WHO WILL BENEFIT: Executives, Managers, Supervisors, Contractors, Commercial and Business Sector Representatives, Sport and Facility Management, Human Resource, Industrial Relations, Project Management, Administrative and Customer Service Personnel. As well as Attorneys, Principals, Teachers, Social Workers, Guidance Counsellors, Life Skills Coaches, EAP providers, Community & Union Leaders, Public Sector Workers, Law Enforcement Personnel and anyone involved in resolving disputes.

Start Time: 08:00
Date: 2011-03-01
End Time: 17:00

Originally established by the 1989 G-7 Summit in Paris, the FATF is an independent, inter-governmental body that develops and promotes policies to protect the global financial system against Money Laundering (ML) and Terrorist Financing (TF). Recommendations issued by FATF define criminal justice and regulatory measures that should be implemented to counter ML/TF. The FATF recommendations are recognised as the global Anti-Money Laundering (AML) and Counter-Terrorist Financing (CTF) standard.

Since 2007, the FATF’s International Co-operation Review Group (ICRG) has been espoused as the body responsible for analyzing high-risk jurisdictions and recommending specific action to address the ML/TF risks emanating from these jurisdictions. On the basis of the results of the ICRG review, jurisdictions may be publicly identified in one of two FATF public documents that are issued three times a year.

In the second of these two public documents, FATF identifies jurisdictions which have strategic AML/CTF deficiencies for which they have developed an action plan with the FATF. In February 2010, Trinidad and Tobago was one of the countries named as having made a high-level political commitment to work with the FATF and CFATF to address its strategic AML/CTF deficiencies.

As of October 2011, FATF acknowledged the efforts made by Trinidad & Tobago to improve its AML/CTF regime noting however, that certain strategic AML/CTF deficiencies remain. Specifically, (1) implementing adequate procedures to identify and freeze terrorist assets without delay (Special Recommendation III); and (2) establishing a fully operational and effectively functioning Financial Intelligence Unit, inclusive of supervisory powers (Recommendation 26).

Implications for Trinidad & Tobago

Several organizations have spoken out on the implications for Trinidad and Tobago, among them the Association of Compliance Professionals of Trinidad and Tobago (ACPTT). This is a legally authorized association in Trinidad and Tobago which deals with the development of compliance and the compliance professional in this country.  They have expressed their concerns that Money Laundering and Terrorist Financing are global challenges that need to be addressed collectively by the international community and as such, the strength of global AML/CFT measures depends on the strength of its weakest link. To the extent that a country is perceived as a haven for ML/TF, it is likely to attract further criminal activity. This perception, coupled with French President Nicolas Sarkozy’s naming of Trinidad and Tobago as one of 11 countries that fail to meet transparency standards and being a tax haven at last year’s G20 Summit, can potentially impact the perception of our country held by the international community. This in turn carries with it financial and reputational risk.

The ability to access the international financial system and conduct international trade transactions (trade financing, payments, etc) can be and in some instances, already have been severely, curtailed. In December 2010, Trinidad and Tobago was placed on a ‘Restricted Country List’ by TD Ameritrade, Scottrade and Options Xpress as a country that they ‘do not conduct business with.’

Furthermore several financial institutions have found that there is greater scrutiny from our correspondent banking relationships with increased queries regarding customer transactions and beneficial owners. This can potentially have the following effect:

• Lengthy delays in completion of foreign currency cross border payment transactions. If payments are time sensitive, penalties or losses may occur to our affected business clients;
• The cost of doing business in Trinidad and Tobago may escalate as businesses attempt to offset losses or other expenses due to the increased restrictions and delays;
• Termination of certain key correspondent banking relationships – limited means to access foreign currency or facilitate cross border payment transactions.

The main correspondent relationships for many of the local banks are in the United States. The US Regulator can impose conditions and even prohibit US financial institutions from transacting with correspondents in a designated jurisdiction. With the US as our largest trading partner, this will have a severe socio-economic impact on the country and also holds true for any of our trading partners.

There is no doubt that continued inclusion of T&T on FATF’s publications can influence our international credit ratings and by extension our bi-lateral and multi-lateral trade agreements due to a loss of confidence in the integrity of our financial system and lead to a perception that our country may lack the political will to implement and enforce compliance with applicable AML/CFT legislation. This could result in:

• A reduction in the flow of direct foreign investments into the local economy and potentially, loss of trading partners;
• Merger and acquisition activities across the region or internationally may be further stymied as regulations become even more prohibitive – cost of capital requirement; degree of regulatory scrutiny etc.
• Cost of borrowing increasing as a result of reduced access to foreign currency.

