Showing posts with label PNM. Show all posts

Thoughts on LGE 2013

Allyuh know PNM eh winning no General Election right?

Rowley could continue to fool himself into thinking the PP will win the election for him as much as he wants, but the reality is that many are pleased with the "box drains". Because for decades they suffered for the bare basics whilst the PNM spent hundreds of billions, so they not worried that it is still being raped today, once they get their drains and roads and jerseys too of course. And in a sense that is what governance is all about, so doh take on those who suddenly found a new mantra that that is what govts supposed to do anyways, yeh that's a fact, but finally a govt is in fact doing what they supposed to do. People usually bash me for taking about box drains, but we must be real.

The local govt win for the PNM is not any real achievement, it's a default win, Rowley knows it too. They did not win by any clear mandate either, preliminary results showed that the PNM actually lost votes compared to the 2010 results, which is very damning considering that soon after the 2010 general election, it was obvious that the PNM would not have done well.

Jack and his ILP will have to spend a lot of money to continue to rent the votes until 2015 in his attempt to pull PP votes, PNM people eh voting for ILP no matter what. Jack obviously counted on the ChagWest fever to take him into this local elections, but it seems many have taken medicine for that temporary ailment. The ILP is in for yet another rude awakening in St Joseph, where of course I predict a PNM win. But not because the ILP will split votes, and they will, but because that seat has been a marginal if you wish and was held by the PNM before 2010.

The COP many are saying is finally dead, I am not sure that the COP is in fact dead, I have always maintained that the COP is comprised of that small percentage of voters who don’t support either of the two major parties along with those persons who have been disenchanted with the UNC prior to 2007, but have since “gone back home” to the UNC. So the real COP is still alive but limping along as they embrace the old politics whilst they whisper into each other’s ear that this is new politics. The COP will remain as is, irrelevant but present.

I must however state that whilst the PP might still feel some bit of relief that they have not done as bad, they still have to seriously reconsider their politics and address allegations of corruption within the government for example. Because lets face it, the base of each party will remain with the party no matter what allegations are thrown up, but there is this percentage who are looking for a government that is serious about addressing corruption.

I believe that we are right back where we started a few months leading up to May 2010, where the PNM will be the government by default once again (yeh I know I said they not winning, by default could never be winning in my book). My only hope however, is that they have learnt from the errors of the past and make radical changes within the party, so as to be able to reign in any rogue leader and ensure a repeat of Manning’s leadership never happens. This I think may very well be the biggest challenge for Dr. Rowley considering the zero support he got as he tried to address corruption under the then PNM government.

Interesting couple of years ahead indeed.

Flashbacks: debating the postponing of Local Govt. Elections

The Municipal Corporations (Amendment) Act, 2007 debate:

This Bill, in our view, represents an erosion of the fundamental pillars of representative democracy. It is tied up with issues of representation. It is tied up with the rights of citizens to choose their government representatives. Indeed, it usurps the right of the citizen to recall their representatives. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

ether it is at the national level or local level, elections are ultimately about the right of citizens to choose who will hold office on their behalf; in whom they will entrust; the governance; whether it be local governance; whether it be national governance. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

Today, in looking at the governance structure and what we are trying to do is to extend the life of these local government bodies, we are taking the rights of the citizens to recall representatives. We are doing it in a context when there is a blood bathe in the country. I look at the Guardian of Monday, July 09, 2007: "Gunmen go ballistic. Six shot dead in 24-hour period." - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

It is in this context that the Government asks for a rubber stamp to continue with its programmes and its policies; to continue with its broken promises, because we come to reason for asking this Parliament to extend the life of local government bodies. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

We are of the view that this Bill represents an abuse of law; it is an assault on parliamentary democracy; on representative democracy; it demonstrates the fact that Government is about the business of depriving the population of its rights; violating the tenets of everything that constitutes good and effective government. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

Those persons had been elected, initially, for three years. They were required to go back to the polls and the public would have a say whether they had performed to the standards that were expected. But Government doing as it was, even as miserably as it was doing then, obviously , was of the view that it would be political suicide to go to the polls at that time. They knew they would be rejected with the general election due and impending, and they did not want to take that rejection by the masses, so they did not call a local election. They postponed it, and so, here we are again. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

