The Rag

2012-01-30T15:42:00.002-04:00

GLASS HALF FULL?

Almost every businessman that you talk to today will tell you privately that he is worried about the country and where we are heading. They will complain that the country is becoming uncompetitive and is falling behind in just about every sphere of business imaginable. They will tell you that there are glaring weaknesses in the schools and in the graduates coming out of the University of the West Indies, that crime is out of control and that clearly nobody has either the will or the capacity to get it under control. They will also complain bitterly about the stagnant economy and the obvious incapacity of the Government to get things moving. Most of all you will hear them complaining about what they perceive to be a lack of leadership and the stagnant economy.

To be fair, most of the complaints about leadership can basically be summed up like this: Rowley ain't cuttin' it. He clearly can't make. Like Manning said, he is like a dog that barks at every passing car in the hope that one day he will catch one. (This leads to the obvious question: what does a dog do when it does eventually catch the car?) But to continue: on the other side a lot of the businessmen say that they still like Kamla but that she has to take control of her Cabinet. They feel that there are some elements in her Cabinet who exercise undue influence on the Lady (the capital "L" is on purpose) and that she is being given poor advice. Further, they point to the rumours of corruption that are swirling around her administration and say that they believe them to be true. Labour is acting up and it is generally felt that trouble will begin after Carnival.

In other words, what is being said by many in the business community privately (and not so privately) is that they are most concerned about the future. They have absolutely no faith in the PNM under Rowley and feel that he (Dr. Rowley) is simply not a credible alternative. On the other side of the coin they feel that Kamla too is failing, though they prefer her to Rowley.

This perception is dangerous in that it creates a feeling of unease in the society that permeates through to all levels. In the past, the PNM was always there as the "default" political party. In other words, we could try ABC party or XYZ but if they didn't work we could always go back to the PNM. The problem is that under Dr. Rowley the PNM is no longer a credible "default" or alternative. The perception is that the PNM has turned sharply to its core African support and really does not care about being multi ethnic or multi cultural. Dr. Rowley didn't help this perception at all with his rather silly criticisms of the Prime Minister's trip to India and her touching the feet of the Indian President ... a gesture that is very acceptable in Hindu culture. Defenders of the Prime Minister have pointed out (quite correctly) that you didn't hear any of these complaints when the Pope visited Trinidad and then President Ellis Clarke ( a sincere and devout Catholic) knelt before him and kissed his ring!

In other words, it was felt/perceived by a sizable portion of the population that these criticisms of the Prime Minister were motivated more by race and ill will than by any honestly held opinion as to her action being an affront to our national identity.

So? What can be done? The present situation is not acceptable and contains within it the possibility of leading to some serious social unrest downstream. The only test of leadership is to lead, and to lead vigorously. The best way for the Prime Minister to get out of this deadly downward spiral that she is now finding herself in is to get the economy moving again. In order to do this she is going to have to deal with her erstwhile Finance Minister and give him the message: lead, follow or get out of the way. There are too many people now who see the nation's glass as being half empty. That perception has to change. We have to be shown that the glass is half full. If she doesn't do that ... and soon ... we will have a very long and dark night to go through.

2012-01-16T12:04:00.002-04:00

WELCOME TO THE WILD, WILD WEST

Two completely separate incidents took place at the end of last week which have brought me out of a self imposed hibernation since Christmas. I had taken a conscious decision not to get involved in any of the (for want of a better word) 'scandals' that might erupt in the new year and to stay out of any 'cat and dog' fights that might result. But these two incidents have so upset me that I feel that I must comment on them, if only for the sake of my own sanity.

The first incident that I am talking about is the storming of the headquarters of the Public Service Association (PSA) on Thursday by a breakaway faction that is opposed to the leadership of the current PSA President, Watson Duke. The matter is now before the High Court and I have absolutely no intention whatsoever of commenting on the rights of either of the parties to that dispute. What concerns (and concerned) me is the behaviour of both sides ... which, quite frankly, was absolutely deplorable.

The second incident took place at the Commission of Enquiry (COE) into the collapse of the CLICO empire on Friday. In that enquiry, a very senior 'Silk' of some 33 years standing, decided that he could gratuitously insult a witness by asking him if he was a bisexual. Mr. Martin Daly was clearly peeved at a response that he had got from Mr. Mervyn Assam and threw the comment/question at him, thus abusing his position as a cross-examining counsel and setting an extremely good example of bad taste and low ethical behaviour.

My point in joining these two incidents together is that they demonstrate clearly that our society has now sunk to new lows that are reminiscent of the wild west where anything went and where might was right. If you were rich and powerful you could (and often did) anything. If you were fast with a gun you could (and often did) anything. And there are plenty of cowboy movies and legends about the ineffective, ineffectual, incompetent and often corrupt sherriff and his deputies. The famous "gunfight at the OK Corral" is one such legend that eventually was made into (I believe) more than one movie. The high and mighty in this society do whatever they want. And the "gunslingers" do the same! Nobody cares or has any respect for anything that is good and decent anymore.

In Trinidad & Tobago standards of good taste have gone through the floor when a so called pillar/exemplar of our society can make the kind of statement in a publicly televised hearing and not be thoroughly pilloried for it. Standards of decency and proper behaviour are now in the cesspit when the leaders of no less an organisation that represents all of the public servants in this country can behave in the disgraceful manner that the country saw on Thursday evening.

I am sorry. If the new rules are that might is right and that we can all say and do anything we want then please tell me so. Perhaps the best way to govern this country is that we disband the police force and allow all citizens to simply strap on a gun in order to defend themselves, blow up all the schools which are clearly not teaching our children anything about proper values and look to see where else we can do away with the trappings of a civilised and progressive State. All the money we are spending on these institutions is clearly going to waste, and you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em ... join 'em! Welcome to the wild, wild west ... Trini style!!!

2011-12-22T10:37:00.002-04:00

MERRY CHRISTMAS

Christmas is always a wonderful time of the year ... even, I dare say, for those who are not christian. It is a time for family and friends and getting together to share ... especially in the way that every culture in the world shares memorable moments and occasions ... with food and drink and the giving of gifts. On Christmas Eve the excitement in the homes that are fortunate enough to have young children is so intense that many parents wonder if the little ones will ever fall asleep.

I have been doing a lot of thinking about Christmas this week ... not only about its religious and historical significance, but what the festival has come to mean in the hearts of millions of families around the world. When I was a little boy Christmas simply meant toys under the tree on Christmas morning. As I grew older, I began to appreciate the gathering of the family for Christmas lunch/ dinner (in my house we always had a very, very late lunch at about 5pm ... or, if you like, early dinner). I didn't notice the 'empty' chairs at first around the Christmas table ... those family members who had passed on or couldn't be there for whatever reason ... nor did I notice the hint of sadness in the eyes of my parents and older folk who had gathered. There were too many happy songs to be sung and I sang all of them!

But as the years have passed I have become more and more aware of the 'empty' chairs ... grown children in Australia, loved ones who have passed, and others who for one (good) reason or another simply cannot be there.

So, does this mean that those of us who have had the pain and sadness of losing a loved one this past year (or at any other time) should cry long tears at Christmas time? Well, if we want to. But I prefer to remember the words of the poet who said

"Life is real, life is earnest
And the grave is not its goal.
Dust thou art and to dust returneth
Was not spoken of the soul"

No. Christmas is a wonderful time ... and Christmas is (amongst other things) about life, glorious life. Remember those who have passed ... by all means. Shed a tear for them if you want. But on Christmas morning draw a deep breath and enjoy being alive. Christmas is a time for everybody to reflect, be happy and (most importantly) share with family and friends. It is, after all is said and done, a time for love.

Merry Christmas to all my readers and to your families.

2011-12-16T10:27:00.002-04:00

IS LAVENTILLE 'FIXABLE'?

Driving to work this morning I was indulging in my usual 'surfing' of the radio talk shows when I stopped on one that caught my ear. The hosts were talking about the problem that is Laventille and how nothing seems to have worked there for the last fifty or so years ... if not longer. Everything seems to have been tried and everything seems to have failed.

Like most Trinidadians I am acutely aware of the human disaster zone that is Laventille. I am also very aware of all that has been done (and not done) and the fact that so long as we don't fix it that we are all simply waiting for the moment when it explodes ... again!

So? What to do? I am of the view that there is no short term fix. This is a problem that took decades to come to where it is today and that short of dropping a nuclear bomb on the place (and, no! I am certainly not advocating that!) `the problem will not go away with a social program here ( a la "Colour Me Orange") or a basketball court there (a la PNM). And although we profess to be familiar with Einstein's edict concerning the definition of insanity, successive regimes continue to do effectively the same thing (though calling it by different names) while expecting a different result. And, of course, the different result never comes!

When I was a young lawyer I was told by an old (and very wise) Queen's Counsel that if I ever wanted to understand a problem I had to go back to basics. That sage advice has helped me enormously as I have journeyed through the adventures that have made up my life. So, applying that advice to Laventille, what is the basic problem there? Answer: extreme ignorance fuelled by excrutiating poverty. I know that a lot of people are going to take offence at the label of extreme ignorance, but it is unfortunately true. I admit that I have no figures to back me up on this, but I will bet dollars to doughnuts that the level of illiteracy in that unfortunate place is intolerably high. I will bet that most of the gang members (if not all) are functionally illiterate. And I will bet that most (if not all) of the pregnant teenage girls can't read or write properly (if at all) either! So, how do you ... we ... fix the social problem that is Laventille? And while I will admit that the ability to read and write may not be everything in this world it does pave the way for a child's mind to be opened. No society in the whole history of mankind has ever succeeded with an illiterate and ignorant population.

The answer has to be by education. The only way out of poverty and to raise a society's standards is by educating the population. In this regard I must say that I believe that our education system is an abysmal failure ... that it is failing our society, not only in Laventille, but in the country as a whole. But that is grist for another post. Let's just concentrate on Laventille for the moment. The schools that cater to that depressed area need to be revamped so that the kids that are churned out at the end are capable, responsible and right thinking. Now, that's a tall order! Those kids already have the terrible hurdles of badly educated (if at all) mothers, terrible and totally unacceptable male role models, and politicians of all stripes (but unfortunately mostly in the PNM) who seek not to help them but to use them for narrow political and sectarian purposes.

But it can be done. It will take time ... more than five years, which is why it probably has never been done. Nobody in power now will get the credit for something that will take about twenty years to fix. But don't fix it now (and 'now' means now!) and it will only get worse. Don't the Chinese have a saying about a journey of a thousand miles beginning with the first step?

2011-12-06T11:51:00.002-04:00

A QUESTION OF CREDIBILITY

"Prime Ministers tend not to lose all their credibility in one go ... Rather it erodes in fits and starts amid accumulations of misstep and scandal".
The Economist - July 14th, 2011

The Government is facing a serious credibility problem that is largely of its own making on the question of the allleged plot to assassinate the Prime Minister and three other Ministers. This follows on the heels of other missteps and scandals such as the Reshmi Ramnarine affair, Caribbean Airlines, the Sat Maharaj/School Principal matter, and (what feels like) a host of others too numerous to count. Why they didn't let the Commissioner of Police announce the alleged plot is beyond me. At least if everything fell apart later (as it did) then he ... and not the Prime Minister ... would have taken the credibility "hit".

This supposed plot to kill the Prime Minister et al was a classic case of misstep that could and should have been avoided from the very beginning. First of all, assassinations of Prime Ministers and Presidents are usually carried out by one of two types: a "crazy" or a small group bent on regime change. But a group of 16 or so plotters is anything but small, and, assuming (though not accepting) that the allegations are true, then the sheer size of the group is practically a guarantee that the plot would leak out. The alleged plotters therefore could not have been very competent.

Put another way, something is missing from the information that we have been given, for the story that we have been given really doesn't make sense. The apparent aim of the assassinations was to cause panic and confusion in the society? Really? For what purpose? Who would benefit from this? For somebody has to benefit. You aren't going to do something as serious as this just to create confusion and panic ... unless you are crazy. And theer is no allegation that the alleged plotters are crazy. So, what could the purpose possibly have been?