Ultimately, negative reactions by the international community have the potential to impact funding from international agencies such as the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund.

So, are we out of the woods yet? According to the ACPTT, the short answer is “No” – but emphasizes that “…as custodians of prudent practices and gatekeepers within this market, all stakeholders have a responsibility to continue to lobby the government to critically address the remaining FATF identified deficiencies in a meaningful way.” The Chamber fully concurs with this position, since to not do so could lead to further erosion of our reputation which could translate into significant economic costs for Trinidad and Tobago.

Within the last two weeks alone, two children have died following acts of ‘discipline’ and media reports have cited three other instances where children were subjected to punitive actions that amount to abuse.

Josiah governor, six, pleaded to be removed from an abusive home where he was finally beaten for death, allegedly for not doing his homework well. The killer reportedly said he did not think “a few strokes from a piece of pvc would kill the child.” Everton Vasquez, a 12-year-old SEA student, hung himself after he had been stopped from playing, beaten and order to do his homework. Threats to kill himself were not taken seriously, and his bewildered grandmother later said that at time he was “filled with rage and anger.”

Then, the news broke that the principal of a private primary school flushed a toilet over a child’s head. She apologized when called in by the police, only to have another child come forward with a similar story. She has not, at the time of writing, been charged with two counts of cruelty to a child under the Children’s Act. Another teacher at a public school was accused of beating a child’s hands with a plastic broom handle. A 13-year-old girl, allegedly sexually assaulted 62 times by an 80-year-old man since she was 8, was recently released from hospital after trying to commit suicide.
There are several obvious questions that arise with regard to what could prompt such behavior, and, where the educational institutions are concerned, the responsibility of the oversight bodies. Remarkably, in the case of the ‘flushing’ incident, the Ministry of Education, the Teaching Service Commission and the Unified Teachers Association, as far as we can ascertain, have all disavowed responsibility even as the deplored the incident.

We must acknowledge that in cases like these, prosecution hinges on the complainant being willing to testify for the prosecution having corroborating witnesses. It is therefore imperative that Government moves with haste to rectify any deficiencies in the various legislations which are aimed at protecting children, such as the Children’s Authority Act, so that they are effective to cure the mischief for which they are intended.

Perhaps it is the historical legacy of these Caribbean islands which accustoms us to such abuse. Perhaps too, we do not even recognize abuse for what it is. Many an adult proudly asserts that after being viciously whipped at school, they would be additionally beaten when they got home. Whatever the justifications, our culture is highly tolerant of violence, including to children. And this might shed some light on why neighbours, despite their misgivings, refuse to intervene in cases like Josiah, Everton, Mikale, Amy and too many others to name in this space.

The sad fact is that we cannot eliminate every instance of child abuse. What interested stakeholders can do though, is to lay down the institutional framework to protect our young. It must not only be a legislative package, but methods to education and empower children to be able to seek help for themselves if they are in abusive situations, knowing they will be well protected – an even sometimes, to help them recognize when abuse is being perpetrated

Today, the Chamber examines the other jurisdiction of the CCJ, its original jurisdiction as an international court and the only one with the authority to interpret the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas, establishing the Caribbean Community, including the CSME, and to settle disputes arising out of its operation.

Our examination results from opening remarks recently made by the very Justice Nelson to stakeholders, including the Chamber, at a seminar to familiarise them with the both jurisdictions of the CCJ.

His Lordship, inter alia, expressed the view that the local private sector had not bought into the CSME, a regime which gives Caribbean peoples a choice of economies. He stressed that the private sector has to refashion the economy to enable such people to compete and survive in the modern world and pointed out that the CCJ exists to protect the rights and freedoms of, not only Member States, but, in one of its recent judgments, their citizens, under the CSME, to make one market of the entire Caribbean instead of every “man” for himself.

Justice Nelson may be spot on, when the Chamber ponders that the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas was signed since July 2001 and the Agreement to establish the CCJ since February, 2001. However, the private sector, by itself, is not solely culpable for the slow pace of unification.  CARICOM Chairman, Dr. Denzil Douglas, during the 32^nd CARICOM Summit in St. Kitts last July, had this to say about the slow pace towards realising the CSME.  “We’ve decided to put on hold, for the moment, realisationof the Economy aspect and let us get right to issuespertaining to attainment of the Single Market aspect and their advance to the Economy segment.”