The legislation speaks to the urgency of reform, and the need to schedule the programmes in the furtherance of the process of local government reform. In describing the problems then, that caused local government not to deliver at the desired rate, the Minister said, the reform is urgent, and that word urgent in its ordinary meaning, is that the reform exercise would begin almost immediately. One year later, we all know, nothing has happened. In fact, the Minister in piloting the Bill—and if this is not so, I am prepared to give way and allow you to tell us,—said nothing in terms of what had happened with that reform agenda from when you asked for the time last year July to this year July. [Interruption] What steps had been taken? Nothing has been said, and in piloting the Bill I thought that would have been very important, where you were coming to ask the Parliament to extend the time for a further year, that you would say, look, in this year that the Parliament granted, we have done one, two, three, four and five. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

So why do you wait on reforms that are not coming or keep being extended and keep extending? Why are you doing that, denying citizens the right of recall, in terms of voting in their local government elections? Why? One year ago, reform, one year later, reform. Let us face the truth. The truth is obviously you do not want to face local government elections at this point in time because of the state of the country; the crisis in the country, the crime rate, [Interruption] the food prices, the disgust [Interruption] and the protests that are taking place; you are afraid of calling local government elections. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

You want another budget. You want to call another budget. You postpone elections, you want to call another budget so you can fill your pockets and you can go out there to attempt to buy votes. That is not going to work again. Mr. Speaker, that will not work again. [Interruption] It may have worked when you bullied your way in 2001 and 2002. The electorate is a more sophisticated electorate, a more educated population who is totally fed up of what this Government has been doing, and so it is not going to work again; postpone it now then; it is not going to work. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

is that you are afraid to call the local government elections at this time. [Interruption] You are afraid! [Deskthumping] You are afraid to call it because that will be the barometer of what will happen in the general elections, and you know what will happen? Do you know what is coming? You will lose that election. You will lose that election, you cannot face it, you cannot take that at this time. [Interruption] And so, while the Constitution and law give the Prime Minister and the Government powers, that authority must be exercised in a responsible manner. Government must, at all times, respect the people. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

You do not need to have reform stopped at election. Tell me why it is necessary for the reform process to stop election for a third year. Why is it necessary to subvert and prevent the citizens and electorate of this land from exercising their democratic right? I come back to the issue of procedural democracy, and I said one major pillar of that democracy has to do with election. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

The Municipal Corporations (Amendment) Act, 2008 debate:

Why do we need to postpone election for another year because of the reform process? Go ahead and do your reform, there is absolutely nothing wrong with the reform ongoing, you could reform as you have been doing since the year 2002 when you came into office six years ago, you can continue to 2020, but do not stop the people from exercising their democratic right. [Desk thumping] This is what I have serious problems with - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

Then we came back again in 2007 and the same thing happened. What the Government did was to take the vote of every citizen in Trinidad and Tobago, and cast them in favour of existing councillors, and that is what I meant by subverting the procedural democracy. It took the votes of the citizens—all who would have voted in the local government election—and by this legislation you will be doing it again, you will be casting that vote in favour of existing councillors. The electorate out there, the burgesses want the right to fire some of those councillors because it is about accountability. You have no right of recall in our system, but because of the period set by the statute, at the end of the three-year period, you have the right of recall because you can cast your vote for or against. That is the system, and that is where the accountability in the democracy comes in, that is part of the substantive and procedural democracy; that the burgesses can say: “I don’t want you anymore. You have failed, you have not functioned, therefore, I should be able to exercise my vote and get rid of you.” - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

So there is absolutely no accountability according to the Constitution. We are in breach of that provision. They do not account to this Parliament, and they will not account to the electorate because those are the two mechanisms provided for us in the law and in the democracy, that you account to the people through election and through the Parliament and its representatives and none has been done. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

What is the reason for postponing the election? It cannot be reform because reform can be ongoing. Reform is something that we do all the time. In every ministry I am sure that you are ongoing in modernizing and reforming. That does not mean that you stop the democratic process for that to happen. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