The creator of Sherlock Holmes put these words in the mouth of his famous detective:

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible,
whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"

So, using Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's logic, what can we deduce from what we have been told? Remember, we were told (a) there was a plot to kill the PM, and
(b) the aim was to create panic and confusion.
Now, assuming (though again not accepting) that this is indeed true, who would possibly benefit from the resulting panic and confusion? Would it be ... could it be ... somebody who would hope that the UNC would turn to him(her) for guidance and leadership and that he(she) would then tell the Party who to appoint as Prime Minister and thus become the "kingmaker" with all the resulting power that flows from such a position because the new "king" would owe his position to the "kingmaker"? Who?

I agree that this scenario is highly improbable ... but you have to admit that it makes a certain sense if what we were told is true! I will also admit that there are other possible scenarios that I have not been able to imagine. But something has to make sense! And I find it difficult to believe that the Prime Minister lied to us about the plot. So, if she didn't, what is the piece of information that we are missing in order for the plot to make sense?

2011-11-30T12:02:00.002-04:00

REALLY? 1.3 MILLION PEOPLE?

Okay! I should say up front that I have absolutely no statistic to prove or disprove my belief in the real size of our population ... just a certain amount of skepticism and common sense. You see, for at least the last 20 or so years politicians (and everybody else for that matter) have been saying that we are a nation of about 1.3 million people. But that just can't be true! Look! The Elections & Boundaries Commission (EBC) said in the elections last year that there were more than 900,000 people on the electoral register (I can't remember the exact figure, which isn't important any way, for I am not dealing here with completely accurate figures). So, if that is the case, what percentage of the adult population do you think is not registered to vote? Ten percent? Twenty percent? Thirty percent? What? Most people that I ask this question say that they think that the percentage of the adult population that is not registered to vote is somewhere between twenty and thirty percent! (You see now why I said that I wasn't concerned with absolute accuracy of figures!) So, let's take the lower figure of twenty percent, and rounding it off we would say then that there are about 300,000 people who are not registered to vote. In other words, there are about 1.2 million adults in this country (900,000 registered voters plus 300,000 unregistered adults).

Now, if there are 1.2 million adults in the country, how many children do you think there are? (And by 'child' I mean anybody under the age of 18). Do you, for example, believe that the ratio of children to adults is one child to every adult? More? Less? Most people tell me that they think the ratio is about one and a half children to every adult. So, assuming (though not accepting ... but it sounds right) that this is so that would mean that there are about 1.8 million children in the country. Add this to the 1.2 million adults that we calculated above and you come up with a figure of about 3 million people living in this little twin island Republic.

Why is this important? Because if all of our plans, financial and otherwise, are based on a population of 1.3 million and the reality is that the population is more than double that then it must follow that all of our plans are useless! Our statistics as regards GDP would be wrong and the fiscal plans to prevent a further worsening of the recession would be totaly inadequate. We need to get a firm fix on where we are as regards poulation size ... and we need this information like yesterday! A census was done sometime ago. Its results need to be published ... now.

2011-11-21T09:31:00.002-04:00

FLOODING (or, if it ain't my responsibility it ain't my fault)!

Have you ever noticed that when anything goes wrong in good old T&T that Nobody is to blame. Poor old Nobody! He gets in trouble all the time! But then it's always his fault! When you ask 'who did this?' or 'who is responsible?' you always get the answer 'Nobody'. As a result, nothing ever gets fixed. Nothing ever gets changed. And Nobody gets fired!

I know. I am being ridiculous. But, unfortunately, I am also being deadly accurate. Nobody ever gets blamed or punished for anything! It is never anybody's responsibility to make certain, for example, that applications for planning approvals for development include plans for proper drainage. It is never anybody's responsibility to deal with unapproved and unauthorised development ... even when this unauthorised development causes drainage (read "flooding") problems.

Patrick Manning used to boast about his Vision 20/20 plans. But in the seven year period in which he boasted and promoted it never once did I ever read of bench marks that would be able to tell us whether or not the implementation of this vision was on track. Even more importantly, nowhere did I ever read that people were going to be made responsible for things ... especially when they went wrong!

The flooding in Port of Spain and its western environs that took place after very heavy showers, that lasted only for about one hour, on Saturday has caused terrible damage and a great deal of unnecessary suffering that ought to have been avoidable. But when you ask whose fault it was you get answers like "developers" or "clogged drains" or some other vague reply. Who are these developers? What are their names? What developments? Who were the engineers? Who were the builders? Were things done according to approved plans? If so, who approved the plans? If the plans were not approved, then why didn't the relevant authority stop the development and do something about it? Bottom line: Who is responsible? And the answer? (Sound the trumpets) Nobody!

I am reluctantly coming to the very sad conclusion that we are all insane ... mad ... crazy! For we continue to do the same things over and over again and continue to expect a different result. Take the Office of Disaster and Preparedness Management (ODPM) for example. What exactly is its function? To hand out matteresses? If it is supposed to help prevent disasters then what exactly is it doing to prevent them? What? What steps has it taken to mitigate or prevent disasters? But what have we done to make this office function the way that it should? Where is the media in all this? Why doesn't the media ask for the names of those responsible and publicise them? Why? But Nobody has been fired from the ODPM for not doing his job!

And we continue to accept mediocrity. When somebody complains he/she is usually met with 'well, this is Trinidad!' as if that is a good reason (not even an excuse) to put up with the particular incompetence or inefficiency. We continue to allow ourselves to be sidetracked over stupid and unimportant issues (the PNM's present raging debate over whether or not their MP's should wear a balisier tie is a classic example of our collective stupidity on focusing on things that are unimportant) and do not tackle head on the things that are important and affect our lives, and most importantly, solve them!

But then Nobody is to blame for anything and everything. And the problem is that we can't fix it because it's Nobody's responsibility. Nobody will fix it ... we don't have to! But my guess is that Nobody is gonna fix things anytime soon. Why should he? We can't fire Nobody. He's got a job for life!

2011-11-10T13:41:00.002-04:00

THE DEATH THROES OF THE PNM

A lot of people may not realise it, but we are witness to history right now. The once mighty and invincable PNM is on its death bed and the last rites have been read. Oh! Don't get me wrong. The brand will be around for a long time, but the once great Party and all that it stood for is effectively dead and gone and the present leadership is totally and completely incapable of bringing it back to life. It simply is no longer a credible alternative government and is totally and completely incapable of uniting this little country of ours.

Although most of us might not have recognised it at the time, with the benefit of hindsight the Party clearly was mortally ill long before the May 2010 elections which effectively dealt it a mortal blow. Indeed, there are a lot of people (especially PNM people) who simply cannot understand why Manning called the election so early. The obvious answer was that he was facing a potentially devastating vote of no confidence which was being brought by then Leader of the Opposition Kamla Persad Bissessar and he didn't want what the then Opposition had to say to come out. If it had, his moral authority (which was already tenuous thanks to the UDECOTT Commission of Enquiry and its very public revelations) would have evaporated completely. Further, he was was facing a very serious rebellion in his own ranks. Dr. Rowley, because of his attacks on Manning up to that point, would have had to join with the Opposition against Mr. Manning, or lose complete credibility both within as well as without his Party. It was also quite probable that Rowley would have pulled a few of his supporters with him. All of this meant that even if he had been able to defeat the vote of no confidence in the Parliament, Manning would have lost it outside ... and outside is where it really counts!

Fast forward some 17 months later and only the most obtuse would not recognise that his so-called apology was a case of too little too late. After a truly dismal record as Prime Minister Mr. Manning came forward to apologise to "all those whom I have caused to be disenfrachised". What? Who did he disenfranchise? The Indian community? Most certainly he did do that! But did he mean them? I doubt it. And if he did then I really don't believe that the apology was sincere. Sorry. But actions speak louder than words. He hasn't done a thing to show that community that he is truly sorry for his actions over the years that effectively discriminated against them. And he did, people. He did!

So who was he referring to? Those PNMites who were feeding at the public trough? Quite possibly. That at least would be more believable. But that apology was really too late. It could have and should have come a lot earlier.

But the truth is that Mr. Manning really couldn't care less. What he was (and is) trying to do is to undermine Dr. Rowley ... who, God bless him, is trying as hard as he can to help Mr. Manning do just that! Everybody understood what Mr. Manning meant when he said that he wasn't going to be like "a pothound chasing after every passing car". What he was doing was demoting Dr. Rowley from rottwheiller status to that of a pot hound. And good old Rowley has cheerfully re-confirmed that he does just that when he made such stupid and silly comments about businessmen Steve Ferguson and Ishwar Galbaransingh winning their extradition matter that it provoked a meeting of the Law Association to discuss whether the comments constitute a contempt of Court.

Rowley clearly did not bother to read the 57 page judgement nor did he bother to acquaint himself remotely with the law of extradition. If you are going to criticise, by all means do so. But at least do it from an informed perspective. Nobody says that you have to agree with everything a judge decides ... even if it is a decision coming from the Privy Council! But if you are going to disagree, then for crying out loud, do so from a point that clearly understands all of the arguments.

I don't want here to go into that "Ish & Steve" case. We can deal with it at another time if necessary. The point here is not the decision of the judge, but how Rowley dealt with it. Rowley simply does not have the intellectual capacity nor the political "smarts" to lead a national political party. He is clear evidence of the "Peter Principle" at work.

The PNM has no effective or national leadership. There is nobody in its present hierarchy that looks remotely like an alternative Prime Minister and the Party is reaching more and more down into its more racist elements in order to be able to show that it has some modicum of support. Most of its educated and more sober minded supporters now look on with not little dismay. They can't bring themselves over even to support the COP (and that tells us something about the COP ... but, again, that's another story), and certainly they feel most uncomfortable with the UNC, but they can't bring themselves to vote for the Party that led this country to independance almost 5o years ago. So, those voters are parked up now and the PNM is about to die (if it ain't dead already)!

The problem here for Kamla is that politics (like nature) abhors a vacuum. There is no guarantee that a new third force will not rise to take the PNM's place, and if it does, and the economy remains sluggish, it could cause serious problems for the Partnership. We'll all continue to watch with interest.

2011-10-31T11:09:00.002-04:00

"NEW" ECONOMICS

We all are (or ought to be) familiar with Albert Einstein's famous definition of insanity: doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result. It seems to me that this is what we have been doing for a long time ... too long. Quite frankly. I cannot discern any real difference between the economic philosophies and policies of this administration from the last, despite all the rhetoric to the contrary and despite all the previous hype about "new politics". If there are policy differences, then could somebody please explain them to me.

The economy is central to everything ... the war against crime, the making of a better life for the citizenry, better health care, better education, better roads ... everything! If the economy fails then everything else sooner or later (and usually sooner) will also fail. Once you understand this fundamental fact then you will understand why I keep going on about the economy and what the Government is or is not doing about it.

Back in 1987 the "flavour" of the time was "trickle down economics". This was an economic theory that had two powerful adherents ... Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher. When the NAR Government came in under A.N.R. Robinson it followed the principles of this theory slavishly. The argument then was that T&T needed to adopt these type of economic principles in order to get out of the rather deep hole that we had dug ourselves into. At the time I was an Opposition Senator and argued that you could not run a country like a business ... a country was not a business, and that if you attempted to do so then while you would get the country out of the hole what would happen is that the rich would get richer and that the poor would get poorer and the middle class would be squeezed out of existance.

Well, Manning came to power in 1991 and persued the same economic policies. Then came Panday in 1995, and Manning again in 2001. As far as economic policies are concerned nothing changed. (This has nothing to do with Manning's squandermania ... we are talking about economic policies! Even the best policies go awry when the wealth of a country is squandered). And here we are back at the beginning as it were ... 1987 all over again. (It is interesting to note, by the way, that Mr. Dookeran was the Planning Minister in Robinson's Cabinet back then).