Let us therefore examine the opportunities for the private sector in CARICOM Member States and, lately, individuals, in the exercise by the CCJ, of its powers in its original jurisdiction while the business communities therein continue to spur on the respective governments to make the CSME happen.

The judgments of the CCJ in the cases brought by Trinidad Cement Limited against the Caribbean Community, and by TCL and a Guyanese subsidiary, against the State of Guyana, have clearly identified who can sue when and for what. It held that both private entities and individuals may call Member States of CARICOM to account before the Courtfor breaches of their treaty obligations under the Revised Treaty subject to the conditions for leave to do so imposed by Article 222, being satisfied. It also held that a company which we either incorporated or registered in a Member State was, for the purposes of the same Article to be regarded as a person of that State, regardless of whether or not the ownership or control of the company, was in the hands of non-nationals.  It also clarified that a person or company with leave under the same Article could sue the State to which it, he or she belonged.   The TCL case also clarified the process for suspension of the CET and forced the CARICOM Secretariat to put in place written procedures for suspensions.

The nature of the goods in that case, was cement and, the breach, was the suspension of the Common External Tariff (CET) by the Government of Guyana but tomorrow it might be beverages from Trinidad and Tobago unfairly prevented from entry to the markets of member States or some similar scenario.   Since the TCL case there have been other instances where private sector entities have taken member states before the CCJ. Article 7 of the Revised Treaty prohibits discrimination on grounds of nationality only.  Red Jet and the Member States which drag their feet or refuse it landing rights or whatever may be the next claimant or LIAT against Caribbean Airlines for unfair competition because of fuel subsidies it enjoys from our Government.

The CCJ ‘s judgment in Johnson vs CARICAD clarified that only Member States or the Caribbean Community may be sued, but not for the actions or decisions of Institutions and Associate Intuitions, which CARICAD is.  Thus, in the Chamber’s opinion, this widens the target, at which claimants may take aim, in search of remedies for breaches of the Revised Treaty.

The judgment also clarified the types of complaints which are justiciable in the CCJ. It ruled that Ms. Johnson could not procure relief for wrongful dismissal, breach of contract and of the laws of Barbados, but could do so in respect of discrimination on the grounds of nationality only. Do not therefore be surprised if Guyanese nationals who complain of discriminatory treatment by immigration officers at Sir Grantley Adams Airport in Barbados also make their way to the CCJ for remedial action, and, even damages invoking the protection of Article 7 of the Revised Treaty.

As the Chamber recalls the views expressed by Justice Nelson, let us in the business community remind ourselves and our leaders that Article 9 of the Revised Treaty is a general undertaking by Member States that they shall take all appropriate measures, whether general or particular, to ensure the carrying out of obligations arising out of this Treaty or resulting from decisions taken by the Organs and Bodies of the Community. They shall facilitate the achievement of the objectives of the Community. They shall abstain from any measures which could jeopardise the attainment of the objectives of this Treaty.

The 50^th year of our Independence is as good a time as any to keep the written word!

The Chamber’s view on enforcement is that the existing Town and Country Planning Act Chapter 35:01 is, by and large, sufficient to address orderly land development and construction.  Its enforcement, in a sustained manner is really the main challenge.

It appears that Planning and Development Minister Dr. Bhoe Tewarie shares our view, for a newspaper reports his observation that, between 1969, when the Act first became law, to 2004, there were only 81 instances of enforcement by the Town and Country Planning Division.  That works out to an average of three per year over the period.  It does not include the last seven years, 2005-2011, a period which during which there was more than one boom in construction and, certainly, in urban development.

With respect to the present Act, Section 16 allows the Minister of Planning and the Economy, where it appears to him/her that any development of land is being carried out after the Act having regard to the provision of the development plan and to any other material considerations, to serve on the owner or occupier of the land an enforcement notice. This may be done in cases where the development has taken place without the grant of permission required thereby, or that any condition subject to which permission was granted in respect of any development has not been complied with, but within four years after the date of the alleged failure to comply. The enforcement may require the demolition or alteration of any buildings or works, the discontinuance of any use of land or the carrying out on land of any building or other operation.

Perhaps, the limitation period of four years from the date of the alleged failure to comply, deserves some enlargement, but the challenge remains enforcement and the Chamber contends that the introduction of new legislation will not, by itself, surmount such a challenge.  Political will, adequate resources and widespread education just may do the trick.

