1

September 27, 2011

Our Historical Journey: Colonialism to National Heroes

By Dr. the Hon. Ralph E. Gonsalves Prime Minister of St. Vincent and the Grenadines THE MAKING OF OUR CIVILISATION Our nation’s collective journey through history has caused the fashioning of a remarkable Caribbean civilisation, and its magnificent Vincentian component. This fundamentally “island” or “seaboard” civilisation is unique in its “creolised” oneness arising from an admixture of peoples comprising the indigenous Amerindian and Garifuna, and migrants, some free but most coerced, from Anglo-Saxon Europe, Africa, Iberian Europe (including Madeira), India, China, and the Middle East, but with a majority of African ancestry, whose ancestors, overwhelmingly, were enslaved. This Caribbean civilisation, including its national Vincentian dimension, has adopted and adapted universal values, and called them our own, within the framework of a dominant, creolised particularity which has been given life and meaning in our landscape and seascape. We have embraced the English Language as our own but with a unique and distinct Caribbeanness; and speak it, and write it, with an especial flair, rhythm, cadences, and creativity. We have risen from this historical process as whole, yet scarred, peoples, who are not merely tenants in, but true owners of, our patrimony, in our being and becoming. We are not migratory transients; we are not simply occupants of lands and seas in the Caribbean; we are permanent owners, who through pain and suffering, joys and celebrations; ups and downs, defeats and triumphs, setbacks and advances, have moulded a civilisation of uniqueness, legitimacy, and of possibilities for further ennoblement, despite our limitations. It is in this context that we assert that we are not better than anyone else, but no one is better than us; different in certain national characteristics or dispositions but not better, not worse. Accordingly, any of the goodness or nobility which our civilisation has lost through an aggressive cultural imperialism or our own neglect, we must reclaim particularly at this time of the 217

th

anniversary of the death of our National Hero, the Rt. Excellent Joseph Chatoyer, Chief of the Garifuna people and the 10

th anniversary of his elevation to the status of National Hero. These

twin-anniversaries have occasioned the physical return, even if temporarily, of many of our Garifuna brothers and sisters who reside in the scattered diaspora overseas. Their homecoming, in an international conference, signals, more profoundly, a coming home to themselves and ourselves as individuals, as a nation, as part of the Caribbean civilisation; to know ourselves better; to know our history in our quest to become better; to celebrate our Garifuna heritage; to reaffirm, in dignity and with no trace of a divisive or belittling discrimination, our multi-ethnic and multi-cultural well-springs in our “creolised” whole, in our especial geographic space; and to be the best we can in the further uplifting of our civilisation. One of my favourite poems by the iconic poet and musical titan from our homeland, “Skake” Keane, addresses this many-sided question with which we have been grappling. The poem is entitled “Private Prayer” and was written for our slain revolutionary brother and scholar, the Guyanese-born Walter Rodney, on the publication in 1973 of his path-breaking volume, “How Europe Underdeveloped Africa.” Listen to “Private Prayer:”

2

“To understand How the whole thing run I have to ask my parents And even my daughter and son “To understand the form Of compromise I am I must in my own voice ask How the whole thing run “To ask Why I don’t dream In the same language I live in I must rise up Among syllables of my parents In the land which I am And form A whole daughter a whole son Out of the compromise Which I am “To understand history I have to come home”

This coming home to oneself, and as a society, is fundamental to any exercise in nation-building, including constitutional re-making, the competitive production of goods and services, the Education Revolution, the reduction of poverty, the building of the Rabacca Bridge, and the construction of the Argyle International Airport. These hitherto unachievable enterprises have become real; they have happened or are happening before our very eyes. At their core, they are about self-belief, self-confidence, self-worth, a profound sense of self-mastery; the embrace of the idea that despite our limitations, we possess the possibilities to achieve the utmost, in concert with our friends and allies. Unfortunately in the Referendum of November 2009, the majority of the people of St. Vincent and the Grenadines rejected a reformed Constitution; this was a set-back in the process of further constitutional decolonisation and a blow to our quest for self-mastery. This sense of self-belief or self-mastery is not yet a fully-tapped political virtue among our people. It truly is our redemption song! We must embrace it enthusiastically. HISTORICAL RECLAMATION History suggests that the first European encounter with the nation which we now call St. Vincent and the Grenadines occurred towards the late fifteenth or early sixteenth century. The Europeans did not “discover” these islands; they came into contact with them. They met people whom they called “Caribs”, meaning “the warlike ones”, but who called themselves Callinagoes or “peaceful people”. Recent archaeological research at Argyle indicates that a civilisation existed here before that of the Callinagoes. These earlier inhabitants are called Tainos or Arawaks. The Callinagoes lived off the land and the sea. Clearly, they were skilled mariners in order to cross the Caribbean Sea from the South American mainland and then to crisscross this region all