Time has, most unfortunately, proven my 1987 arguments correct. The gap between rich and poor is now much greater than it ever was, and the middle class is gasping for breath on its death bed. If the present Finance Minister continues on his present course he might get us out of the hole, but at a terrible cost. It would be like the famous medical joke: the operation was a success but the patient died!

So, what to do? We ought to take another look at how we are doing things. Maybe we should take a leaf out of former President Bill Clinton's idea of "invest and grow economics" as opposed to the outdated and discredited "trickle down" theory. We need to start creating ... like yesterday ... a new investment paradigm. We need to make T&T a place where people will want to come and live and invest. Do you know, for example, that Brazil is enjoying an influx of qualified and educated Europeans who, unable to find work in their own countries are now migrating en masse to Brazil? This 'reverse' brain drain is beginning to cause such concern that just last week you had the BBC reporting on it. Educated immigrants build a country. So, why don't we look at this possibility? And if you tell me in a rather smug manner that you are, then what are you doing about it?

Put another way, the time has come to stop all the "ol' talk" which we are so good at. No! The time has come to perform ... get things done! As the old Basdeo Panday used to say ... and he was right ... performance beats old talk every time! We don't need a lot of half baked theories, nor do we need a bunch of badly articulated speeches. We need action ... now! And just in case you didn't understand "now" means now!

2011-10-21T10:30:00.002-04:00

REAL "NEW POLITICS" - CHANGING THE PARADIGM

The just concluded budget debate was as uninspiring as the erstwhile Finance Minister's budget presentation. It is almost as if every single Parliamentarian was absolutely determined not to outshine the Minister when it came to his ideas on the management of the economy. Everybody payed lip service to the old idea that "we have to stop depending on our oil and gas" (and I have put the phrase in inverted commas on purpose), but nobody came up with any new ideas as to how we should achieve this obviously desirable goal. Nobody stood up and articulated a vision as to how we should or could achieve this highly desirable goal. Because let's face it, the oil and gas will run out one of these days! And then what?!

Looking at the relationship between Government and the private sector in this country since dinosaurs roamed the earth (or at least since independence) it is difficult to come to any other conclusion but that the private sector has failed miserably and/or been unable to meet the great challenge of being able to pay its own way as far as exports are concerned. In other words, if it weren't for the oil and gas revenues we would not be anywhere near the level of development that we now enjoy. So, the big question is why? Why hasn't the private sector 'stepped up to the plate and performed as it should have? They have had almost fifty years to do this! So? Why haven't they?

A friend of mine has suggested to me that one of the reasons for this is quite simple: all elected governments tend to become elected dictatorships for their term in office. In good old T&T the business class has tended to "suck up" to the Administration of the day and behave as supplicants rather than as partners. The result to date has been that the elected politicians tend to preen their feathers and enjoy their temporary and apparent superiority without bothering to realise that this attitude has stymied economic growth for the last fifty years! It is more fun to deal with a supplicant rather than with a partner. Having to deal with a partner would mean that you have to listen to his views ... which can occasionally be inconvenient. But if the rules mean that any time you want to get something that you have to come to me for permission then my ego is inflated and there is a good chance that I can get my pocket fattened as well. So, it ain't really in my interest ("me" being a politician of any political party who is either in office at the moment or who has hopes of one day being in office) to fix the problem or change the rules in any meaningful way that would allow you to make decisions without having to beg or ask me for a favour.

Let me put it another way: there are a host of things that require governmental approval or licences. At any given time on any given subject, the businessman has to jump through hoops to get his approval. There is no such thing as a fast track for anything, ranging from the simple application for a passport to the obtaining of an energy licence to do exploration. Work permits continue to be difficult to obtain, even when the foreigner invests substantial sums in the country. The prevailing attitude from those in charge of the State apparatus is that they are doing us a favour ... and not the other way around ... by giving us a licence or permission for whatever!

If you compare Trinidad and Tobago with Singapore you will get an idea of where I am coming from. In Singapore the Government treats with the private sector as partners, not as supplicants. Decisions on all matters are quick and informed. The Government there does not try to supplant or dominate the business community.The result has been that a small country with no apparent physical resources has boomed in the last fifty years. Things work there ... and work well! A lot has to do with attitude, especially the attitude of the politicians and the civil servants.

We have to start realising that it is not sinful to make money and to start creating an environment that is truly "business friendly". This is not to say that the business community is without sin. Don't let me get started on that! Maybe the sins of the business community can be the subject of another post, but let's deal with one thing at a time.

"New politics" (that grossly over used and over abused phrase) ought to be revisited again ... and this time it ought to mean something. It ought to mean creating a new and efficient business environment. It ought to mean that we are finally growing up and realise that our favourite colour should be the colour of our hundred dollar bills ... blue!

2011-10-18T10:42:00.002-04:00

AN OLD COWBOY & INDIAN MOVIE

Okay. I think that now is about the time in the old cowboy movies when the wagons had been circled and the Indians were riding around shooting flaming arrows into them and amunition was running low that you would hear the sound of a bugle and you knew that at the last minute the cavalry was going to appear from just behind the hill and chase the Indians away saving everybody except for a couple of bad guys in the wagon train who had been conveniently killed by the Indians. In other words, now is the time for the cavalry (in the form of the Prime Minister) to take charge and fire her Finance Minister before all the wagons (the economy) are completely burned and the Indians (the economic problems facing us) completely overwhelm the wagon train (the country).

The budget presented by Mr. Dookeran was wooly, lacked any kind of detail, pretended that nothing had been promised last year and therefore there was no need to refer to any of the unkept promises from last year (because they simply didn't exist in his mind), and did absolutely nothing to engender confidence in his stewardship of the economy. It was a hodgepodge of good wishes and vague promises. In simple English, look out for more of the same that we have endured over the last year. Things just aren't going to get better ... in fact, they will probably get worse!

If I am proven wrong then I will be the first person to sing 'Glory Halleluiah!! Thank goodness that I was wrong!" I genuinely do not want to be right! But if I am right ... and, unfortunately, I believe that I am ... what are we going to do? Hold our collective heads and bawl "woe is me!"? Well, that is one solution. Another would be to take charge of our destiny by telling the Prime Minister that while we still have confidence in her, regretably, we do not have any confidence in Mr. Dookeran's ability to manage our economy. Let's face it! He has failed to deliver! And the sooner that we face up to this the better. I know that I am mixing metaphors here, but we have to stop being the people who see that the Emperor is naked and pretending that he isn't.

Can the economy be saved? The short answer is 'yes'. But it cannot be saved and will not be saved unless there is leadership with clear and well articulated policies and ideas to get us out of the stinking morass that we find ourselves in. And regretably, that just ain't comin' from our hapless and seemingly helpless Finance Minister.

Actually, he should count himself lucky, because the Opposition PNM is even more hapless and helpless than he is. Dr. Rowley and his cohorts are continuously reminding all of us why we voted them out last year. Dr. Rowley's budget contribution failed to gain any traction, nor has he been able to articulate even his good points (because he did have a few) in a way that resonated with the average person. The truth is that the PNM is suffering from a dearth (as well as a death)of leadership. It is hard to believe that it could have ever happened, but Dr. Rowley's performance over the last 16 months or so has had the obviously unintended effect of making Patrick Manning look good!

But Kamla should not sit back and take too much comfort from the PNM's obvious disarray. The old truism that oppositions do not win elections ... governments lose them, still holds true today. The Prime Minister cannot rest on the fact that she is today the most popular politician in the country. Nor should she take comfort from the fact that the majority of the population still supports her Government. She should remember that the Indians in the old cowboy movies were able to inflict tremendous damage on wagon trains that carried with it incompetent persons who failed to live up to their responsibilities to guard the wagons and the people inside. How many old movies have you seen where a guard fell asleep and the Indians were able to sneek up, kill him and then cause serious damage to the wagons and their occupants? Usually in those old movies, the hero/heroine would see the Indians sneeking in and raise the alarm. We need the heroine in this real life cowboy and indian movie to raise the alarm right now. She is the only one who can do it. Put another way, give Mr. Dookeran another job. Anything! Send him to China! Anywhere! Just get him out of Finance. We can't afford him there much longer.

2011-10-06T14:00:00.003-04:00

LEADERSHIP AND THE BUDGET

In a few days from now the Minister of Finance is going to unveil his 2011-2012 budget. There are many who are predicting that the very large gasoline or fuel subsidy will be radically reduced if only because we can no longer afford it. There are others who are predicting (including the Minister) that there will be several "surprises" ... and that most of them will be unpleasant. (Though, to be fair to the Minister, although he has said that there will be "surprises", he hasn't said that they will be unpleasant.) My question is why is it necessary for there to be "surprises" (especially unpleasant ones) from a politician who spent years preaching transparency and open government?

And this brings me to the central point of this post: Leadership! I have said it many times ... the only test for leadership is to lead and to lead vigorously! But in order to lead you have to have some idea of where you want to go. You don't want to lead people, for example, off a cliff onto the sharp rocks below. In order to lead vigorously you have to explain where it is that you want to go, why you want to get there, how you intend to get there, and what everyone is going to have to do in order to get to that "shining city on the hill". Once you do that you will find that if your ideas are clear and logical people will happily follow, even if it entails some immediate sacrifice on their part. But, if you don't explain yourself properly and just in effect say 'well, this is what I am going to do and I expect all of you to be quiet and just fall in line' , then you will sooner or later get a lot of grumbling that will eventually spill over into serious protest that is neither welcome nor healthy for any democratic society.

The truth is that people only resort to protesting when they feel that their leaders are not listening and/or don't really care about the problems that are being encountered by the protestors in their day to day lives.If people feel that their leaders care and are doing the best that they can in all of the circumstances they will "take the pressure". But it is so very important that the people can see the light at the end of the tunnel and understand why it is necessary to "go through the tunnel" all the way until the end.

The present Finance Minister is regarded by many as having failed in his stewardship of the economy over the last 16 months that he has been in office. To those who would disagree I say look at the fact that the TT dollar has slipped from $6.30 to US$1.00 down to about $6.47 to US$1.00 in the last 16 months ... and it continues to fall. The Central Bank has said that the reason for the slippage is the high demand for US dollars. Why would anyone want to convert his TT dollars into US dollars at this time in history when the pressure on the American economy is terrible, the immediate prospects for teh American economy are anything but good, and interest rates in American banks on deposits hover at around half of one percent? There is only one answer that makes sense: people with money have more confidence in the American economy than they do in the Trinidad one! Then you have only got to listen to almost every businessman complaining that "things are slow". Yes! Things are slow! Unemployment is rising slowly and people are finding it harder to make ends meet. Maybe things might have been worse if you, Mr. Minister, had not done certain things. But is it too much to ask you to tell us the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth about the economy, Clico and everything else?! Because let me tell you something: It is not too much to demand from you that you tell us what has been going on and what you intend to do in clear and unequivocal terms. You didn't do that last year!

And therein lies the case for leadership. The Minister should understand that he has precious little time left to lead us out of the stagnation that we have found ourselves in. I do understand that a lot of the problems that the Minister is grappling with are not of his making. But that ain't the point! The point is that we voted for you to solve these problems for us. Speaking for myself only, I really do hope that the Minister does not spend an inordinate time on Monday telling us all about the problems. Hello! We know what they are. What we want to know is how you are going to fix them and why you believe that the solutions that you are presenting will work. We also want to know what are your benchmarks for success.

If you do that Mr. Minister, everyone (including me) will praise you and call you a hero. If you don't do that, then quite frankly, and as nice as you are, the Prime Minister should fire you, for you clearly cannot lead. And leadership is what we so desperately need right now!

2011-09-21T09:42:00.002-04:00

TAKING ANOTHER LOOK AT THE SoE

This Government really needs somebody to help them explain to the public their aims and objectives for or on any particular issue ... especially when there are so many thorny issues that need explaining. In the Twenty-First century it is a sine qua non that governments should be open and transparent, at least if they aspire to be democratic. It is also important to keep reminding this Government that they were elected (inter alia) on a promise of just that, i.e., openness and transparency. And it is important that we keep on pointing out that they are failing miserably in being open and transparent on a host of important issues.