We repeat here, in support of our contribution, a blog on the Express’ website by “Thatguy TT” aimed at Minister Tewarie: “People may do what they want, but it is the responsibility of the authorities to ensure that what they do is right and legal.  If this is not done, every single member of the responsible authority is guilty of enabling such behaviour. If the ones charged with “policing” do not do their jobs… what else can we expect but anarchy?”

The Chamber’s criticism is not targeted at this period of national governance only.  For example, Patricia Mejias, the former Chairman of the Tunapuna-Piarco Regional Corporation, in 2009 she identified the source of floods in that region to be the indiscriminate and illegal development of land in the hills of North Tunapuna and announced her intention to meet with the same Town and Country  Planning Division and stakeholders, in order to find a way to stop people from cutting the hills for “development”.  It would be interesting to know whether this ever came to pass and, more importantly, what action was ever taken!

Minister Imbert, the former Minister of Works, after witnessing flood damage in his constituency and elsewhere in the same 2009, also promised that the PNM Government would be going to Parliament to strengthen his Ministry’s capabilities with respect to blockages of watercourses, and developments, which, in his opinion, resulted in such damage. Perhaps, this new Bill for first reading, is the sequel!  Who knows?

Section 5 of the existing Act requires Minister Tewarie to carry out a survey of the entire country and submit to Parliament a development plan, consisting of the survey, together with recommendations indicating the manner in which land in Trinidad and Tobago may be used (whether by the carrying out of development or otherwise), and the stages by which any such development may be carried out.  It appears to the Chamber that his access to Parliament for this reason may prove to be more beneficial than simply laying a new Bill, with which technocrats must begin to familiarise themselves afresh.

Section 5 also requires the Minster to table this plan not later than seven years after the commencement of the 1969 Act.  Even if Government did so in 1976, the needs of our people and land stock available to meet such needs, as well as the consequent risks, would have changed, in over forty years!  This is what Parliament should be asked to address, and address before the next torrential downpour.

Neither is the path of those who wish to abide by the law as it stands, and engage the process an easy one. The traditional runaround from public utilities like the Water and Sewerage Authority, the Regional Corporations, the Fire Services, the Environmental Management Authority, the Drainage Division, and the Office of the Commissioner of State Lands through to final approval of the Town and Country Planning Division, is so frustrating, annoying, inconvenient and downright wastefully inefficient, that many honest to goodness law abiding citizens find themselves seriously considering bending the rules in order to proceed with necessary repairs, additions, or renovations. So, not only is there no enforcement of Section 16, but citizens themselves who wish to observe and so obey the law, have no alternative but to grit their teeth when they encounter the existing bureaucracy.  Undoubtedly, this has spawned and institutionalised the allegation or perception of corruption by those trying to obey the law.

The Chamber will approach the review of the new Planning and Development Bill with an open mind, despite the foregoing, but any justification for its introduction by giving a failing grade to the existing legislation, is potentially unfair and, in our opinion, unfounded.  Any ‘new wine in old bottles’ which fails to successfully address the annual concerns with flooding, loss of life, property and continues to run shivers down the backs of those who seek to obey the law, does not bring added value to the quality of our lives.

It is for this very reason we at the Chamber believe  the questions we should be pondering upon at present are less along the lines of “Where have we gone wrong?” and more, “What can we each do to assist in getting it right?” What pockets of excellence currently exist within T&T?  IMF statistics as at the end of 2010 confirmed that Asia remained at the top of the list for real GDP growth, the fastest growing economies therein being Singapore, India, China and Sri Lanka. The statistics for 2011 continued along this trend.

At the Chamber our Mission is “To be the voice of business in the development of a sustainable national economy”.

Amongst the key contributors to sustainable economic growth within the Asian economies continues to be their emphasis on exports.  Where do we stand in T&T on this? As a nation we continue to justify the need to import goods and services for which we should be actively building our own capacity to provide. Rather than speak of the absence of skills and resources let uss busy ourselves with development of same. Are we engaging the captains of enterprise who have gotten the export trade right to replicate their models across T&T?

Let us no longer just criticise and speak freely of consistent declines in revenues and profits, negative GDP, the risks of increasing national debt in an uncertain global financial climate, speak of the absence of sound leadership, good governance and transparency in addressing critical socio-economic issues affecting our nation while failing to make the link that addressing these issues on a national level requires that we all address them within our own shops. As leaders it is time to display some personal leadership, let’s change the “wait and see” game to a “go and do” race.