3

the way up to the Greater Antilles and beyond. The Callinagoes owned their land communally; built their houses from materials at hand; organized their society in accordance with their own beliefs and principles; and fashioned elemental governance or authority structures, headed by a “Cacique” or Chief. European contact, conquest, settlement, and exploitation diverted the Callinago nation of Youlou and the Begos or Yourimei (different historical records point to diverse names, though the latter appears authentic), from its path of autochthonous or home-grown, self-reliant development, to one of subservience to colonialism, and later modern imperialism. In the process, the Callinago population dwindled, largely decimated, and the remainder creolised; the successor population of Garifuna (Callinagos and African admixture from the 1680s) was substantially wiped out through genocide and forced deportations; the enslavement of Africans was established; and the indentureship of Madeirans (Portuguese), Indians, and so-called “liberated” Africans, was introduced. All of this was under the colonial suzerainty of Europeans, initially Spanish, then French, and after the Treaty of Paris in 1763, the British continuously (save for a brief period in the 1770s and early 1780s) until internal self government in 1969 and constitutional independence in 1979. The mountainous terrain of St. Vincent and the fierce determination of the Callinago and Garifuna nation not to succumb to foreign rule and the forced alienation of their lands, made St. Vincent inhospitable territory for the imposition of European colonialism. The early settlement by Europeans of countries like St. Kitts, Barbados and Jamaica by the mid-1650s did not occur in St. Vincent. Accordingly, slavery as an organized, sustained system of dominance and exploitation did not happen in St. Vincent until much later. As the European settlers reported to their capitals, “the Caribs” would not allow them to settle down. They were up against organized guerilla warriors who believed in themselves and the defense of their patrimony. Indeed, it was only after the defeat of the Garifuna by the British in 1797 that a European-imposed system of slavery based on the importation of African slaves flourished undisturbed, save and except for occasional acts of rebellion by the slaves and their localised individualistic resistance, until slavery’s abolition in 1838. In order to impose its authority and power, the armed forces of British colonialism were not satisfied with merely defeating the Garifuna and killing their leaders, including the indomitable Garifuna Chief Joseph Chatoyer. They went much, much further. The British launched an unrestrained criminal campaign against the Garifuna men, women and children. Thousands of the Garifuna were slaughtered; no Christian or human mercy was shown. It was violence in its natural state against innocent, defenceless people. Many Garifuna who sought to escape by way of the sea, without boats, went solemnly and heroically to their watery grave. Having massacred thousands of the Garifuna, the British then rounded up some five thousand of the Garifuna and corralled them on the off-shore island Balliceaux. Devoid of food and fresh water, after a few months an estimated two thousand or so died. The rest were transported forcibly, to Roatan Island off British Honduras, now Belize. Historians tell us that, hitherto, the only animals which survived on Roatan Island were lizards and iguanas. But the Garifuna survived and thrived. From that determined group of our compatriots have emerged a Garifuna nation overseas, settled in Belize, Honduras, Nicaragua, and Guatemala, and later to the United States of America, particularly in the Bronx where there are some sixty thousand descendants of the Garifuna. Up to today, the British have never acknowledged their genocidal crime against humanity and neither have they, consequentially, offered compensation to St. Vincent and the Grenadines for substantially obliterating the Garifuna nation, to recompense the off-spring of the Garifuna and their compatriots, at home and abroad.