I raise this now because I am concerned at the lack of a cohesive message coming from the Government concerning the State of Emergency (SoE), what are the aims and goals that the Government has, for what I have previously called "the end game" strategy. As I have said before, I personally can't see "the end game" strategy, which is, of course, a far different thing from saying that such a strategy does not exist. But in looking at what has happened over the last month in the country and in also reading (or trying to at any rate) everything that both the proponents and the critics of the SoE have had to say, I have come to certain tentative conclusions which I will readily admit are not necessarily accurate. Still, persons with whom I have discussed them with agree that they make some sense. It is in this light that I seek to share them with you.

First of all, it is unreasonable to expect that the SoE will mean the complete or virtual elimination of serious crime. It won't and it can't. The "bad boys" will get out of jail sooner or later and they will try to return to their evil ways. And the police will have to be prepared to deal with that when it happens ... as it most certainly will.

However, what we can all hope for and reasonably expect is that the imposition of the SoE and the seizures of arms and ammunition has been (will be) such that this combination seriously dents the various criminal enterprises being carried on by the various criminal gangs. In other words, it is going to be difficult for the gangs to get back up to their previous levels of murderous activity. Anything that makes life difficult for the criminals has to be a good thing.

Secondly, there has been a lot of criticism that "Mr. Big" has not yet been caught. This criticism is really as unrealistic as it is unfair. Let's examine a few facts:
(1) Something like 98 per cent of the gang activity (murders, armed robbery, etc.)
is being committed by gangs coming out of what you might call the "original
hotspots" like Laventille and the Beetham. It happens that most of the people
in these areas are African ... which is why most of those arrested/detained so
far have been black.
(2) These gangs are not the importers of the guns. It is reasonable to assume
(though I will readily confess that I have absolutely no evidence to back this up)
that the importers of the arms and ammunition come from Central and South. I
say this because I believe that most of the smuggling of guns and drugs come in
through fishing boats operated by "fishermen" in Central and South. Now,
assuming that this is correct then it is also quite probable that most of these
gun importers are Indian. Again, I say this because the majority of East Indians
live in Central and South. It is also reasonable to assume that these are the "Mr
Bigs" that everybody keeps talking about.
(3) The problem for the authorities is that without some sort of evidence it is going
to be difficult, if not impossible to get any kind of evidence against the gun
importers. Think about it. If you were a gang leader and I was your supplier of
guns and ammunition I would be the last person that you would "sell out".
There are two obvious reasons for this: First of all, if you sold me out you would
be cutting off your future supply, and secondly, if you sold me out I would
probably kill you and/or your family. Think about it!

In other words, the authorities ain't gonna catch "Mr. Big" any time soon. They will catch a few "big" gang leaders, but those guys at the top of the pyramid will continue to walk the streets of T&T! Sad, but true! The authorities therefore are probably better off doing just what they have been doing ... attacking the "market" that the "Mr. Bigs" have been supplying their products to in an effort to destroy or seriusly damge the trade.

Some politicians have foolishly been trying to play the race card in order to bolster their standing with certain elements of the electorate. This is as stupid as it is dangerous and should be condemned by all right thinking people. But that is not the point of this particular post.

The point is that we ought to understand that regardless of what some might be saying, that the bench marks for success in this SoE have to be a lot lower than what we might be being led to believe. Therefore, the bench marks for success have to be:
(a) That when the SoE is removed although we can expect
(regretably) some escalation again in criminal activity, that such
activity is considerably less than what was pertaining before the SoE
was declared;
(b) That the intelligence/information gathered by the police during this
SoE is such that the police will now be in a position to force the
continued downward spiral of serious crime in this little country of
ours.

Put another way, we should be very realistic as to what is and what is not achievable. Speaking for myself, I believe that what I have said above is achievable and realistic. I, for one, will be satisfied if this is indeed what is achieved. What do you think? What are your benchmarks for judging the success of the SoE?

2011-09-05T09:44:00.002-04:00

MEANWHILE, BACK AT THE RANCH...

To say that the contributions of the PNM Opposition in the State of Emergency (SoE) debate in Parliament over the weekend were pithy and uninspiring is to put it mildly. The primary purpose of an Opposition in a democratic Parliament is to present achievable alternatives for or to a particular problem. Instead of coming to the Parliament with real ideas and proposals just about every Opposition speaker from Keith Rowley to Amery Browne (and everybody in between) simply attacked the Government with criticisms that on occasion were overtly racist in both tone and content and provided absolutely no alternatives to the present imbroglio.

As readers of this blog will have noted, I am one of those who is most concerned about the end result. I too have said (and continue to say) that there has to be a well thought out strategy to be able to take the country up over and out. But, I have made it clear (or tried to at any rate) that I cautiously support the Government in this SoE and that I am dearly hoping that they do in fact succeed. The fact that I can't discern an 'end game' strategy does not mean that there isn't one. And no, I personally do not have at this time any 'end game' solutions. So, we should all just sit and wait ... at least for a while. Put another way, I am prepared to give the Government a chance to make things right. Heck! it is in my/our interests that they do make things right.

But life has to go on, and one of the most important events of the year is just around the corner ... and that is the presentation of the annual budget. No thinking person in the country cannot help but be concerned. We have seen the TT dollar over the last 15 or so months slip from about TT$6.30 to US$1.00 down to about TT$6.47 to US$1.00! And the Minister of Finance has behaved as if this is no big thing and of no great concern to him. In talking to persons who should know they tell me that the main reason for this 'slippage' is because wealthy Trinidadians are taking their money out ... in other words, they do not have confidence in the Government's overall ability to manage the economy and they are betting on a continuing slide or devaluation.

Now, I have spoken with several Government Ministers and other spokesmen who assure me that the budget will change things radically for the better and that we are going to see fairly soon some big projects that will turn on the flow of dollars once more ... indeed, the Prime Minister herself spoke in Parliament over the weekend of a huge $40 billion project that is about to be launched for Invaders Bay. But these big projects have to start coming on stream now ... and 'now' means now!!

What also needs to happen is for the Minister of Finance to start to tell the country what his plans are in advance of the budget. People need hope that things will get better. One of the ways of giving them that hope is to explain to the population how you are planning things to make their lives better and what exactly you are planning. We need to see the plans and be able to understand them. We need to have an idea of when things are likely to start turning around. And we need to understand why you think that it will take the time that you say. Or, as I have said before: Explain! Explain!! Explain!!!

2011-08-30T10:38:00.002-04:00

(VERY) SIMPLE ARITHMETIC!

Like most people in the country, I am very concerned about the crime situation and an hoping and praying that this state of emergency (SOE) really does 'break the backs' of the criminal gangs. And, like a lot of thinking people who do not have access to security reports, I am concerned because I cannot discern a clear strategy for what happens after the SOE is lifted and life goes back to 'normal' (whatever 'normal' was).

You see, I was doing some very simple arithmetic on the back of a napkin in a favourite watering hole at lunch time yesterday and came up with the following:

Let's say that we have a population of 1.5 million people. (In the absence of the publication of a reliable census we are all guessing ... I am assuming that the population is in fact larger than the 1.3 million everybody quotes. All the other figures too are simply assumptions/guesses, but hopefully you will get my point). Now, let's say that the African/Black population is a little less than half that figure ... say, 650,000. Now, let's say that of that figure approximately half are males ... so that would give us a figure of 325,000. Now, let's say that of that figure a little less than half live in the 'hotspots'. So that would give us a figure of approximately 150,000 African males living in the 'hotspots'. And of that figure let's say that approximately half are young enough/old enough to be the 'target age group' for gang membership. That would yield a figure of approximately 75,000. And finally, let's say that gang membership is confined to approximately 10 per cent of this 'target age group'. In other words, there are approximately 7,500 young, angry and dangerous men running around with various degrees of lethal weapons at their command.

Now, before anybody accuses me of some kind of racism because I am targeting only young black men, let me just say that the empirical evidence that has been presented to the population as a whole over the last few years is that the overwhelming majority of the criminal gang population appears to be composed of young black men. If this is not so, then please present your own evidence that proves or suggests otherwise.

So, back to my point, which is that it was announced in today's papers that the total number arrested was 820. This means that according to my figures ... which admittedly could easily be widely inaccurate ... a little more than 10 percent of the gang members have so far been detained! Assuming (as is entirely possible) that this figure doubles or even quadruples in the coming weeks, what happens next? I just don't see an 'exit strategy'. And this (the 'exit strategy') is probably even more important than just locking up all of these people for now.

The Government needs to understand that the citizenry is overwhelmingly on its side in this war on the criminals, and we desperately want it to succeed. We do understand that for obvious security reasons they cannot tell us everything, but we need to be told enough to stay on their side. So when, for example, the Attorney General says something like the names of those detained cannot be published for legal reasons... a statement which does not make sense at all ... it becomes difficult for those of us who wish the Government well in this SOE to defend all of their actions. And it allows people like Amery Browne to defend otherwise indefensible causes.

The Government must understand that at the end of the day, there will have to be a full and frank accounting. It will be to their eternal credit if they not only do that, but when they do they are able to demonstrate their success so clearly that even an idiot will have to acknowledge it and we will all be able to live in a country that once more belongs to all of us.

2011-08-25T10:21:00.002-04:00

DIVIDED WE STAND!!!!

I received the following e mail from a PP supporter last night which is self explanatory:

I received this YouTube clip and the sender captioned it as Kalipersad vs Ramlogan.
Kalipersad vs Ramlogan... I don’t think so! Now that I have seen/heard the interview (Youtube video clip attached below) I see it as a continuation of the PNM underground machine/war room which has always been aided and abetted by the Trinidad Express very active and very much at work.
The sustained attack by the Express Newspaper on the PM and the Government continues . This was not professional journalism, indeed, it was an abuse by Kalipersad of the electronic media, an abuse of the “freedom of the press” – he discarded all journalistic integrity!
Dominic Kalipersad should be ashamed and embarrassed by his unethical and unprofessional conduct!
Attorney General Anand Ramlogan must be congratulated for his very professional responses and for “keeping his cool” especially when from the very beginning it was evident that Kalipersad’s tone and intent were going to be confrontational and irresponsible.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d2HRRhqwc1w&feature=share

Now, let me tell you what my problem is: Having watched the video I did not think that Kalipersad had "discarded all journalistic integrity" as stated by my friend above. I did think that he was tough and aggressive ... and could even buy the argument that he was totally unsympathetic to the Attorney General's (and by extension the Government's) position. On the other hand, I did think that the interviewer was wrong when he told the Attorney General of Trinidad & Tobago "don't be rude". Even if you don't like the individual who happens to occupy the office, you ought at all times to respect that office. At the very least, I thought that the comment was disrespectful. I also thought that it was certainly not at all nice to say that the AG had invited himself onto the program. That may have indeed been true, but to say it like that!? When I heard that my reaction was "ouch"! Put another way, I thought that this comment was unnecessary and added nothing to the quality of the interview. But overall I did not have a problem with the very tough questioning of the Minister.

I also thought that the AG could have done a better job in explaining things. For example, thePolice Service Commission (PSC) had come out and criticised the Commissioner of Police (CoP) for being out of the country when the state of emergency (SOE) was called. Dominic Kalipersad questioned the AG on this ... rather aggressively and the AG obviously did not have the facts at his fingertips that have appeared in this morning's papers. (What happened, it seems, was that the CoP had indeed written to the proper authority informing them of his travel plans. The PSC was informed on the Friday before (i.e., 19th August) and the PSC did not deal with the letter until Tuesday 23rd August! But the PSC on Monday 22nd August decided to slam the CoP for not informing them (when in fact he had) of his plans to be out of the country!) Certain questions arise as to whether or not the PSC was correct in all of the circumstances to make the press release as hastily as it did ... for it was clearly wrong ... but that could be the subject of another post. Suffice to say at this time that if today's newspaper reports are correct, then the apparent or perceived bias of one of the members of the PSC ought now to be called into question.