Many of us are of the view that the stalling of elections is because the Government is afraid to face the people of Trinidad and Tobago. Why? We come back to the MORI poll. In food prices there has been an increase of 218 per cent since this Government came into office. Since they came into office inflation is 53 per cent, from then to now. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

As I close, Mr. Speaker, I am not convinced that any good reason has been given for stopping the local government elections in order to allow the reform process to take place. The reform process is ongoing, will continue to take place, will continue in process, but the election should go on. This is the third time we are coming, we do not support it. Therefore, Mr. Speaker, I am of the respectful view that the reasons given for this Bill are not the true reasons and in fact, at the bottom line of it the Government is afraid to face the electorate because of its incompetence, its mismanagement and corruption in the entire system. I thank you, Mr. Speaker. - Mrs. Kamla Persad-Bissessar

From Ethnic Cleansing to Ethnic Stocking

In this country yuh does always know in advance when cyanaval start.

Since the People’s Partnership came into government on May 24th 2010, it has been accused of discrimination of all kinds. Are these claims of discrimination with merit? Or are they simply effects of good old politics? And then there is always the issue of corruption en mass, but that’s a whole other issue.

The Jamaica Observer in a recent Editorial claims that the present government is indeed practicing discrimination, it states;

“the current Government of Trinidad and Tobago has systematically practised ethnic stocking; rewarding individuals with positions even though they not qualified, either by professional training or by pertinent transferable work experience.”

I think the paper needs to give the source of inspiration for such an editorial, it would be interesting to find out what informed such remarks. I mean, even if one were to attempt to make up this he could not, so there must be someone providing info, who is this person? In the same way when some years ago we heard about Indian women being raped by African men [which as we understand it, turned out to be Indian men wearing wigs] and Indians were running away from T&T, in the same way we got to the truth back then, we must also demand details on this story. Because as with everything, there must be some context, the Editor would not simply wake up one morning and decide to do such a commentary on a country he does not live in. I can safely put my life on the line in saying that this has everything to do with politics and nothing more.

Oh, BTW, is this an Editorial or a news report? It does not read like an Editorial to me. Anyways.

But Dr. Winford James seems to think differently and I must say he presents a good argument here.

Now, assuming the editorial writer lives outside of Trinidad and Tobago, probably in Jamaica, we can agree quite easily that we, living here in this blighted country know far more about the matter than he or she. We know that in the vast majority of cases the appointees to the headships and memberships of state boards and committees are Indos, with a smattering of Afros and others as mostly convenient tokens of ethnic diversity. It's in our faces every living day! The question is, How can we change to a situation of appointment by merit and ethnic evenhandedness? Ethnic stocking has never done us any good as different peoples seeking to build one society out of our diversity. It did us no good under the PNM, and it isn't doing us any good under this UNC Government masquerading as a People's Partnership.

He goes on to conclude “Ethnic stocking has never done us any good as different peoples seeking to build one society out of our diversity. It did us no good under the PNM, and it isn't doing us any good under this UNC Government masquerading as a People's Partnership.”

In response to the Observer’s Editorial, Minister Warner asked where they were when the PNM practiced ethnic stocking and asked for the author to be revealed. I agree with Warner on that because someone should not be allowed to make such claims and not expect to be challenged. But when Warner starts going on about not one Hindu has been appointed by the PNM, then we have serious issues, Warner continues;

“For more than 30 years, not a Hindu was appointed or elected as a member of government by the PNM, and yet the Observer dare speak about ethnic stocking? The old adage that cockroach should not meddle in fowl business is relevant to the Observer in this context," stated Warner.”

Make no mistake, this type of rhetoric based purely on appealing to the emotions of blind party loyalists. The fact is that East Indians have always held positions in government, it’s possible that it’s not based on inclusion but rather on support of the then government [PNM], that has nothing to do with inclusiveness really.

