Are the days of the maximum leader coming to an end? Two events in the past few days, perhaps trivial in themselves, hint at a sea change in the politics of Trinidad and Tobago. One was the reaction when a member of the United National Congress, speaking from the floor at the party’s meeting on Sunday, called for Basdeo Panday to step aside in favour of another leader for the party-and was applauded. The other reaction was to PNM leader Patrick Manning invoking Biblical authority in the Parliament as he criticised his erstwhile colleague, Diego Martin West MP Keith Rowley. Public comment afterward was not so much Christian outrage, but offence that Mr Manning had attempted to use the transparent political device of invoking divine support.

What is significant here is that both these reactions do not represent any shift in loyalty to the two political parties. Instead, they signify a diminishing of blind allegiance to the leader.

Also noteworthy is that these eyes have been opened among the rank-and-file, even as the inner circles of each leader continue to be habitually blinkered. But, as both Mr Panday and Mr Manning must know, their subordinates would surely be observing these public signs of members’ disaffection very closely. After all, this is part of politics-supposedly steadfast colleagues may change allegiance if they see a shift in the balance of power from which they can benefit.

Thus, even if no change actually occurs, the leader may be forced to allow more autonomy to his subordinates in order to maintain their loyalty. And such a devolution of power improves governance, since key decisions no longer fall to one man who may believe himself wiser than everyone else.

More important than that in the long run, however, is whether the average Trinbagonian comes to believe that challenging authority should be the default position of responsible citizens. Despite the liking our people have for picong and even mauvais-langue, there is an essential timidity when it comes to truly questioning the powers-that-be. Yet no democracy works unless a significant number of citizens are continually testing their leaders, ensuring that they adhere to their oaths of office and serve the needs of the people. And the attitude of party loyalists is a key indicator of whether this critical scrutiny occurs or not.

Perhaps the citizenry is now developing this new perspective. And, even if this changed ethos does not bear fruit during the tenure of either Mr Manning or Mr Panday, it seems almost certain that whoever replaces them will not have the same unstinting support that both these men have enjoyed as political leaders. This, in our opinion, is a consummation devoutly to be wished.