And this brings me to the central point of this post. In the last four days since the declaration of the SOE you can tell who is a supporter of the Government and who is a supporter of the PNM merely by listening to or reading the comments as to whether or not the SOE is a good or bad move. Let's all take a few steps back and a few deep breaths. These are trying enough times without us all being at one another's throats. First of all, let us all acknowledge that if this SOE works and the criminal elements in our society are "licked up" that will be a very, very good thing and that the temporary sacrifice of giving up our civil liberties will have been well worth it. Let us understand that the real enemies are the criminals, not the PNM or the PP supporters. Everybody should be united on this. And I am the first to acknowledge that there appear to be serious problems with the way that this SOE was implemented. At the moment, though, I am prepared (probably because I recognise how desperate and how serious the situation is) to put aside any misgivings that I might have and give this thing a chance to work. If it does not work then we can all revisit all of the issues. For now, at least, I urge everyone else to do the same.

2011-08-23T15:21:00.002-04:00

THE STATE OF EMERGENCY: WHAT'S GOING ON?

Every right thinking member of society must want the Government to succeed in its war against the criminal elements in our society. And make no mistake: it is a war. There are many who have been calling for a state of emergency ("SOE") to be declared for just this purpose and there are great expectations that the criminal elements will finally be brought to heel. But will they? It is difficult to say at this time. I certainly hope so ... but hoping just ain't good enough!

Let me explain what I mean: The way that this SOE was declared was ... well, unusual, to say the least. SOE's are never usually declared in advance. They are usually declared quietly and when they are in force the Government then moves to pick up and detain those persons who are considered a threat to the society for whatever reason (planning a coup, crime, etc.). If an SOE is announced well before it come s into effect, that announcement will give time to the very persons who are targets of the SOE to run and hide.

Remember that the declaration of an SOE is an extermely serious thing. An SOE takes away certain fundamental constitutional rights that the citizenry has against dictatorship and virtually allows a Government (any Government) untrammeled access to powers of arrest and detention without access to the Courts. While it is sometimes necessary for a Government in times of peril to declare an SOE that declaration needs to be very carefully thought out and the SOE needs to be very carefully executed and removed as soon as possible.

So, my question is what exactly happened to cause this SOE to be declared? The second question is why was it declared in advance of it taking effect? I will readily admit that there may be another reason, or even several other reasons, but I can only think of two: The first is that there was a sudden and unexpected security threat that could only be met by the declaring of an SOE. This is possible, and it may also explain why the whole thing was handled in such an apparently rushed way. (More on this point later.) It could also explain why this happened when the Commissioner of Police and his deputy were out of the country! (That point in itself is curious too, don't you think?)

The next possibility is that it was done by "vaps". Eleven murders took place in a very short space of time and the Government panicked. This could also explain the rather haphazard way that the whole thing was presented. But then surely Brigadier Sandy should have known better?

Now, most democratic Governments have (or ought to have) contingency plans in place for just about every type of emergency, including (though not limited to) declaing an SOE. It would be disheartening to learn that such a contingency plan did not exist, and I for one would like to believe otherwise. But if it did exist, why was the SOE declared in the way that it was? That did not make sense at all!

The expectation of the population is that crime will drop radically after this (assuming always that it really was done to declare war on the criminals); but if that is going to be the case then it was reasonable to expect that (a) there would be massive arrests of known gang leaders and gang members, and (b) that there would be massive searches in the designated hotspots which would yield massive seizures of arms and ammunition. But neither has happened yet! And at the time of writing the SOE is almost 48 hours old! Usually the significant arrests and seizures are made almost immediately after the SOE comes into force! Everything after that is what might be called "mopping up" operations.

So? What has happened? Please don't get me wrong. I want this SOE to work. I want the criminals caught and put under lock and key. I do not want the Government to fail on this. You see, if after the SOE is lifted crime simply goes right back to where it was before then we will be in a worse position than we were in before the SOE was declared. It will mean that the SOE was totally ineffective and that the bad guys were able to outsmart the good guys. It will also mean that the Government has run out of effective means of controlling the criminals in this country. I honestly and sincerely hope that the Government wins this fight. It has to! There is obviously no "Plan B". And that can't be good for any of us.

2011-08-19T09:31:00.002-04:00

CAPTAIN! THE SHIP IS SINKING!!

"Unless we find a way to either reduce our import demand and replace that with domestic production we are going to be struggling with maintaining a relatively stable TT dollar versus the US dollar,"http://www.trinidadexpress.com/business-magazine/T_T_revenue_under_threat-127916438.html

Put another way, what the Central Bank Governor is saying in the above quoted article that we look as though we are heading for an inevitable devaluation. More than one reader of this blog has in fact written we to tell me this. Well, the short story is that I agree with them. It certainly looks that way. The long story, though, is a little different in that it ain't necessarily so! A devaluation is not necessarily inevitable and can still be warded off.

What I mean is this: The sad truth is that in the 15 or so months that he has been Finance Minister Mr. Dookeran has done little to engender the necessary confidence in the business community that he has the financial situation under control. They look at the fact that there has beeen an extremely tight rein on Government expenditure and that promised projects and payments are inexplicably delayed, that there is suddenly a huge squeeze by the commercial banks on hitherto good customers ... which squeeze the banks say is being dictated to them by the Central Bank ... and the absolute dearth of clear information as to exactly what is the state of our finances. After more than two years the infamous Clico accounts, we are told, are still in a mess! Really? If that is true, then where in the name of heaven was the Regulatory Authority (better known as the Central Bank) in all those years previously when Clico and its executives were bestriding the world like a colossos (or is it 'colossi'?)? Where were the auditors? How come nobody has been charged with fraud?

It may very well be that Mr. Dookeran is doing a fine job in his Ministry and that he is indeed saving us all from an even greater calamity that could befall our tiny nation state in the global economic hurricanes that are blowing at this time. But he just isn't telling us a thing! And this is the man who preached transparency, new politics and open government all the while that he was in opposition! So, what happened? Was all that just a lie? Is he a hypocrite who says one thing but does another? What? Why can't he explain?

A Finance Minister has to lead ... and the only way to lead is to lead vigourously. He cannot stay in his ivory tower, drink coffee and hold meetings with the IMF boffins who tell him that he is doing a great job. He might be , but we don't know that!!! And therein lies the problem. Why can we not be trusted with the truth?

The TT dollar is sinking as against the US dollar. The US dollar is sinking as against many of the world's major currencies, so we are getting hit not once, but twice! And the main reason that our dollar is sinking is because there is a lack of confidence in Mr. Dookeran's management of the economy. And the main reason for that lack of confidence is because he simply will not explain to us what exactly is going on.

The time has come for Mr. Dookeran to be replaced as Finance Minister ... before it is too late. If the reality is that he is really doing a good job (which I will be the first to admit might be possible) then keep him on as a junior Finance Minister where from behind the scenes he can help. But put a person who can lead ... Vassant Bharath comes to mind for example, although agriculture is so important that I would hate to see him go from there. The problem is that the Finance Ministry is the most important ministry of all. Without good management and leadership there nothing happens! It is still not too late. The economic situation can still be turned around. What is needed is a huge dose of confidence to be injected into the national pysche. And it is clear that whatever his virtues (which may be many) Mr. Dookeran's ability to engender confidence is clearly not one of them. Because, mark me well, in the words of Gypsy's immortal calypso, Captain, the ship is sinking and without that confidence the very bad storms which are gathering on the not so distant horizon will strike to the detriment of all.

Isn't there a saying about who doh hear must feel?

2011-08-02T11:07:00.002-04:00

"A PROUD 70 YEAR TRACK RECORD"?

There are, quite obviously, a lot of questions concerning the Caribbean Airline (CAL) crash in Guyana in the early hours of Saturday morning that can't and won't be answered until the investigation by the American National Transport and safety Board (NTSB) is concluded. One thing is certain, the Americans will not allow any cover up and we will all sooner or later learn the truth. I suppose that we ought to be grateful for small mercies!

However, one of the questions that can and should be answered right away is how come CAL says that it has "a proud 70 year track record" of being accident free? Let's start from the beginning: First of all, the International Civil Aviation Organisation (ICAO) defines an aviation accident like this:

"An aviation accident is defined in the Convention on International Civil
Aviation Annex 13 as an occurrence associated with the operation of an
aircraft which takes place between the time any person boards the aircraft
with an intention of flight and all such persons have disembarked, in which a
person is fatally or seriously injured, the aircraft sustains damage or
structural failure or the aircraft is missing or is completely inaccesible."

So, it is quite clear that according to the best definition from the highest aviation authority in the world that the CAL aircraft suffered an accident ... and a serious one at that ... on Saturday 30th July, 2011 in Guyana. Also, it is also clear that BWIA never had an accident in its proud history. So, I can hear you say, what's the problem?

The problem is that CAL is not a 70 year old airline with a 70 year old track record! It is only four years old and as fledgling airline has had what you might call a "fledgling" accident. You can test this assertion fairly easily. If CAL is simply BWIA re-branded and is "a rose by any other name" then CAL would be liable for all of BWIA's debts and prior responsibilities. But CAL is not liable for BWIA's debts and obligations. Ask the former employees of BWIA, many of whom feel that they were unfairly shafted when the last Government shut down BWIA and threw many of them out on the street. These former employees were told that they could sue the defunct BWIA if they wanted, but that nothing from nothing was nothing and CAL was a brand new airline!
In other words, the Government took what it wanted from the old BWIA and created a new entity that was CAL. Heck! They even sold the BWIA landing slots in London! (And that's yet another scandal waiting to explode!)

Now, it may be that CAL's safety procedures are similar to, or even identical to the defunct BWIA. It may also be that CAL has taken a lot of good things from BWIA, including but not limited to some of its old employees (like pilots and engineers). But it is not BWIA re-branded. It is a brand new airline. It does have various different procedures and ways of doing business which may or may not be better than BWIA's. But it is disingenuous to say the least that it has a "proud 70 year old track record". It doesn't. It is not BWIA and those who are trying to piggyback CAL's safety record onto that of BWIA's are not doing that now defunct airline any service, nor are they being fair to the former employees of BWIA or the travelling public. Frankly, they are being dishonest! CAL's track record is only four years old! No more and no less!

And you know what? The people who have to make decisions concerning insurance and viability are not going to be fooled by the persons who are spouting this '70 year' nonsense. But then, I suppose those people, because they have no respect for us and believe that lieing to us has no consequences whatsoever, know that they can get away with nonsense like this. And you know what? Maybe they are right! That's what makes this all the more galling!

2011-07-27T10:53:00.002-04:00

ONE STEP FORWARD...THREE STEPS BACK!

Let me declare my bias from the start: I voted for this Government; I want them to succeed; I do not want them to fail. Unfortunately, they are failing. There are too many unforced errors taking place and only the most biased or dishonest observers will not admit that we are in trouble. And by "we" I mean the country.

Let's look at the latest problem to hit the headlines: the imbroglio with the unions. The first question that I have is one that reflects my utter disbelief at the total incompetence of the Cabinet. How in the name of heaven could the Ministers responsible for the clash with the unions allow the Prime Minister to go into a meeting with the unions when it was clear from the start that the PrimeMinister's chances of getting them to agree to back down were slim to none?!? Ministers are supposed to defend the Prime Minister, and if anything "fall on their swords" for her (or him as the case may be). They aren't supposed to let the Prime Minister put her credibility on the line the way that they did! The best way that I can probably explain this is to borrow a sentence that I got from The Economist about a week ago in an article that it published concerning the phone hacking scandal in Britain: "Prime Ministers tend not to lose all their credibility in one go ... Rather it erodes in fits and starts amid accumulations of misstep and scandal".