Trinidad & Tobago’s High Commissioner to Jamaica, Rev Dr Iva Gloudon, also issued a statement to the newspaper on Wednesday expressing disappointment and regret over the editorial:

"As the High Commissioner for Trinidad and Tobago to Jamaica, let me first respectfully say that in my experience, there are times when shouting across the Caribbean Sea does not help a cause. I must, therefore, use this opportunity to say, softly, that it is with regret and disappointment that I read the Jamaica Observer's editorial of Tuesday 11, November, 2012 "The Abuse of Substance. My main concern is that so much of what was said lacked, among other things, respect and an overall understanding of the complexity of Governance in the Caribbean. When logic and empirical evidence are not presented one often resorts to generalisations which can become inflammatory."

The Chairman of the youth arm of the United National Congress, Nicholas Morris has also demanded an apology, stating that the government is about equality, inclusion, transparency and all the rest.

The youth arm claims the statements in the editorial are not true, as over the past two years the People’s Partnership Government, led by Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar, has operated not only on the pillars of transparency and morality but also on one of equality and inclusion.

“The People’s Partnership Government has implemented polices that has not only sought to develop and better the standard of living of each and every citizen of Trinidad and Tobago but also to be representative of all the different races, religions and cultural backgrounds.
“Evidence of the Government’s practice of equality and inclusion is seen from the very top, where the Cabinet of T&T comprises a diverse group of individuals, all coming from different ethnic groups, religions and cultural backgrounds."

The Jamaica Observer has responded to Minister Warner’s and the UNC’s Youth Arm: “In an emailed response to Newsday, Jamaica Observer’s Executive Editor (Operations) Desmond Allen said: “The Jamaica Observer has the fullest respect and admiration for the people of Trinidad and Tobago and their leaders. Any offence taken from our editorial was absolutely unintended.”

Something has always troubled me with this talk about Indians getting all the wuk. First off, it is a fact that when governments change, boards are changed, so that's out of the way. Now, for the PP to stock up boards etc. with Indians, it means that they have to replace someone right? So who were those someones? Were they Africans? If they were, because the claim is that Africans are being replaced by Indians, then what was it back then? Could that also be ethnic stocking?

A response to the above would be "hey, the PNM was about equality", well lets say they were, there were Indians and Africans on boards etc. Are we saying that the PP is removing all the Africans and leaving the Indians? I doubt that very much, therefore it is more likely that they would remove everyone appointed by the PNM and replace them with PP supporters. So how is that ethnic stocking exactly?

I have always had issues with this talk about racism, it just makes no sense. But of course there are racist persons who live and practice racism in this country, we not going to deny this. I think it is so easy to get into this race talk because of the make-up of the base support of both major parties, it allows politicians to make the remarks effectively appealing to tribal instincts. And the politicians take advantage of this; they keep the two major groups going at each other, fighting for the scraps as they loot the treasury.

We really need to move past this nonsense and begin to really look at the serious issues like accountability, equality, transparency, people empowerment. For decades we have been doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results. That’s ludicrous at best.

Blind Loyalty. What is it?

I have always condemned this and I think all should. Blind loyalty in my view is the one reason politicians have been able to mismanage, misappropriate, neglect the needs of the ordinary citizens and enrich an elite few.

As I read different articles, listen to talk formatted radio and engage in discussions, I always hear persons say that there are those who continue to hold on to their party no matter what that party does/not do in terms of developing the people of this country. Why is this so? Have we really held on to our party, blindly?

The PNM has been the party in power for most of our so called independence, with a couple of breaks in its grip on power. Why have those parties opposed to the PNM not able to hold on to power for more than one term? My answer to this would have to be that the supporters of the PNM have not moved away from supporting their party. This is not so with the other parties that has managed to capture power. For one reason or another, those parties were not able to hold on to power. One reason could be that together with leaders, supporters have moved, creating a situation where there is never enough support for one opposition party to retain power for more than their initial term. Therefore, could we conclude that the supporters of parties opposed to the PNM are blind loyalists? It does not seem that way.

But wait; there are those who argue that there is a core base in all parties that never moves. True, but what has that translated to? Simple, it has translated to the PNM being in office for most of our so called independence. Again, my logic tells me that the supporters of the PNM have never moved. They have held on to their support for decades. The fact that the other parties who have held office for one term on two occasions tell me that the supporters of those parties were not willing to accept anything less than real representation.

