Even the most fanatical political pundits can hardly absorb the finer points in the dispute over the implementation of agreements under 'constructive engagement' at this time of year, and as for the ordinary citizen, he or she simply does not want to know. However, last week Mr Robert Persaud took the exchanges on the subject into an altogether different dimension, with allegations connecting the PNCR's criticisms about the rate of implementation with what he calls the "crime spree." Inevitably, Mr Corbin had to reply, and he had allegations of his own to make, this time linking some members of the governing party with the 'phantom squad.'

The truth of the matter is that both parties are being dishonest, and both parties need to engage in some introspection. Without wasting time on Mr Persaud's fanciful theories in relation to the PNCR and the crime wave, it has to be said that Mr Corbin will not get any thinking person to seriously believe that there were not some individual members of the PNCR - as opposed to the party, as a party - who did not have connections to those involved in last year's criminal activity. It is a problem which the Leader of the Opposition has to look squarely in the eye, and which will not go away by simply pretending it does not exist. Whatever the political context of some criminal activity in this state of ours, the PNCR as a party has to work to make sure that none of its members is contaminated by it now.

The governing party, of course, has been engaged in its own pretence. It refuses to acknowledge the existence of the phantom squad, or that this squad had a role to play in confronting the Buxton phenomenon last year and this. If the administration and the party associated with it, truly don't know about the phantom squad when ordinary people do, then they are grossly incompetent; and if they do know about the phantom squad, but are not admitting it, then they are treating voters with utter contempt.

Whether, as Mr Corbin has alleged, there are connections at any level between individual "functionaries" and the squad, is not something which is subject to proof or disproof at the moment; what is incontrovertible, however, is that the political authorities have allowed the phantom to operate by default - a particularly unhealthy phenomenon by anyone's standards.

In short, the PPP/C has some of its own waking up to do, and needs to look its particular problem squarely in the eye, and ensure that it too cannot be accused of having even the appearance of contamination. Owing to the fact that it is in government, however, it has to go a step further and publicly acknowledge the reality of the crime situation - phantoms included. If it does not do this, then the public will not have confidence in its capacity to deal with the problem.

As it is, at a press conference on Friday President Jagdeo was none too inspiring on the subject. There was no acknowledgement of phantom and what a report in our Thursday edition dubbed "anti-phantom" squads from him. He was reported as speaking of his commitment to ensuring more resources for the security forces to better equip them in the fight against crime, and as saying that there had to be intensified community policing, as well as a more aggressive approach towards criminal activities. He qualified this latter statement by remarking, however, that the same sections of the community which called for aggressive action against criminals, cried harassment of people whenever this was done.

One wonders just what universe the President is living in. In the first place, community policing is no response to a situation where the drug cohorts (both with or without political associations) are taking over, and where the foot soldiers of the narcotics trade are carrying M70s and AK-47s. As the Disciplined Forces Commission (DFC) recommended, the country needs a specialized unit within the police force, suitably equipped and trained to confront the current crime crisis. It is not a question, therefore, of equipping the security forces at large to fight crime; it is a matter of strengthening the police force in general, and creating a specially trained unit within the GPF in particular.

In the second place, an aggressive approach to crime does not in and of itself imply harassment of law-abiding citizens; the choice is not, as the President appears to think, between rampant crime and the Black Clothes police with their extra-judicial ways. Again, as the DFC recommended, any special unit has to have clear rules of operation. The bottom line is that crime in its present incarnation, no less than before, requires an effective but legal state response. The President's continuing naivete in relation to the operations of the former Black Clothes squad, is to the say the least, disconcerting.