And who are the Ministers responsible? Answer: The Ministers of Finance and Labour! Let us call a spade a spade and stop this neo-colonial type of nonsense where we continuously pretend that we can see the naked Emperor's clothes. Hello! The Emperor is naked! It is the responsibility of the Finance Minister to put the case for money squarely and fairly on the table. If the country cannot afford the wage increases that are being demanded it is his responsibility to explain to all of us exactly what our financial situation is and why we cannot afford to pay what the unions are asking for. It is the responsibility of the Labour Minister to help calm the stormy waters that his ministerial colleague finds himself in, to familiarise himself with the truth of what the Finance Minister is saying, and to convince the unions that the Finance Minister is indeed telling the truth. And if the Finance Minister is not telling the truth then it is the responsibility of teh Labour Minister to make it clear to the Prime Minister that her Finance Minister's position is untenable. But these guys cannot keep quiet and effectively throw the Prime Minister and her Government under the proverbial bus ... which is exactly what they have done!

I don't know about you, but I am totally fed-up. Like most people I believe that the country simply cannot afford the demands that the unions are making. I also believe that these demands are unreasonable given the existing economic situation prevailing not only here, but worldwide. However, the operative word in that last sentence is "believe". I don't know that we can't afford to pay and/or meet the unions' demands. I also believe that the workers that the unions represent are hurting ... and hurting badly! I also believe that they deserve much more than a measly five percent pay rise. And, yes, it is measly given the inflation that has ravaged the country over the last few years.

In other words, for me at least, the argument is not whether the workers deserve a pay rise in excess of five per cent, but whether or not we can afford to pay it? So, Mr. Dookeran, as always it is over to you. Show us! Tell us! Explain to us! We are not dummies. The threatened general strike will fail if you convince the country that we really can't afford it. It is also quite possible that even if you don't, most people are like me and believe that we can't afford it, which would mean that the strike will fail. But belief can only go so far. Sooner or later the population will start to demand proof. Take some good advice: Don't wait until then!

And Mr. McLeod, the only reason that you are in the Cabinet and hold the post of Minister of Labour is because of your long experience and your connections with the Labour Movement. Every single administration in every single democracy sooner or later locks horns with organised labour. What every single administration needs is a Labour Minister who can and will interface with the Labour Movement in a way that successfully diffuses the inevitable tensions that are bound to arise. If you can't or won't do that then leave. I don't care which ('can't' or 'won't') it is. It doesn't matter. What matters is that this job (Minister of Labour) requires leadership; and the only test for leadership is to lead vigorously. If you can't or won't, then get out of the way. The country does not need you if you are just going to sit on your hands and bleat about "process". And right now, you simply ain't leading!

And to Mesrrs. Roget and company, I say, look, most people are sympathetic to your cause. Don't hold the country to ransom over unrealistic demands. Show us that we really can afford to pay you and you will get our support without your having to threaten the society in the way that you are doing now. But you won't get it simply by demanding that we pay regardless of the consequences. No thinking or responsible citizen could ever agree to that. And remember, "jaw-jaw" is always better than "war-war"!

2011-07-14T10:12:00.002-04:00

THE APPROACHING ICEBERG

Everybody knows that most of an iceberg is under the water. So if you are in either the Arctic or Antartic oceans and you see an iceberg towering, say, some fifty feet over the water, you know that there is at least three to four hundred feet hiding beneath the surface. I say this because I sometimes feel like the guy on the foredeck of the Titanic who on seeing the huge iceberg which the illfated ship was heading straight for, tried to warn those on the great ship's bridge ... but of course, they were too high up, too far away to hear the shouts and too "experienced" to listen to some unqualified peasant on the foredeck of the ship peering through the fog. What could he possibly see that they couldn't!?

Like the Titanic, the good ship S.S. Trinidad & Tobago seems to be heading directly for a large economic iceberg that is roughly the same size as the one that struck that great ship a century ago. By that I mean that I can see that the economy is shaky, that the slightest "tremor" can sink us and that the Ministry of Finance either doesn't have a plan or does not want to share the plan with the rest of us peasants.

Pay attention: The unions are threatening a general strike and the police are threatening a five day strike if the Government does not resile from its five percent cap on wages. The Government says that the country cannot afford to pay more. The unions say that this is nonsense! And here is where the rest of us come in. Like most people, I tend to believe that the Government is telling the truth, i.e., that the country really can't afford to pay more. But, like most people, I personally don't have the evidence before me that will prove that this is indeed so. Further, Winston Dookeran, if nothing else has to be just about the worst communicator in history! This is a man who for years preached transparency and open government, but on getting into power has practised secrecy and an absolute refusal to tell the nation exactly what is going on with the country's various economic problems. All we have got from him over the last year has been "this is what we are going to do whether you like it or not" attitude instead of "look, this is what is going on and as a result this is what we think is the best thing to do".

I have complained about this before; I call it the neo-colonialist attitude that has crippled our country since Eric williams came to power in 1956. In the "good old days" of the colonial period there were two rules: Rule 1 was that the white man or massa was always right. Rule 2 was when massa was wrong refer back to rule 1!! Just about every single Prime Minister from Williams to date has adopted these two rules as if they were gospel. The end result has been that instead of the country having a modern twenty-first century outlook, we have remained mired in outdated, out moded, unoriginal, old fashioned 1960's type of thinking. We continue to try and solve the same old problems with the same old solutions, Albert Einstein, what did you say was the classic definition of insanity?

In addition to Mr. Dookeran's obvious failures, we also have the image of a so-called Labour leader in the person of Errol McLeod who appears to be doing absolutely nothing to head off this most serious approaching crisis. I can think of only two reasons why Mr. McLeod will not intervene forcefully: Either he is totally and completely incompetent and is occupying a position that he is really not qualified to occupy, or he really doesn't believe his Ministerial colleague and believes that the country can pay more. If anybody can give me a third, or even a tenth, reason then please do. But this is all that I can come up with. And yes, I am aware of the neo-colonialist B.S. (Baloney for Sure) that I have heard Mr. McLeod spout about "process"! Please!! Don't come with that claptrap! When a house is on fire you don't wait for the "process" of the fire department to come. You start to throw water on the fire immediately. At least, that is what a modern twenty first century person would do.

We are heading for a period of potentially serious and possibly fatal social instability caused by the inability of those responsible in the Government to communicate effectively. The "iceberg effect"! In other words, once trouble starts there is no way that we will know how deep it will go. It is still not too late. Things can still be turned around ... and the best way of doing this is to tell us the truth. We aren't stupid and we see what is going on in the rest of the world. But people, especially working class people are hurting badly. The Government has to come forward and show all of us that it not only understands and empathises, but given the circumstances is doing the best that it can. But it will have to explain what these "circumstances" are exactly. Telling us that Moody's has given us a good credit rating means nothing to the man at the bottom. Explain! Explain! Explain! That is one way that you can serve the people! Serve the people! Serve the people!

2011-06-27T11:35:00.002-04:00

TRUTH, LIES AND THE INTERNET (part 2)

In my last post (below) I exhibited an e mail that had been circulating that I said if true was absolutely awful! I have now received absolute confirmation that the story is indeed true! Serious questions now arise: Firstly, why did the mainstream media not publicise the story? no doubt there may be any number of reasons, any one of which I would be prepared to accept if it made sense, but frankly, the only reason that I can think of that makes sense is that the mainstream media are not prepared to go up against the rich and powerful. So, if this is correct, the newspapers and the radio stations (forget about the television stations) will not publicise a story that is obviously as newsworthy as it is important.

The next question that comes up is what exactly is Movie Towne going to do when it "revises" its security procedures? Clearly, there was a dreadful failure of security. But why? Was the security guard fired? Did the closed circuit television cameras work? If so, what have the tapes revealed? If they weren't working, then why weren't they working? What can the owners of Movie Towne do to ensure the safety of all of their customers? What are they doing now? Is it too much to ask for a "zero tolerance" attitude towards any kind of misbehaviour in places like Movie Towne which are privately owned but where the general public gather in large numbers?

Another question that we should be asking ourselves as a society is given that we are so apparently reluctant to criticise private enterprise for failing dreadfully to protect the citizenry from crime when citizens visit the premises of private enterprise is it fair to criticise the government for its failure to do anything about crime? In other words, if we are prepared to accept the failure of Movie Towne for its obvious lapse in security and are not prepared to demand of that private enterprise that it do something then is it fair to criticise the government for its obvious failure? I ask this question quite seriously, for it has to be a lot easier to make Move Towne a crime free zone than it would be to make the whole country crime free. And the biggest deterent to crime is the fear of getting caught. The criminals have obviously "sussed out" the security (or lack of it) in Movie Towne and have realised that they simply ain't gonna get caught!! So, they go where there are "rich pickings". Bad news for the rest of us! But are we prepared as a society to demand that private enterprises also "step up to the plate"?

Since this story went "viral" on the internet I have heard other horror stories coming out of Movie Towne that are almost as dreadful as this one. But the mainstream media are completely silent ... and for their silence I criticise and condemn them roundly and put the label "hypocrite" on them. I challenge them to show that they are not hypocrites by making this story as important as it ought to be.

One thing is certain: the internet is now such a powerful tool that we need no longer be beholden to the media and press barons as we were in the past for information. The truth can and will come out ... even when those "at the top" don't want it to. We are living at the dawn of a new age. Thank goodness for the internet and those persons brave enough and smart enough to use it. If the mainstream media wants to survive ... at least in T&T ... it will have to come to terms with this new reality and understand that its credibility (which is already in trouble) will go the way of the dodo bird if it continues to try and suppress important truths.

2011-06-22T12:49:00.002-04:00

TRUTH, LIES AND THE POWER OF THE INTERNET

I have received the e mail below from a variety of sources. The story (if true) is absolutely dreadful. The problem is that I am not certain that it is true. There are a few points that I would like to bring to your attention:

1) In every e mail that I have received, the name of the sender does not exist. Why? If this is a true story and it had happened to you, wouldn’t you put your name to the e mail? I would!
2) This story has not been reported in the mainstream media? Why? If it is true this is a very serious and important story? But I can’t find it anywhere? I can’t believe that the mainstream media would conspire to keep a story like this out of the news!
3) I happen to have a friend who was at Movie Towne that night and who had gone to pick up his children who had gone to see X Men and came out at 11:55pm. He was in the area and saw nothing. Admittedly, this does not prove that it didn’t happen, but it is curious that neither he nor his family saw nothing, or you don’t think so?
4) The account of the incident has a “ring” to it that creates a lot of questions. For example, how was the sister able to shout into her cell phone “they killing him” and apparently suffer no consequences? If a robber saw/heard somebody using his/her cell phone while in the middle of an attack, wouldn’t he turn on that person … especially if the person was a woman? Why would the brother-in-law put his window down?

There are other questions which lead an impartial observer to wonder about the veracity of the story. But I do readily admit that the account might be true. I also readily admit that logical answers could exist for what is clearly a poorly written account. But I am not criticising here the lack of articulation in the narrative. The problem is that there is also a distinct possibility that it may not be true. We are not well served by false information being disseminated on the Internet. On the other hand, we should all take note, because none of us can afford to take the chance and ignore this warning, especially as it could just as easily be true. You might say that it is better to err on the side of caution than complacency. I certainly will be taking extra care even though I personally have some serious doubts that the story is true. But just as 'all that glisters is not gold', all that appears on the Internet is not necessarily true!

Dear Friends and Family,
This is what unfolded at Movie Towne P.O.S. on Saturday 18th June 2011 @ 11.55pm. My bother-in-law and sister were almost brutally MURDERED on the western side of Movie Towne car park. As the evening unfolded, I had a dinner party to attend however my son called me up and asked me to join him, my sister and my brother-in-law at Movie Towne POS to view the movie "X-men" at 9.15pm. Without hesitation I did. Excellent movie by the way.

