Dear Editor: T&T Coat of Arms should not be business of any one political party

“[…] It is my view therefore that a decision to alter the Coat of Arms should not have been made by the political directorate at its party convention taking into account the implications for such a change, which is not the responsibility of any political party, but a responsibility of the state.

“[..] Could one element or image be removed without altering the intent and meaning of the original design as was approved by the College of Arms? […]”

The following Letter to the Editor on Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley’s proposed change to the Trinidad and Tobago Coat of Arms was submitted to Wired868 by Bryan St Louis of Bassa Hill, La Brea:

The coat of arms is an official emblem, mark of identification, symbol of the authority of the government of a nation or state. In effect it is really the seal of state of the government and arguably the most important of the national emblems and it is located at the top of all government documents.

It is my view therefore that a decision to alter the Coat of Arms should not have been made by the political directorate at its party convention taking into account the implications for such a change, which is not the responsibility of any political party, but a responsibility of the state.

So, what is the history behind the design of the existing Coat of Arms?

The Coat of Arms of Trinidad and Tobago was designed by a committee formed in 1962 to select the symbols that would be representative of the people of Trinidad and Tobago. The committee included noted artist, the late Carlyle Chang and Carnival designer, the late George Bailey.

The Coat of Arms with the accompanying motifs—which represent indigenous features of Trinidad and Tobago—were selected and formally agreed to be used as the Coat of Arms of Trinidad and Tobago in 1962, in a design approved by the College of Arms.

So, could one element or image be removed without altering the intent and meaning of the original design as was approved by the College of Arms?

If after 62 years politicians now see the need to effect a change to one element because of the negative historical connection, then maybe we may have to consider if it is time for us to review the contents of every element or image on the Coat of Arms and come up with a new design going forward.

For instance, most Tobagonians see the Cocrico birds as noisy pests. Additionally, what were the other images intended to reflect?

A change in the design of the existing Coat of Arms should not only be about attempting to erase part of our history as it relates to the role played by Columbus and the colonisers.

It should be about creating and designing a new coat of arms which would reflect what we stand for as a cosmopolitan people of Trinidad and Tobago.

I may be wrong in my views but I suggest the need for a committee, as was done in 1962, to be formed to select the appropriate symbols. Those symbols would be a positive and progressive representation of the people of Trinidad and Tobago—keeping our history as Trinbagonians intact as well as reflecting our advances.

Nuff said! Let us begin a meaningful conversation on this development and other not so related issues.

More from Wired868

Dear Editor: TTPS shouldn’t be unchecked militia; investigate police “brutality” in Belmont

“[…] The officers (in the Belmont incident) wore no uniforms, bore no visible badges, and allegedly seem to give no Read more

Dear Editor: Public figures must stop reckless habit of filming while driving

“[…] Public figures—especially elected officials—have enormous influence. Their actions speak louder than their speeches. “When they film themselves while driving, Read more

St Louis: UNC guilty of mass retrenchments; but PNM left workers vulnerable

The recent article by Ashton Ford, former general secretary of the People’s National Movement (PNM), attempts to paint the PNM Read more

Dear Editor: Club Eting’s shooting highlights dangers of TTPS officers taking guns home

“[…] In other countries where off-duty firearm carry is allowed, it is done with strict safeguards: ongoing psychological assessments, secure Read more

Dear Editor: Is Cepep programme in crisis? Or is this an opportunity for reform?

“[…] Cepep was designed as a springboard—a transitional system for those facing barriers to employment, a way to build dignity Read more

Dear Editor: Why is accountability only demanded of ‘the other side’?

“[…] What kind of society are we building when the working class is always the first to feel the axe? Read more

Letters to the Editor

Want to share your thoughts with Wired868? Email us at editor@wired868.com.
Please keep your letter between 300 to 600 words and be sure to read it over first for typos and punctuation.
We don’t publish anonymously unless there is a good reason, such as an obvious threat of harassment or job loss.