Rather than continue to expend our energies looking to the past for who’s to blame, let us go forward in 2012 looking in the mirror for the answers. Let us together explore “What exactly it is we would like to achieve as a nation?” and “What this path demands of us as individuals – in our own lives, homes, organizations, sectors and as a society and nation as a whole?”

Let us not sit immobilized by fear and uncertainty but rather define a way forward ourselves. Let’s commit to GDP growth in 2012 and decide once and for all to become what this goal demands.

But to move away from the energy product to others requires a policy shift to cultivate innovation. In 2011, the Government established a National Council for Competitiveness and Innovation which is charged to “develop and implement a holistic and competitive innovation policy” that will “transform the economy by lowering its economic dependence on hydrocarbons as well as improving its global competitiveness and innovation rank over the next ten years.”

Using the Arts as a possible industry selected for diversification, it can be said that this sector (comprising the fashion, film and carnival entertainment industries) is already positively positioned for growth through innovation, given its young demographic and location in the highly commoditised realm of popular culture. Therefore, by providing a combination of funding for research and development, education, and by addressing the realities of operating in the particular sector, it can be hoped – and planned – that the Arts industry benefits from improvements in its products (for example, creation of inter-connected film studios to produce local films); processes (those that ensure timely, efficient  and affordable production of say, mas’ costumes); marketing methods (like leveraging new media to more effectively sell carnival as a tourism product); and organisational synergies (such as creation of a fashion consortium made up of boutique stores utilising their combined weight to make export profitable).

Innovation can be nurtured in all sectors. However, to improve the likelihood of success of a national policy, there needs to be a focused approach to spending time and money. It is not enough to state that resources and incentives will be allocated to the “non-energy” and “services” sectors. A definitive group should be selected which represents – with an eye towards efficiency – about four areas within which, over time, Trinidad and Tobago can most effectively increase its productivity through either the implementation or creation of innovative products, processes or methods.

Furthermore, the responsibility for innovation and diversification does not rest solely with government; all citizens have a role to play.  Even as government commits to a drive for innovation and diversification, Trinidadians and Tobagonians must buy into this thrust.   As we find ourselves in the near and far-flung places of the globe, as we so often do, each of us must be an ambassador for our country, promoting the national brand.  This is not as far-fetched as some may think: an excellent example is Anya Ayoung-Chee, who proudly maintained her Trinbagonian accent and artistic style, to take the winner’s place on Project Runway.  And while we often do not have a year-round appreciation of our own artforms and artists, the rest of the world is usually ‘wowed’ by our versatile and creative spirit.

The opportunities are there.  The time is right. Let us all commit to making this critical change as we seek to secure the future of Trinidad and Tobago.

In the Chamber’s view, this is the type of New Year’s resolution which every law enforcement officer should make and keep so that the commitment of those on the ground, like Superintendent Abraham could be a given.

But, this swallow, by itself, does not make a summer of peace, for which law abiding citizens have longed year after year. The Chamber shares the view of Gillian Lucky, Director of the Police Complaints Authority, that the detection rate by the police remains much too low. Commissioner Gibbs and his team need to work at this, although t detection rate was admittedly appalling even before he assumed office. The PSC must also adopt this target as theirs, too, for the low detection rate was also a concern even before its Chairman and other members began to serve.

If policing and reporting of crime makes the message delivered by Superintendent Abraham, the first dream to come true in 2012, Attorney General Ramlogan, Minister Sandy and Minister Volney need to also not only resolve, but deliver, and make good on the promise by the Prime Minister to better deliver in 2012, speedier trials for those charged with crime and an increase in those numbers when the detection rate improves, being mindful of the need to win the support of the Judiciary and Magistracy. Minister Volney must fast-track all the legislation on which he and his Ministry have been working for over a year, to abolish Preliminary Enquires, to introduce radar timing devices and to resource the agencies necessary to implement the measures to expedite trials including the use of DNA, if only to make the warning to criminals by Superintendent Abraham, not a hollow, inconsequential one.

Our prison system, parole and the monitoring of sex offenders, accused on bail and convicts on parole will assume greater necessity, if the other blocks in the wall of detection and conviction are put in place.  Commissioner of Prisons, Martin Martinez and his line Ministers, must buy into the message from Superintendent Abraham, and, more importantly, its implementation and delivery.

It appears to the Chamber that the PSC and Government have a lot upon which to chew here. The experience of the private sector in addressing such challenges on the job, is result-oriented towards a stated overall objective with a strategic action plan to achieve it.  It must include targets and performance reviews along the way, for measurement and accountability.

Over to you, Police Service Commission.