The movie ended at 11.40pm and we all walked out towards the car park. We first walked my son to his vehicle to make sure he was safe. Then I turned to my sister and said "let me drop you to your vehicle." We were busy talking and without realising it I existed Movie Towne. My brother-in-law then said to me "don't worry we would walk back inside, the car is just over there opposite Excellent Stores on the western side," (a stone throw away from the security booth). I pulled to the side and they exited my vehicle and proceeded to theirs. I then called my sister on her cell phone while they were en route to their vehicle as I was feeling very uneasy for some reason. We chatted as they walked and as they got into their car she said "ok, we're in the car, everything is cool". I said ok, hanged up and proceeded towards the traffic lights.

In that fraction of a second as we both got off the phone and she turned towards her husband, she saw a very thin, young negro chap pointing a 38 calibre long nose at her husband's head. The criminal shouted "open your f****ing door or ah go shoot all yuh!" On her side of the vehicle were two more negro men trying to open her door and diagonally behind was a White B-13 with a driver. My brother-in-law at that instance put his glass down only to receive a gashing blow with the gun to his forehead. The bandit then pushed the gun into his chest and he (my bother-in-law) grabbed it placing one of his finger behind the trigger and holding the barrel securely. With death facing both of them in the face, the bandit continued to hit him continuously with a metal object bursting his head open in several places. While this ordeal was taking place, my sister some how managed to call me on the cell screaming hysterically "they killing him, they killing him... help...help!" I immediately spinned my vehicle around and drove straight over the median towards Movie Towne exit. As I approached the guard booth I saw my bother-in-law's vehicle approaching and as he came to a stop there was blood everywhere. Blood was gushing out of his head and my sister was still screaming hysterically and shaking. He was then hastily taken to West Shore Medical.

The security at Movie Towne was of NO HELP. One security guard said to me "these things does happen sir!" Another security guard when I asked if they were not going to ward off the area said "them fellas gone already, sir!" CAN YOU BELIEVE THAT? Then when I asked about the surveillance tape(s), they said "I not sure that working nah" I could not believe my ears. Is this the kind of security that Mr. Derek Chin provides at Movie Towne, P.O.S? The safety of people that puts dollars in this man's coffers apparently seem to be insignificant to warrant proper security facilities to protect their well-being. The restaurants and shops that are so well patronized means absolutely nothing. Should the new branding be "Come To Movie Towne, P.O.S. At Your Risk !"

Is this the kind of place we're going to let our children and wives go too ? Are we going to wait until one of our family members are brutally raped and murdered to do anything about this situation ? Do you want to be brutally beaten like my brother-in-law was ? Please ask yourself these questions before venturing there !

It is obvious that the current security are either involved or not equipped or trained to ensure the safety of its patrons. Chin needs to do something NOW about this, IT IS RIDICULOUS !!! MY SISTER AND BROTHER-IN-LAW WAS ALMOST MURDERED . The police indicated to me that this is a regular thing that happens there and they try to keep it on the down low.

Then check this out, the very same night about one and a half hours later in the said car park when security should be on high alert due to what just previously happened, a young man is abducted at gun point, brutally beaten, tied up and thrown out of his vehicle in the Chaguaramas beach area for dead. His car that was stolen was taken to Cocorite, to be stripped and sold I was told.

I've been informed that a group comprising of nine young men that target the Movie Towne P.O.S. is supported by a well organised "King Pin". ALL YUH HEAR WHAT I SAYING, YOU MEAN CHIN COULD NOT GET TO THE BOTTOM OF THIS ! WHO NEXT ? WHO NEXT ? CHIN THIS IS YOUR "BREAD AND BUTTER", DO SOMETHING NOW !!!!!

I simply ask my family and friends to forward this e-mail to everyone they know so that this never happens to them at Movie Towne, P.O.S.

2011-06-06T10:40:00.002-04:00

THE HANGING OF JACK WARNER

Just about everyone in the entire world is familiar with the terrible scandal that has engulfed FIFA, the controlling body of world football and the accusations against arguably the most powerful of FIFA's vice-presidents, Jack Warner. Very briefly, the facts that are in the public domain are as follows:
1) The United States and England were extremely upset when they lost their
respective bids for the 2018 and 2022 World Cup finals in favour of Russia and
Qattar.
2) The English were so upset that the head of the English football delegation some
months after the decision that Qattar was the successful applicant for the 2022
finals accused Jack Warner of asking for a bribe.
3) This accusation was made even more explosive as Lord Triesman (the English
football head) made these accusations before a House of Commons Committee
that was looking into why the English did not get the 2022 World Cup.
4) Mr. Warner was finally completely cleared of Treisman's allegations.
5) In the meantime, the election of a President for FIFA was coming up on June 1st.
6) Mr. Mohammed Bin Hammam, from Qattar, a vice president of FIFA, had thrown
his hat in the ring and was challenging the incumbent Sepp Blatter for the
Presidency.
7) Bin Hammam was prevented from attending a Concacaf meeting in Miami in
April because he was denied a visa by USA authorities.
8) In order that he could meet with Concacaf dlegates and make his pitch to them as
to why they should vote for him instead of Mr. Blatter he asked Mr. Warner to
organise a meeting with Concacaf delegates in Trinidad in early May. Mr. Warner
obliged.
9) After the meeting Mr. Warner was quoted in the press as saying that he would
not divulge whether or not he would support Mr. Blatter.
10) At that stage all hell broke loose. The General Secreatary of Concacaf, one Chuck
Blazer, reported to Mr. Blatter that Messrs. Warner and Bin Hammam had had a
meeting with Concacaf delegates in teh Hyatt Regency Hotel in Port of Spain and
had given each of the delegates an envelope containing US$40,000 in cash. The
delegates from Puerto Rico and the Bahamas backed Blazer's accusations. But,
interestingly no other delegates did. In fact, the delegate from Grenada has been
reported as saying that if this was true he was clearly being discriminated
against as he received nothing at all.
11) The FIFA Ethics Committee summoned Messrs. Bin Hammam and Warner to a
meeting on Sunday 29th May, some 3 days before the Presidential election, and
decided, without giving either Warner or Bin Hammam a chance to defend
themselves properly, that there was a prima facie case to answer. Accordingly,
both men were summarily suspended from all FIFA duties and positions until
there could be a full hearing ... which would be (very conveniently for Blatter)
after the election. Bin Hammam withdrew from the race and Blatter was elected
unopposed.
12) Then Lyle Austin, who became the acting President for Concacaf in place of the
suspended Jack Warner, fired Chuck Blazer for hiring a big time American law
firm without the approval of the executive committee of Concacaf.
13) Then it is announced that Blazer is not fired but that Austin is now
suspended for purporting to fire Blazer without proper authority.
14) But it is noticable that the committee purporting to suspend Austin is made
up of only 4 delegates!

I apologise for the rather lengthy list above, but it is important to keep all of the above in mind when listening to all of the sound and fury that is going on. Clearly there is a lot more behind the scenes and anything that anybody says right now (including yours truly) can end up being so much hot air. But having said that, I think that it is possible to come to the tentative conclusion that the old Jack Warner simply ain't gonna get a fair hearing from the Ethics Committee whose behaviour on Sunday 29th May showed quite clearly that they weren't at all bothered by fair play and ethics, but that the most inportant thing was to get Jack and Bin Hammam out of the way at all costs.

One of the things to notice, and one of the reasons that I say this is because I find it strange to say the least how Blazer could hire a law firm without apparent authority and be backed up by Blatter for so doing. But Mr. Austin is suspended for trying to put the American in his place! There is something that simply isn't right here. That there are many who would like to see Jack hanged (not literally, of course) but to all the right thinking members of that group I would say that by all means go ahead and hang him. But make sure you do so only after he gets a fair trial. And quite frankly, while I will readily concede that I could be wrong, the truth is that I genuinely believe that Blatter is out to "kill" Jack and will do so at the earliest possible opportunity ... and truth, justice and fair play be damned!!

2011-05-03T10:15:00.000-04:00

AN ACT OF TREASON?

I don’t think that the importance of former NAR Minister Gloria Henry’s testimony to the Commission of Enquiry into the 1990 coup (COE) yesterday has sunk in to the national consciousness as yet. Basically, the former Minister is reported as saying that on the afternoon of the 1990 coup she saw then Leader of the Opposition Patrick Manning talking with some Muslimeen men. According to the ex-minister, shortly after this conversation Mr. Manning went to his seat in the Parliament, collected his brief case and left. About an hour later the Muslimeen (including the men that she saw talking to Mr. Manning) stormed the Red House … and the rest is history.

Now, the leader of the Jamaat al Muslimeen, Yasin Abu Bakr, has for a long time claimed that Mr. Manning knew about the coup in advance. Mr. Manning has always denied this. The Director of Public Prosecutions has deemed Abu Bakr to be an unreliable witness and as his (Abu Bakr’s) evidence has to date been the only thing in existence, quite clearly there has been (up to now) no justiciable evidence against Mr. Manning.

But Ms. Henry’s evidence to the COE may very well be the first of several pieces of evidence to link Mr. Manning to that dastardly attempt almost 21 years ago. Let’s face it: the inference of what Ms. Henry said tends to support the allegation that Mr. Manning knew in advance (even if it was only an hour or so before) of the coup attempt and that he deliberately left the Red House so as not to be caught up in it. While that is the clear inference of her evidence, any reasonable person will accept immediately that that is not necessarily so, and that to convict Mr. Manning on that alone (assuming always that what Ms. Henry said about seeing him talking to members of the Muslimeen is true) would be impossible. Any good lawyer could have a case built on that evidence alone to be thrown out so quickly that you wouldn’t even have time to say “Patrick Manning”!

On the other hand, and again assuming that Ms. Henry’s evidence is true, what if those men who she saw talking to Mr. Manning turn up after all these years and say ‘yes, we warned him to get out of the Red House and told him of the coup’? Add their testimony to that of Ms. Henry and that of Abu Bakr and all of a sudden Mr. Manning would have a very serious case to answer. For make no mistake about it; if he knew (and it has to be a big “if”) then he is guilty of an act of treason, or at the very least being an accessory to an act of treason. This is serious. Mr. Manning was at the time the Leader of the Opposition. He later went on to become Prime Minister. It would be a tragedy indeed if it came out that such a high elected official who is the longest serving Parliamentarian in this country’s history were to be found to be guilty of such a crime. On the other hand IF he is guilty then it would be an even greater tragedy if he was allowed to get away with it … even after so many years have intervened.

For me, at least, this latest development has been most unexpected. I honestly never thought that Mr. Manning would have behaved as it is being alleged that he did and I never really accepted Abu Bakr’s allegations in this regard. Now, I am not so certain. I do not know what to believe. For the sake of the country, I sincerely hope that the COE clears this up definitively one way or the other. It would not be fair to Mr. Manning to leave this obvious cloud over his head. On the other hand, it would be terrible if he was really guilty and was able to get away scot free!