Today we have a coalition of parties in government and already, nine months into their term in office, there is talk of discontent amongst the parties. Just three years ago, two of the parties making up the Partnership could not have won an election on their own and the PNM was returned to office by their supporters. Why did the COP for example not win the election in that year? Why could the UNC not persuade enough supporters to re-elect them to office. This should have been simple enough considering the discontentment at the time with the then Government.

I know the Gurus who crunch the numbers may differ and they may very well be correct considering the statistics. But I tend to deal with these issues in a simplistic manner, no numbers, and no stats. I just say what I see.

And I see loyalty to party, for decades, have gotten us nowhere and will not get us anywhere. There is hope however; an entire generation is leaving us, being replaced by a whole new generation of thinkers. A new generation who demands much more. They say we are a young democracy; well it’s time we grow up.

Dr. Rowley’s Dilemma

I almost feel sorry for the man. For after his tireless efforts to get the government, of which he was a part, to address the issue of corruption. He found himself in the political dog house and in a heated battle with his former leader and “captain” whom he vowed to deal with as the ship docks.

Since the May 24th Election defeat he has been trying his utmost best to rebuild his party and to retain and pull back the lost support. In this regard, I will not fault him at all. I indicated via one of the Social Networks that Dr. Rowley CANNOT be blamed for the diminished support of the PNM, all blame must be placed squarely at the feet of the former leader and his party executive and that three months is in no means to conclude that he has failed. The leader for his arrogant attitude toward opposition and the executive for their silence as the leader carried on with his “know-it-all style”. No one supported the one man who saw it coming.

However, after all that has happened, it would seem that it’s now business as usual, the age old game of politics rein supreme in that we jump up and spew the usual rhetoric in an attempt and hope to score “political points”, this in itself is skewed and must be redefined. The political points must not be related to the rubbish that comes out of your head, rather the political points must be based on what positive and nation building ideas can be put forward.

In his latest attempt at boosting support (blind loyalty) he has decided to take the Government to task their decision to, as he puts it. “shut down” the country in light of the possibility of a hurricane on Friday last. Speaking at the People's National Movement (PNM) Women's League seminar at Balisier House on Saturday, he said “the entire country was shut down because of a cloud”. Stating that it was a "governance issue", he went on to accuse the Government of using the recent floods around the country to "play themselves" before the public as do-gooders.

But it did not end there, he went further to attack the staff of the ODPM, stating that "In their desperation to please, they shut the country down since yesterday morning, causing millions of dollars in losses—more than what would have been caused by a storm". "We suffered losses," Rowley said, later adding: "I hope that every time it looks like it's going to rain we will not shut the country down and be subjected to a 20-minute speech by the Prime Minister, who clearly is not in charge of the situation." I wonder how this cost was determined and was it applied to lives and property which could have been lost?

After this had blown up in his face he shifted to damage control. Via a press release Dr. Rowley sought to explain what he meant by his initial remarks toward the the decision to “shut down” the country. This time using science to support his point. Whilst he indeed has a point, no one can ever be to prepared and the weather experts merely make forecasts, meaning this is probable but not definite either way. My issue is that in this country several areas, POS in particular, floods badly with regular rainfall, and considering that there was a possibility of a hurricane (we are in hurricane season) it would be wise to get people home so they can secure their homes and most importantly their loved ones, especially considering our poor infrastructure in terms of dealing with normal flooding far less disasters.

In her response to all this the Prime Minister indicated that she did not ask workers to go home, it was the schools that were asked to send children home, people took it upon themselves to leave work. Now, it’s better she had just shut up, Dr. Rowley did enough to make her look good for her to make this foolish statement.

What I have learnt from this is that there must be a properly designed plan to evacuate people in cases of emergencies. Whilst we can ask people to go home because of a possible storm we must also ensure that the proper systems are in place for this to be a smooth process.

We have a lot of work to do, the cheap politics has no role to play. We need leaders who can put this aside and work together for the development of our country and its people.

Read also Express Editorial: A cloud over Dr. Rowley

Give them the credit!!!