4

Similarly, the British have ignored legitimate demands from the Caribbean and elsewhere at the United Nations and in other international fora for meaningful compensation, too, for the enslavement of our African forbears. This will haunt the British forever and will remain a raw, open wound in our relations until settled amicably. On March 14, 2002, on National Heroes Day, my Government on behalf of the people of St. Vincent and the Grenadines and our Garifuna family world-wide, proclaimed the Right Excellent Joseph Chatoyer, Paramount Chief of the Garifuna, as our first, and, so far, only National Hero on account of his extraordinary, selfless sacrifices on behalf of our nation in defence of its right to self-determination. Slavery and the plantation economy in the Caribbean built the mercantile capitalism of Britain and contributed immensely to its evolution into industrial capitalism while simultaneously under-developing and exploiting the Caribbean. As Eric Williams so persuasively argued in “Capitalism and Slavery,” slavery and the plantation economy in our region enriched industrial Britain which in turn was restrained in its further expansion and development by the restrictive, commercial and trading practices of the slave economy. The requisites of industrial capitalism heralded the economic circumstances which prompted the end of the slave trade in 1807 and the termination of slavery itself in 1838. To be sure, slave rebellions, the economic uncompetitiveness of slave labour when compared to “free” labour, and the meritorious work of the noble British abolitionists all contributed to slavery’s abolition. But as Eric Williams contended, the economic limitations of the slave economy had become a brake on the further development of capitalism internationally. From the very beginning, the various European nations, in colonial competition for territorial expansion overseas and mercantilist capitalist expansion, considered St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and other Caribbean countries to be pawns and possessions for profitable exploitation. It is the same inner dynamic of their mercantile capitalism which drove them to compete in Asia, North America, and South America. Later, it was the turn of Africa for European’s division of that continent by a rampaging industrial capitalism in the 1880s which had become modern imperialism, or advanced capitalism on the world stage. There is very little documented information about European settlements in St. Vincent between the early 18

th century up to 1748, when the Treaty of Aix-la-Chapelle was signed ending the

European conflict known as the War of Jenkins’ Ear. That Treaty confirmed the neutral status of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, Dominica, St. Lucia, and Tobago. European nations were to withdraw from these islands; they were to be left to “the Caribs”. This, of course, did not quite happen that way since French inhabitants from Martinique and Guadeloupe were already in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, particularly on the western side of St. Vincent in small farms cultivating cocoa, coffee, cotton, tobacco, indigo, and root crops. On the eastern side of the island, the Caribs were more familiar with the British woodcutters who travelled from Barbados to collect timber. Between 1756 and 1762, the British and the French were again at war, dubbed the Seven Years’ War. The Treaty of Paris of 1763 which brought that conflict to an end was significant for St. Vincent and the Grenadines in that it was ceded to the British and remained so for the next 216 years, save and except for a brief period between 1779 and 1783 when the French were in tenuous control or dominance. Immediately, as its suzerainty commenced in 1763, Britain declared all of the lands in St. Vincent and the Grenadines to be Crown lands, and embarked upon a land survey in 1764. The records

