What’s the difference between a Rottweiler and a wajang? We pose this question in light of Prime Minister Patrick Manning’s renewed insistence that he fired Diego Martin West MP Keith Rowley for untoward behaviour rather than, as Dr Rowley insists, for opposing the policies of the Urban Development Corporation of Trinidad and Tobago (UDeCOTT).

After all, when the PNM sat on the Opposition benches from 1995, Mr Manning fully approved the designation of ’Rottweiler’ given to Dr Rowley, who in that period established himself as an aggressive and effective critic of the UNC administration.

Since the PNM leader and his colleague were at least publicly on good terms, Dr Rowley’s manner, when directed at the PNM’s political opponents, had Mr Manning’s unequivocal support. Fast forward 13 years, with the Manning regime now in its second term of office. Dr Rowley has been given the Housing Ministry portfolio, in a new dispensation where nearly all the senior PNM Ministers have been dropped from the candidates’ slate mere weeks before the 2007 general election.

The prevailing view was that Dr Rowley was kept on only because, given his popularity within the PNM, removing him would have been more politically risky than sidelining a Diane Seukeran or even a Ken Valley. Housing has historically been a hard Ministry, but Dr Rowley performs well.

Meanwhile, public disaffection with UDeCOTT has been growing and, in April 2008, Dr Rowley apparently decides to take the Calder Hart bull by the horns. Retribution is swift, with Prime Minister Manning removing Dr Rowley’s ministerial portfolio and relegating him to the status of mere MP. The reason, says Mr Manning, is ’wajang behaviour’, but what is curious here is that he himself was absent when this behaviour allegedly took place. Having received a complaint -- though exactly from whom nobody knows -- Mr Manning polled five ministers, four of whom did not approve of Dr Rowley’s manner and one who saw no problem.

On this basis, Mr Manning made his decision -- and this is where the people of Trinidad and Tobago became sceptical of the Prime Minister’s explanation. Even if Dr Rowley did behave in an unacceptable manner, it beggars belief that, as a senior Cabinet Minister, he should be dismissed for a lapse which essentially occurred in private. It makes more sense to assume that Mr Manning was, in fact, taking the side of Calder Hart since, both before and after the commencement of the Uff Commission of Enquiry, Mr Manning has made clear his support of Mr Hart and all his works.

On that basis, it is safe to say that the difference between Rottweiler and wajang behaviour is all in the eye of the beholder, especially when the beholder is Mr Manning.