MP for Laventille East/Morvant, Donna Cox in her contribution to the budget debate yesterday indicated that the decrease in crime stated by the govn't is as a direct result of initiatives of the then PNM government and that credit must be given to the PNM. I want to agree with her fully. Things don't happen overnight and neither can this happen in 3 months into a new regime's term in office.

I have always maintained that today’s results, positive or negative, is a direct result of past actions. For instance, the decrease in crime has to be a direct result of past initiatives. Something all have been clamoring for, for the past eight years.

Similarly, the state of our development or non-development today has to be a direct result of past actions by past governments. For instance, after the “Oil Boom” of the late 70’s early 80’s and after the waste of our resources via corrupt leaders who plundered those resources, we were left with a situation where a new regime had to implement harsh measures in order to bring back the economy.

Yet again, within the past eight years, the resources of this country were again squandered by a corrupt regime who disguised it as development. The results of this will be seen in the years to come.

Therefore, this is why I must maintain that we must place credit where credit is due and nowhere else.

Ship Jumping

What would have moved former PNM MP Roger Joseph and Former San Fernando Mayor Ian Atherly to endorse the People’s Partnership in the upcoming local Government election. For Atherly, this may seem an easy choice considering how he was treated and especially what he recently exposed on a two part interview on Power 102 about the former leader of the PNM in relation to an allegation of rape. But what about former MP Roger Joseph, what would have cause him to make such bold statements like:

"I do not want to be a part of a bunch of misfits; I do not want to be part of victimisation and spite”,
“The PNM lost the general election for one reason and that is because they failed to serve the people of T&T".
“What I expected from PNM turned out to be two different things. I grew up with one philosophy from the late Dr Eric Williams, and that was serving the people. When I look at the PP I think I can make a contribution to serve my people".
Was he not party of the very Government when Dr. Rowley was “victimised” for standing up to what was at the time perceived as corrupt dealing (today the evidence is mounting). Was Mr. Joseph’s conscience not active at that time to understand that what his Prime Minister was doing amounted to victimisation. No need to list every similar circumstance.

Economy Good / Economy Bad

We had govn't claiming to "develop” our country on or before 2010 - they spent and spent and spent - even with all the spending on social programs aimed at assisting the poor in providing a hands up (in principle) this was not the reality. Today after the mega projects expenditure, I am certain that the poor are no better off than they were before such expenditure/programs; I say this because whilst in principle these programs were well intentioned, they were not used for that purpose.
Rather they were used to maintain the vote bank, evident by the platform rhetoric used to create a fear that they (the poor) will lose these programs if another Govn't were to be elected.
It is absolutely necessary for the electorate to understand clearly how government works and to some extent how the economy works and how this relates to their existence. Today I am hearing allot of talk about delivery of campaign promises, some are asking if the new Govn't can deliver on these promises considering the state of the economy. And this is a valid concern, but is it a genuine concern, because these are the same people who had no issue with delivery over the last few years, even when the then govn't promised increase in the Old Age Pension, but instead tied this to the NIS and worst yet change what we know as the Old Age Pension to a Senior Citizens Grant, distinctly different. Those very persons were defending everything the govn’t did when it was evident that many of it was corrupt.
Whilst we may have a change in Govn’t I am not sure that we have gotten a change in how we address issues of governance. Presently I am hearing from those in support of the new regime the very same blind loyalty rhetoric that has cause most of our problems during the past 8 years. In a sense the situation is but reversed with the very blind loyalty exsisting on both sides the difference in who is defending and who is demanding.
The state of the Economy must be made known to all, no matter what the numbers may mean, in this way we all can understand what can be done and what cannot be done and most importantly we must also understand what we must do. Gerrymandering of the figures for the purpose of politics will serve no one any good. I must add as I end that whatever the state of the economy, the govn’t, any govn’t would have campaigned with answers, I hope that suddenly no one has any.