5

show that the British met 1,300 French inhabitants and 2,700 slaves. The French were allowed to remain on their occupied lands but only as leaseholders up to a maximum of 40 years. What did the British do with the bulk of the lands occupied and owned by “the Caribs”? First, they gave “the hero” of the Seven Years’ War, General Robert Monckton, who had captured St. Vincent and Martinique, some 4,000 acres stretching from between what is now Stubbs and Biabou, extending inland to the headwaters of the river flowing from the Mesopotamia Valley. Monckton never settled it but sold it instead for 30,000 pounds sterling or some four millions pounds or EC $20 million at today’s value. Incidentally, this area includes the 400 acres which the Government of St. Vincent and the Grenadines has purchased to construct the Argyle International Airport. Secondly, the British auctioned off 20,538 acres at a cost of 162,854 pounds sterling or some 21.7 million pounds at today’s value. (The Gross Domestic Product (GDP) deflator measurement multiplies the 1775 figure by 133). The sterling figure amounts to some EC $110 million. And that was simply, just for starters, for British colonialism. At independence, what did we get as a “golden handshake”? A pittance, less than EC $10 million. In 2001-2002, I negotiated with the British debt-relief for the unpaid $12 million on an earlier loan. What a wheel of historical inequities! Please note that 20,538 acres or 903.7 million square feet, would fetch more than EC $2 billion today. Thirdly, the British Crown kept some of the remaining arable land for public purposes. And roughly one-third of the total acreage of St. Vincent almost 90,000 acres was in forest above the 1,000 feet contour. Thus, not much land was left for “the Caribs”. This was to be a major source of conflict between them and the British conquistadores. It was all to come to an epic denouement or final unraveling in 1797 in the defeat of the Garifuna and the death of Chatoyer. But, we are getting a bit ahead of ourselves in telling the history! Let us talk more about the British confiscation of our nation’s land without compensation and their utilisation of it to the detriment of the Garifuna, the African slaves, and later the indentured servants, Portuguese, Indian, and “liberated” Africans. Of the 171 parcels of land auctioned off, most were under 200 acres, the original maximum limit set, but 19 were in excess of 200 acres, one of which was an estate of 471 transferred by the Crown to John Byres, the Land Surveyor. Of the 114 French leasehold properties, only three were larger than 100 acres, the largest being 135 acres. The alienation of the land in St. Vincent and the Grenadines was accompanied almost immediately with an explosion in sugarcane cultivation and a large influx of African slaves. Many of the early British estate owners came from the older English-controlled islands who were anxious for virgin soil to cultivate sugarcane. Several of them bought out the small estate owners; this led inevitably to a concentration of property in fewer hands. The rapid rise of the sugar industry in St. Vincent and the Grenadines could be gauged from the production data: In 1766, sugar production was 35 tons; four years later in 1770, it was 1770 tons. Throughout the 1770s, the total sugar production fluctuated between 3,130 tons in 1774 and 2,049 tons in 1770, a year of intense Anglo-French conflict. The expansion of the sugar industry prompted the British settlers to gaze longingly at the islands reserved for the Garifuna on the sought-after Windward coast. This, in effect, occasioned the so-called “First Carib War” between 1772 and 1773, when two British regiments from the North

6

American colonies were recruited to defeat the Garifuna, who were coerced into a “peace” Treaty in February 1773. One consequence of this 1773 Treaty was the legalisation of the seizure of lands belonging to the Garifuna beyond the Yambou River. A new reserve was established for the Garifuna, further north. The new boundary for Carib lands, called “Carib Country” became the Byera River on the Windward Coast and a line running from the headwaters of the Byera northwest to the upper reaches of the Wallibou River on the north Leeward coast. But even these boundaries were ignored by the triumphal British. The Governor gave a large parcel of land on the northwest coast to a Royal American Officer, Lieutenant-Colonel Etherington, to command the British garrison guarding St. Vincent and the Grenadines from French attack. As fate would have it, when the French arrived in 1779, they captured St. Vincent and the Grenadines without firing a single shot because Etherington was using his garrison troops to clear his land! The French over-rule lasted a mere four years after which British control was re-asserted. The land issue in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, and the French Revolution (1789 to 1795) abroad, were to have an historic impact on our country. The French revolutionaries in the Lesser Antilles embarked on a campaign of agitation among the Garifuna in St. Vincent and the Grenadines and helped them with arms and technical, military assistance. Cane fields, and sugar mills were set afire and in 1795 a full-scale war between the British and the Garifuna erupted, ending in the Garifuna’s defeat and Chatoyer’s death. In the aftermath of this war, the British confiscated all the lands belonging to the Garifuna. The hugely depleted Garifuna population, as a result of genocide and forced deportations, was isolated in a reserve of 239 acres in the extreme north of the island. In 1802, Henry Bentinck (after whom Mt. Bentinck was named) was installed as Governor. He swiftly embarked on a disposition of “the Carib lands”. Bentinck permitted British war veterans to use, not own, 5,262 acres. The total accessible area in the Windward district was 16,640 acres. Large parcels of this land were granted to prominent planters after the passage of an 1804 Act which formally stripped “the Caribs” of all of their land rights. An American Royalist from Georgia, Colonel Thomas Browne, was granted 6,000 acres stretching from Byera River in the south to Cayo River in the north, including the area of seven large, recently established estates, namely Tourama, Orange Hill, Waterloo, Lot Number 14, Rabacca, Langley Park, and Mt. Bentinck. Planters’ protest ensued and Browne was allowed to keep Grand Sable Estate, the largest of the lot with 1,600 acres and a payment from the Treasury of 25,000 pounds sterling, part of the Treasury’s earnings from the remaining 3,400 acres which it sold at £22.10 shillings per acre or 76,500 pounds sterling, in total; this amounts to 7.65 pounds sterling in today’s value. All these monies went to the British Treasury. By 1805, there were 16,500 slaves; by 1812 there were 24,920 slaves despite the abolition of the slave trade from 1807; in 1819, there were 19,442 slaves; and on the eve of the abolition of slavery in 1834, there were estimated, 18,794 slaves. The average number of slaves for the 112 plantations, in 1833 was 205. Grand Sable had the highest number, 693 slaves; and the smallest number, 15, belonged to Madame Laroux’s cotton estate on Petit St. Vincent. In the last year of slave registration in 1832, there were 22,997 slaves, valued by the owners at £1,341,492 sterling or approximately £58 per slave. Upon slavery’s abolition in 1834 (there was to be a 4-year apprenticeship period up to 1838), however, the slave-owners received compensation of £592,509 sterling or an average of £26 per slave. At today’s value, this

