The Other Side of Milton Cato- National Hero?

The struggle by the NCDD and the people of St.Vincent and the Grenadines was an historic one and the importance of that struggle was noted by Tydel John in a piece he did for the Vincentian on the anniversary of the Kill the  Bills movement. He wrote: “…The month of May represents a

memorable and important victory of the people of St.Vincent and the Grenadines over dictatorship, reaction and the withering away of democratic rights won through many years of struggle. It was the occasion when over 20,000 patriotic citizens said a convincing ‘NO!’ to the introduction of two pieces of undemocratic legislations in the parliament, which, if they had become laws, would have greatly curtailed many of the cherished rights of the Vincentian masses such as the right to strike and the right to oppose an elected government by any means once it had ceased to serve the interest of the people and had become a tool of foreign domination.

Today, after only one year, that victory must not be forgotten, and the people must not cease to be vigilant. For that victory has taught us the lesson, that as long as a people is willing to be organised to struggle against evil, the political rulers are then no longer totally free to do as they wish…. One year after the victory over the regressive laws, the Cato government is still attempting by other more disguised means to rob the people of their rights. The passage of the Representative of the People Act in parliament is a clear method of tampering with free and fair elections in the future…” (written as a letter by Tydel John)
1.  EMERGENCY POWERS BILL AND REPRESENTATION OF THE PEOPLE ACT
I will make only brief references to these Bills although like the others they were met with much opposition.

The Emergency Powers Act was introduced into the House of Assembly on Thursday, October 22, 1970, and quickly had its first reading. It was only circulated to members of the Opposition on the preceding Wednesday afternoon, October 21. Joshua as Leader of the Opposition protested almost immediately. He argued, “The crafty manoeuvre is an abuse of the democratic process- A Bill of such a nature scope and significance ought not to be surreptitiously introduced into the House of Assembly… The Bill takes away the protection given under the Constitution- the Protection of the citizens’ Fundamental Rights and Freedoms. This Bill is dangerous, it ought not to become law in its present form and yet Section 9 of this Act says; ‘This Act should come into operation on the last day of November 1970” (The VINCENTIAN, November 14, 1970)

After being told that the Bill was to replace the Emergency Powers Order in Council 1939, the VINCENTIAN attempted to examine the 1939 Act but was unable through its lawyers to find it until later someone provided them with a copy. The paper considered the Bill a serious one. “…Many persons are asking what the reasons for it are. This we cannot answer. We all know it is generally conceded both at home and abroad, that Vincentians are peaceful and law-abiding citizens and we can see no reason for the introduction of such a measure. When we took it for granted that the Bill was reinstating an Act which had been de facto and de jure law, according to the Object named in the Bill, we fell into the trap of not really perusing the Bill but we find after considering all the facts that this is an unnecessary Bill, which can create hardships not only on the citizens of St.Vincent, but also on the very legislators who are now proponents of the Bill, at a time when they may one day be in not favoured or fortunate a position. This Bill should be thrown out.”

The Member for South Leeward during the debate on the Bill considered that it “smacked of Siberia and the German Concentration Camp and was not for humans.” The Government of course, had a majority in the House.

Representation of the People Act

This was another Act that caused a great deal of concern from politicians on the other side of the House and from Trade Unions, the UPM and other groups. Some of these groups had actually met to discuss the impact of the Bill.

The VINCENTIAN in its issue of January 21, 1982, took up the issue. In its editorial captioned “The people and confrontation” it stated, “…It may take a lot of goading for people to rebel against unsavoury legislation being pressed on them by their duly elected government, but even West Indians will ultimately draw the line on occasion. Vincentians did this in connection with the Essential Services Amendment and Public Safety Act and Public Order Bills. It is now to be seen if the same thing will happen with the proposed Registration of the People Act, if the Cato government uses its overwhelming majority in the House to push it through.”

There was discussion among some groups and letters written to the newspaper, but the Bills were officially withdrawn in July. Prime Minister Cato at the official opening of Union House announced that the bills that were presented to the House in April were dead.

“Now in front of scores of Vincentians and influential visitors and hundreds of radio listeners, the Prime Minister himself had made it known that if the people don’t want the Bills there will be no bills. He has reaffirmed his government’s support for democratic principles.

Mr. Cato must have been very serious about what he was saying, or he would not have chosen to say it before hundreds of national and international witnesses and to use such emphatic phraseology as “if the people want it then they get it, if the people don’t want it then we are not going to give it to them against their will.”

…One of the organisations which played a big part in ‘killing the bills’ was the Commercial Technical and Allied Workers Union. It was its President Cyril Roberts who headed the National Committee for the Defence of Democracy which spearheaded the peaceful demonstrations against the Bills so effectively. Consequently, it seems appropriate that the Prime Minister choose a moment of triumph for the CTAWU to announce this victory for democracy.”

This is not meant to be a scholarly work. It is an attempt to present another side to the heroic figure that some sympathisers are trying to create out of Milton Cato. I have been arguing that National Heroes are not Saints but human beings who would have their negative sides, but when the negative becomes a dominant and persistent part of one’s tenure then it needs to be highlighted. I have made reference to a number of issues under the Cato administration that drew strong condemnation from the people of the country, issues that were considered undemocratic and dictatorial. These stretched throughout the period of tenure of Cato going up to 1984 with the search carried out at the house of Renwick Rose. It is for these reasons that I have objections to the attempt to confer the status of national hero on Milton Cato.

Dr Adrian Fraser is a social commentator and historian