PNM Party / PNM Govn’t

As the PNM moves to regroup and possibly rid itself of the negatives that played an important role in its landslide defeat in the May 24th General Election, one must ask if it's too little too late. This is a party that boast of being the longest running and most "disciplined". Enil (Party Chairman) had indicated, foolishly in my view, that the PNM as a party is separate from PNM the Govn't, how can this be when during the campaign the party boasted of all that they (PNM Party in Govn’t has done.
It is therefore only logical that both are the same, for the principles of the party guides Govn't policies, the Party determines who represents us.
Now in opposition with just 12 seats (a loss of 14), what can the party do so that the electorate can regain some semblance of confidence that it is in fact a party who seeks to develop the people of this country rather than the elite few that has plundered the resources of this country. This is the very party that defended every allegation of corruption made against the Govn't. To now decide to act and rid it of the many arrogant and know-it-all is not going to do this so called disciplined party any good; for once they had the power they flagrantly ignored the cries of the people, the warnings of massive corruption even from within. Instead, silenced the one person who raised questions about the operations of the PM’s (Project Manager) development machinery (Udecott) and the Party did nothing about it but allowed the corruption to flourish.
The next few weeks into months will be very interesting and this cannot be compared to any past instances (33/3) the population is far more intelligent to simply forgive and forget such high-handed disregard for the plights of the poor. The population today is in fact thinking about the future and how today’s actions affect this future. It is absolutely necessary for this all-time corrupt party to look very carefully at those it selects to represent the people, no longer will they be able to get away with its policies of corruption and hold people to ransom with things like CEPEP and the many other social services. The people will demand more. And I am not sure that the party can deliver more than it has after spending billions with no real development of the people.

...Of Corruption and Men.

The UNC was voted out of office on the basis of "allegations" of corruption which was eventually proven by the new government. The new government was elected into office on the premise that they will deal with corruption, they promised also to look at the procurement procedures in relation to the construction sector, which was the main area of corruption under the UNC regime and in particular the Piarco Airport project.

However, after getting into office and given a “mandate” with 26 seats, the PNM government has done nothing significant to end the means to corruption. Instead they did the opposite to what they have promised. The PNM regime has continued with the UNC’s use of state enterprises to carry out contract work in the name of fast tracking. Udecott being at the forefront of this the government’s main tool in its 2020 development drive.

The present regime has defended ever single allegation of corruption linked to Udecott, even those made by one of its own members of parliament and even went as far as to fire that member. And at the eleventh hour they want to tell you and I that they are addressing these concerns, rubbish, they eh fooling me, are they fooling you?

The report of the CoE into the Piarco Airport Project has never been published in the public domain. However, according to the Sunday’s Newsday, this report had made recommendations aimed at preventing a repeat of the Airport fiasco. The present regime has ignored the recommendations of the 2003 Piarco Report; hence we have today, a repeat of the Airport scandal except it is at least ten times worst.

The following are some of the recommendations of the 2003 Piarco Report:

• Statutory bodies and state agencies as well as local corporations should play no part whatsoever in the preparation of the award of any public contract of any kind;

• Parliament should be allowed to debate the raising of state funds for public construction projects;

• No major contracts should be afforded to foreign contractors unless local expertise is not available or readily available locally;

• There should be limits on who should participate in the preparation for or in the award of public contracts.

On the creation of state enterprises, like Udecott, the 2003 Piarco Report had this to say, “they can be used (badly) despite of the best intentions of its management personnel.”

On the use of foreign contractors, like Shanghai Construction, the 2003 Piarco Report had this to say, “project handled solely by expatriates (consultants and contractors) have always been plagued with allegations.”

The 2003 Piarco Report refers to an example during the 1980’s where a foreign contractor (Sam P. Wallace Co. Ink., involved in the famous #100 million Caroni Racing Complex where after millions have been expended, all we are left with were some piles and steel rods on the ground.

Today however, after being given the mandate from the people, the people who believed you when you told them that what happened at Piarco must never happen again, we have a $20 million commission of enquiry telling us the very same thing that one did several years ago.

What is necessary in all of this is for us to understand that whilst the goals, in principle, of a government in office may be well intended, we must not discount the fact that corruption can become a part of the process. This is absolutely necessary for us to understand this and demand that the relevant measures be implemented to eliminate as much as possible the avenues for corruption to take place.

Finally, we must NOT allow ourselves to be so blinded, that we remove one party and elect another and think that our work is done. We must ensure that the right procedures are put in place to protect our wealth.

TTHaveYourSay®