7

compensation package by one measure (the Gross Domestic Product deflation) amounts to £59.25 million sterling or EC $296.25 million. POST EMANCIPATION SOCIETY IN OUTLINE A main consequence of the emancipation of the slaves in 1838 was their legal right to sell their labour to whomsoever they chose. But the practical socio-economic circumstances brought into sharp focus the difference between “freedom” and ability or capacity, since the ex-slaves, now dubbed “labourers “, were unable to enjoy, or incapable of enjoying, the full exercise of their economic freedom in real terms. Still, a dynamic was set in motion which laid the basis for a labour economy based on “choice” and not compulsion. Indeed, a large number of the ex-slaves were so anxious to remove themselves from the strictures of the plantation economy that numerous “free villages” were established. The stirrings of a small peasantry on Crown lands arose; and many others went into own-account activities as skilled or semi-skilled workers. Accordingly, labour shortages affected the plantations. From a total of 14,441 slaves in 1834, the number declined to 11,772 labourers in 1838, a loss of 18 percent during the apprenticeship period. At the same time, the numbers in the “free villages” grew. In 1839 (first year of freedom), 2,819 workers abandoned their estate lodgings or a fall of 28 percent over 1838, and a drop of 44 percent from 1834. By the time of the first official census in 1844, only 24 percent of the island’s population was classed as resident estate labourers, down from 91 percent in 1831, a period of slavery. In 1844, there were 20,629 Vincentians not living on the sugar estates, though many of them still worked there. The first mention of “free villages” in the St. Vincent “Blue Books” was in 1854. It was then reported that 7,466 persons were living in these villages built since emancipation. By 1861, the number had jumped to 12,833. Between 1840 and 1880, sugar production was maintained in St. Vincent by imported indentured labourers. The first wave were Portuguese from Madeira between 1845 and 1850, numbering 2,102; a further eight arrived in 1864. When the Madeirans refused to renew their indentureship, the local authorities sought prized labour from elsewhere, again from Africa, namely the so-called “liberated” Africans; that is to say, Africans who had been “liberated” from slave-traders who still sought to ply their nefarious trade especially to the U.S.A. They were then held as virtual captives by the British in the “King’s Yard”, mainly in Sierra Leone or St. Helena. Between 1849 and 1862 in St. Vincent and the Grenadines, some 1,036 “liberated” Africans were indentured: 234 in 1849 and 575 in 1850 from the Sierra Leone “Yard”; then in 1860, 1861, and 1862, three shiploads totaling 227 were sent from St. Helena. The last of this group, 14 in number, were labeled as “2

nd class” immigrants, that is, under the age of 15 years.

It was the turn next of the Indians from Mother India to be recruited as indentured servants. Between 1861 and 1880, Indians numbering 2,429 arrived. By 1880, therefore, the shape of the modern population of St. Vincent and the Grenadines had become complete: Persons mainly of African descent, Anglo-Saxon Europeans, Madeirans, Indians, Garifuna, and the various admixtures between them in our “creolised” nation. Migrants from the Middle East were to arrive first at a mere trickle in the mid-twentieth century and then in a mini-rush of relatively small numbers between the 1970s and today. In the process, St. Vincent and the Grenadines had moved from a culturally plural society in which each racial/cultural section had its own relatively distinct pattern of socio-cultural integration

