About one year ago, Prime Minister Patrick Manning brought to his Cabinet a letter, signed by former Grenada prime minister Dr Keith Mitchell, seeking an association between that country and Trinidad and Tobago, which, if accepted, would have made Grenada ’a virtual colony’ of Trinidad and Tobago.

Grenada wanted free access to Trinidad and Tobago’s education system, health system, transportation system, et cetera.

’The only thing that the letter didn’t speak of having access to was the Trinidad and Tobago treasury. But, of course that was an unspoken word. But clearly we would have been in effect minding Grenada,’ one former minister noted yesterday.

Another former Government minister stated that several members of the Cabinet felt that Mitchell was at the time looking for someone ’to pay his (Grenada’s) bills’ and was ’mamaguying’ Trinidad and Tobago. Accordingly, the member said, the Cabinet totally rejected the idea.

Two weeks ago, Grenada’s new Prime Minister Tillman Thomas, along with Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines Ralph Gonzales, Stephenson King of St Lucia and Manning signed a Memorandum of Understanding in Port of Spain, committing themselves to economic union by 2011 and political union by 2013. The MOU comes at a time when Trinidad and Tobago’s revenues are high and Grenada’s treasury empty. On Monday, the Finance Minister of Grenada stated that that country’s treasury was empty and that the Government might not be able to pay its public servants.

Furthermore, questions have been raised that Trinidad and Tobago would not be able to enter into such an arrangement without fundamental constitutional amendments.

’How can you do this without the sanction of the people?’ one political observer asked.

However, one leading scholar and experienced regionalist stated yesterday that the question of whether any law seeking to give effect to political/economic union required a special parliamentary majority or a single parliamentary majority, depended on what sort of union was being contemplated.

’If you want to have a union that in effect impinges on the territorial integrity and sovereignty of the country, that is another matter. So it really depends on what sort of relationship you are talking about,’ the scholar said.

The expert added, ’As far as the (current) Constitution is concerned, it does not say you may or you may not (have a union).

’At this stage one hasn’t a clue what is being considered. And I am not worried. Two years ago everything was constitutional reform. Two years later everybody has forgotten it. Everything now is ’integrate or disintegrate’ and two years hence, everybody would have forgotten about this.

’These things are very complex. It takes a lot of talking, to-ing and fro-ing because each side would want to protect its own interest. So now you are just flying kite... It is a straw in the wind. You haven’t begun to get the building blocks yet.’