.
It may, therefore, be better to vigorously pursue realistic initiatives for a resolution, within the framework of the disputes settlement provisions of the CARICOM Treaty, avoid the tit for tat that has proven unproductive in previous cases involving other Community trading partners.
The truth is all member states need CARICOM.