8

to one of a highly-stratified society based on class, race and status, finally to a more fully integrated, multi-ethnic society with a core of shared values grounded in our home-grown Caribbean civilisation but with some debilitating residues from slavery, indentureship, and British colonialism. Metaphorically, St. Vincent and the Grenadines has emerged as roughly containing the songs of the Garifuna and the Amerindians; the rhythm of Africa; the chords of Asia; the melody of Europe; and the home-grown lyrics of the Caribbean, including St. Vincent and the Grenadines, itself. These various elements come together as a distinctive, organic whole, though with some cultural dissonance, and constitute the bulk of our nation’s submerged, invisible side of culture, living and being, and shape the essence of its visible side: institutions, work, production, and consumerism. Over the long historical haul from post-1763 European settlement of St. Vincent and the Grenadines, the economy has been dominated by single export crops: Sugar until 1880s; then arrowroot and cotton; then the resuscitation of sugar from the 1920s and 1961 alongside arrowroot; then the enthronement of bananas from the late 1950s up to 1993 and from then its steady decline up to the present time; and finally, the emphasis on tourism, financial, and other services in the modern period, including, too, a diversified economy in agriculture and fishing. The challenges for businesses in St. Vincent and the Grenadines in a modern, competitive, globalised economy are immense for the entrepreneur, the investor, the worker, and the State. But a strong economic base, nationally and through the process of regional integration, and international linkages, is vital for sustainable development, including the requisites for a modern, sophisticated people. The economic challenge is at the heart, too, of the homecoming occasion of our Garifuna brothers and sisters from overseas and the moment for the commencement of the process to consider the possible elevation of other nationals to the status of National Hero. THE ORDER OF NATIONAL HERO In 2002, ten years ago, the Right Excellent Joseph Chatoyer was accorded the Order of National Hero. He is our first, and thus far, our only National Hero. The time has now come for our nation to consider other candidates for elevation to the status of National Hero. Accordingly, Cabinet recently took the decision to commence the process which, hopefully, by National Heroes Day 2013, would result in the official declaration of one or more deserving persons as National Hero(es) in accordance with the Order of National Hero Act, Chapter 5 of the Laws of St. Vincent and the Grenadines (2009 Edition). In this regard, the first step is the appointment of the National Heroes Advisory Committee, which has already been put in train. This Advisory Committee is comprised of nine members, appointed by the Governor General as follows: (a) two persons in his absolute discretion; (b) three persons upon the advice of the Prime Minister; (c) one person upon the advice of the Leader of the Opposition; and (d) three approved by the Governor General from a list of names submitted by the local non-governmental organisations, and such appointments shall be made after consultation with the Prime Minister and Leader of the Opposition. The functions of the Advisory Committee are as follows: (a) to receive and consider nominations of persons upon whom may be conferred the Order of National Hero; (b) to carry out investigations in order to determine persons upon whom the honour may be conferred; and (c) to carry out duties as the Governor General may, from time to time, assign to the Committee. The Advisory Committee may in performance of its functions, consult with such other persons or bodies as it thinks necessary and all findings of the Committee shall be reported to the Governor General who shall submit such report to the Cabinet for consideration.

9

The Order of National Hero is conferred by instrument under the seal of the Order by the Governor General in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister. Section 10 of the Order of National Heroes Act stipulates the qualifications for the conferment of the Order of National Hero on a person as follows:

(a) who was born in St. Vincent and the Grenadines; or (b) who was at the time of his death –

(i) a citizen of St. Vincent and the Grenadines; or (ii) entitled to be a citizen of St. Vincent and the Grenadines; and (iii) who satisfies the following criteria, namely:

(c) the person has given outstanding service to St. Vincent and the Grenadines and his contribution has altered positively the course of the history of St. Vincent and the Grenadines;

(d) has given service to St. Vincent and the Grenadines which has been exemplified

by visionary and pioneering leadership, extraordinary achievement and the attainment of the highest excellence which has redound to the honour of St. Vincent and the Grenadines; or

(e) has through heroic exploits and sacrifice, contributed to the improvement of the

economic, social or political conditions of St. Vincent and the Grenadines generally.

It is significant to note that the Order of National Hero shall only be conferred upon a person who is dead. Over the past ten years there has been widespread national conversation on possible candidates for conferment of the Order of National Hero in addition to the Rt. Excellent Joseph Chatoyer. The names which have frequently arisen for possible consideration include: Hugh Mulzac, Elma Francois, George Augustus Mc Intosh, Ebenezer Theodore Joshua, Robert Milton Cato, and Dr. J.P. Eustace. It is the business of the Advisory Committee to assess all reasonably plausible candidates and to report thereon to the Governor General for decision-making by the Cabinet. Most dispassionate and reflective citizens are likely to urge that the number of persons accorded entry to the pantheon of National Heroes be most restricted. Indeed, the criteria for the conferment of the Order of National Hero are such as to admit to a most restrictive or exclusive list. During the next year, I expect the Advisory Committee to direct an intensive and extensive educational campaign on the process of conferring the Order of National Hero and on the possible candidates for such an elevation. I anticipate a robust, but hopefully honest, reflective and respectful, debate. Such a debate ought not to be used to settle scores against distinguished citizens who have passed to the great beyond. Let this debate make us worthy inheritors of our forebears’ excellence and the redemptive grace of national reconciliation. Let us celebrate the reckoning hours of our past for an uplifting present and a glorious future. Let us proceed without rancour but in joy, love and unity. SUMMATION

10

Conquest, exploitation, genocide, slavery, indentureship, racism, colonialism, and imperialism. Our nation has endured all this and has thrived. We have fashioned a multi-ethnic, liberal democratic and tolerant society, but grounded on a narrow economic base resident in our landscape and seascape. We have come from our yesterdays leaping from the oppressor’s hate and the scorn of ourselves; we have come to the world with scars upon our souls, wounds on our bodies, fury in our hands. We turn to the histories of men and the lives of our peoples; we examine the shower of sparks and the wealth of our dreams; we are pleased with the glories and sad with the sorrows, rich with the riches, poor with the loss. From our yesterdays we have come with our burdens; to the world of tomorrow we turn with our strengths. These words borrowed and adapted from the deceased Poet Laureate of Guyana, Martin Carter, constitute a veritable anthem for our Caribbean civilisation and its magnificent Vincentian component. We have made our St. Vincent and the Grenadines largely by our ourselves, despite the burdens of colonialism and imperialism. To those who hanker after colonialism or are in quest of a neo-colonial regime, I assert that we have done far better in 32 years of independence than 200-plus years of British colonialism in all material spheres of life and living. Still, too many inferior passions, particularly our vanities and discourtesies, haunt our spirit and actions; the tendency of a tiny minority to violent criminality and laziness; the selfishness and greed of some; and the avoidance of commitment to nationhood by too many. These limitations we must correct, individually and collectively. Further, and most importantly, we must address more assuredly the intractable pockets of poverty in our midst. At this time we must honour the efforts of our forbears whose sacrifices and hard work have laid a solid foundation for us. Our leaders from the past and present, we must honour appropriately. We must honour, too, our unsung heroes who selflessly seek to make our lives better. At the same time, let us not forget that the true measure of our civilisation resides not only in the individual efforts of leaders and distinguished persons, but in the community and solidarity of the people, as a whole, in the process of nation-building:

the ordinary workers and entrepreneurs in agriculture, industry, fisheries, construction, tourism, trade, commence, transportation, and other assorted businesses;

the professionalism and extra efforts of our health personnel, educators, police officers, public servants, and social workers;

the collective spirit and endeavours of the youths in tackling community problems;

the day-to-day travails of women in keeping their families together and guiding their off-spring;

the struggles of the poor in addressing their housing and other material needs, with or without State assistance;

the daily grind of ordinary folk in their quest for greater democratic control on the State administration, and for justice;

the striving of our sportsmen, sportswomen, cultural creators and writers of the creative imagination, professionals of all kinds, of our peasants, farmers, workers of excellence;

11

the efforts of our compatriots in the diaspora to help their families and nation at home;

the building of friendships regionally and internationally between peoples and nations; and

generally the collective actions of our peoples in the judiciary, the arts, culture, production, architecture, religion, journalism, politics, and sports.

All these endeavours, and more, of the civilised whole ennoble us. Contrary actions lead to our diminution. Let us together build our St. Vincent and the Grenadines!