2011-04-13T09:17:00.001-04:00

PAIN vs. POTENTIAL PAIN Like most people, I had been looking at the recently concluded PSA dispute which was finally settled last Friday with a mixture of sympathy for the public servants and a strong desire for more information. I have been (and remain) very critical of the Minister of Finance for not giving us ... the general public ... the facts and gigures to justify his case for the 5 per cent. For make no mistake, the onus is on the Government side to justify the holding to the line of the 5 per cent, and in my view, they have yet to do so. What the Minister has basically done is to tell the unions and the rest of the population "that's it! We are holding teh line at 5 per cent, and those who don't like it can lump it!" It is an attitude that is unfortunate, to say the least, and one which no 21st century man or woman can condone or agree with. And, like most people, I am of the view that if we could afford to pay the public servants more then we should have done so. However, we ought not to let ourselves get bogged down in criticism of the Minister of Finance (no matter how justified that criticism might be), but should, as responsible members of society try to figure out and understand why the Government is hewing to such a tough line. Sir Arthur Conan Doyle put the following words in the mouth of his famous detective, Sherlock Holmes: "How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth". If you take the sense of those words you could say much the same thing when it comes to the behaviour of Governments in general, and of this Government in particular,i.e., that when you accept that teh Government is not made up of mad or crazy people that there must be a very good reason why it is holding so rigidly to the 5 per cent line. The only answer that seems to make sense is that the Government is not very optimistic about Trinidad & Tobago's future and is quite concerned about our future economic well being. Let's look at some facts: 1) Oil production is declining at a time when oil prices are rising thus preventing us from taking advantage of what would normally have been a very nice windfall. Our oil production is now less than 100,000 barrels per day! 2) We are now a gas based economy. But there are several problems: - America can now produce gas for less than we can; - gas prices are not rising in tandem with oil prices; - our reserves are dwindling and what remains is deep down and difficult to exploit; - when we called for exploration bids last year only one bid was received - then we put out what might be termed "a sweetheart" call for bids and ended up with none at all! It is clear that the foreigners are saying to us "you keep your gas - it is too expensive!" So, the very serious questions arise: how much time do we have? What are we going to do? The Government appears to recognise the problem. Right now it is making serious efforts to try and revive the manufacturing sector, and the nation's number one salesman (actually, that should be 'saleswoman'), the Prime Minister, is getting off of her chair and is going out into the world at large to try and bring business to our shores. So far teh Government's success in this endeavour has been limited, to say the least. It is clear to any interested and well informed observer that we are in dire straits - and the Government is nothing if not interested and well informed! Clearly, the Government's thinking is that the country cannot afford to take on future commitments that it may not be able to hold on to. We have only to look over to Europe and observe what is happening to Portugal, Ireland, Greece and Spain (the "P.I.G.S."). All of these countries let their spending get out of control with the result that their respective populations are being visited with great economic pain and not little humiliation. The time has come at last to pay the piper! Portugal is now in the process of going cap in hand to teh European Union for a bailout. If it doesn't come then the trouble that they will face will make their current problems look like a picnic! Basically, the problem with all of the "P.I.G.S." is that they let their expenditure get bigger than their income. Put another way, they 'bet the farm' on being able to pay their debts "sometime" in the future. The future is now here! England too has not been spared. The new (almost one year old) coalition Government has been forced to make radical and drastic spending cuts in order to avoid going the way of the "P.I.G.S.". Some half a million jobs have been cut! Can you imagine that?! Five hundred thousand people are being thrown on the bread line! Only Germany has managed to survive. The Germans look at their European counterparts with scorn and derision, saying in effect "you fools living in a fools' paradise". They held the line and refused to let their spending get out of control even when it was politic to do so. But today they are the only Europen country that is prospering! And just in case we forget ... remember that lending coumtries and institutions (like the infamous IMF) tend to impose very strict and/or serious conditions on lons that they make rto bail out a country. Ask the people of Greece! Ask the people of Ireland! I could go on, but you get the point. It lokks as if we are where the "P.I.G.S." and England were a few years ago. With oil production dropping and gas not as potentially profitble as it used to be, the Government would be very foolish to go easy now. The alternatives would be one or more of the following: - lay off a lot of people now; - devalue the currency (a temporary panacea); - move into mre debt ... but then what? We cannot let go. No! As I said, I am ver critical of the neo-colonialist attitude of teh Mnister of Finance who obviously does not believe either in transparency nor in open Government. But it is clear that his thinking is that we have to hold the line. And on that score I agree with him completely and give him full marks ... a hundred percent! Unfortunately we have been completely profligate with our good fortune in the past ... too profligate, spending as if there were no tomorrow. We need to take a page out of the German approach and hold the line. If you think that what is happening now is painful ... trust me! You ain't seen nothing like the pain we will endure if we don't!

2011-03-28T12:16:00.002-04:00

KILLING THE MESSENGER? The famous English playwright, George Bernard Shaw, once said "The reasonable man adapts hinself to the world: the unreasonable one persists intrying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man". Like most people, I was surprised by the comments of the Chairman of the Police Service Commission made before a Parlaimentary Committee on Friday to the effect that there was a dearth of East Indians in the hierarchy of the Police Service. Mr. Mohammed quoted facts and figures to support his statements. The problem was that the way he presented his case clearly suggested that the fact that there was a dearth of East Indians at the top of the police service was because of latent racism in the Service and in past Governments, not to mention past Police Service Commissions. Because of this Mr. Mohammed has been pillioried in the local media. Indeed, many (black) politicians have been howling for his resignation and all three black members of the Police Service Commission (PSC) chose not only to distance themselves from their chairman's remarks but to disagree publicly with him. The Minister of Health (who is herself of mixed ancestory), sitting on the Committee at that time also chose to disagree with the embattled chairman who has found himself out on a limb almost completely on his own and looking very much like an unreasonable man. Indeed, it was this fact (i.e., the fact that he sounded so unreasonable) that caused me to pause and look again. Because, let's face it: either what Mr. Mohammed said was (a) true, or (b) partly true,or (c) completely false. Well, we ought to have no trouble in dealing with the erstwhile Chairman if the statements were completely false. He ought to be fired! Immediately, if not sooner! If the statements were completely false then they are dangerous, subversive and bordering on the seditious. There can be no argument about that. End of discussion! But, what if there was some truth in the statements? Certainly, the facts seem to suggest that there is a racial problem in the hierarchy of the police. The fact that there is almost a complete lack of Indians in the top ranks of the police service seems to suggest that Mr. Mohammed might have a point. Of course, there may be explanations other than racial discrimination that could throw light on this matter. But what they are, I, for one, certainly do not know. I can say, though, that what Mr. Mohammed has uttered so loudly and so passionately has been muttered about for at least the last thirty years in bars and private places by many East Indian policemen who have believed (rightly or wrongly) that they were being discriminated against. While this is the first time that I have heard these complaints aired in public it is not the first time that I have heard them. And by saying that I have heard them before does not necessarily mean that they are true ... it simply means that the complaints are not new. So, where there is smoke is there fire or simply a smoke making machine? As a society we should not be so ready to shoot the messenger, even when he comes with a point of view that on the face of it might seem to be unreasonable. (Remember Shaw's edict about the unreasonable man.) We should be prepared to listen carefully to the message and deal with it ... one way or the other. Mr. Mohammed has let this particular Genie out of the bottle. It cannot be stuffed back in so easily by simply firing him. If he is to be fired it can only be because what he has said is completely, but completely untrue. However, if, as unpalatable as it might be to contemplate, there is some truth in what he has said then we should be bold enough, and brave enough, and smart enough to deal with the problem head on. Or, we could go back to simply doing what we do best .... and that is shoot the messenger!

2011-03-22T10:22:00.007-04:00

BALONEY for SURE

We all know the expression "B.S!" And we all know what it means ... "Baloney for Sure". (What? You thought it meant something else? Well, it doesn't! Not in this blog!)

Now that we have that little explanation out of the way for the benefit of those who might not have understood, I must say that I have never heard such absolute "B.S." as came out last week from certain doctors and other persons from the Southwest Regional Health Authority ('SWRHA') who were objecting to the suspension of certain persons following the death of an apparently healthy 29 year old young woman in the San Fernando General Hospital. The essence of the objections as expressed in the newspapers is that "proper procedures" for the suspending of the entire shift on duty at the time of the operation from which the unfortunate young lady died were not followed.

Talk about a Phd ('Piled higher and deeper') in unadulterated B.S.! Let's look at the facts:
1) There was an operation in which a 'C'-section was performed on the young lady;
2) She was apparently healthy at the time;
3) She died while on the operating table.

Now, it is fairly safe to assume (though certainly not to accept) that somebody may have made a mistake which resulted in the young woman's death. Who is responsible? That is the sixty-four million dollar question! It is also fairly safe to assume also that if anybody screwed up it would be one or more of the persons on the shift, i.e., the people who were on duty and took part in the operation. So, that being the case (i.e., that there is a distinct possibility that somebody messed up badly and as a result the young woman died) then quite clearly the thing to do is to have an immediate investigation into what happened. But, you don't want to mount an investigation into any matter, much less a matter as serious as this, and leave a possible guilty party in a position where he (or she, or they) could tamper with the evidence. You would want to remove any and everybody from the scene so that you could find out exactly what happened.

That is why the behaviour of everybody from the dismissed SWRHA Chief Executive Officer on down is so inexplicable and nonsensical. Yes! The whole shift should have been suspended. And, quite frankly, the dismissed CEO should have done that immediately! A young woman is dead, for crying out loud! And you want to quibble about procedures!?!? So, if the proper procedure is that the suspension notices should have been on pink paper but were written instead on blue paper (being ridiculous to make the point) then they should not have been suspended?!? Pull the other one! It's got bells on it!

No! Some, if not all of those suspended may be quite innocent of any negligence whatsoever, but we will not know unless and until an investigation and enquiry takes place. They have been suspended with full pay and they will be given an opportunity to answer any allegations that may be made against them as well as to produce evidence to show that they were not to blame. But keep your eye on the ball: A young woman is dead! And it is more than likely that somebody (or "bodies") is to blame. The Minister of Health in this case is absolutely right!

2011-03-14T10:36:00.002-04:00

WHY I QUIT MY RADIO PROGRAM

As readers will be aware, for the last three and a half months I have been doing an afternoon radio program on Talk City 91.1FM every Monday, Tuesday and Wednesday. The CEO of CNMG, Ken Ali (who is a friend of mine), had approached me to do the show back in November of last year. They really couldn't afford to pay me so I agreed not to charge the station anything for my services but told them that they were to pay whatever they could afford and whatever they thought fair to the Cancer Society in my name, an arrangement to which they happily agreed. I called my program "Counterpoint" and began to broadcast around the 25th November. My idea was to have a program in which I would air my views on any given subject, but that persons would be free to call in and give their own opinions. The only provisos were that all opinions had to be reasoned and not be defamatory. I couldn't (and don't) care less whether or not a caller agreed with me, but I insisted that every caller would have to answer quetsions that were put to him/her and not be allowed to waffle when the questioning got tough. I apllied the same rules to myself.

Well, although no survey was done, I believe that we had become quite popular. When we first started the program we had hardly any calls. By Carnival Wednesday (2nd March) when I quit, as soon as we would open the lines the switch board would light up. Many persons would call me in my office the next day to say that they had tried for the two hours that the show was on, but couldn't get through. Many, many other people would approach me just about everywhere that I went (from the beach to the supermarket and everywhere in between) to tell me how much they were enjoying the show. Clearly, it was becoming quite popular.

On Carnival Wednesday my producer suggested that we discuss the calypso that the Calypsonian Crocro sang at the Calypso Monarch semi-finals. I hadn't up till then heard the calypso, but agreed that we could discuss it. I had heard that it was terribly racist and very offensive. In any case, we played a large section of the calypso on the show and then began to discuss it. I was absolutely horrified by the calypso. It was offensive and racist in the extreme. In essence, its theme was that any black person who did not vote for Patrick Manning and the PNM was a traitor to his race!! Indeed, the Calypsonian called out the names of several prominent African-Trinidadians in the calypso calling them traitors to their race!

In my view this was awful. It was promoting racial division and strife in a society that does not need this, and was racist in the extreme. If you changed a few words and had a white person or an Indian sing that calypso he would be called (quite rightly) a racist. I see no reason why what is sauce for the goose should not be sauce, as well, for the gander. Racism is racism no matter from where it originates, and I said so quite clearly. I condemned Crocro for the song, and I condemned the judges who put him into the Calypso Monarch finals.

I am pleased to say that every single caller to the program that afternoon agreed with me. However, my co-host, Justin Dookie, who has the advantage over me in that he controls the switch board (even though it was my show), took the view that it was a calypso, and that offensive as it might be, the calypsonian had the right to sing it. I couldn't disagree with him more! Indeed, one lady caller quite intelligently pointed out that claypsonians couldn't sing anything they liked. A child molester, for example, should not be allowed to sing a calypso about how much he liked to molest little children! According to my co-host child molestation and racism were two completely different things and therefore her comparison was invalid.

When the show had about half an hour to go somebody came in and said that Crocro had been trying to call in but couldn't get through ... the lines were jammed. My co-host decided that we should call Crocro and give him a chance to defend himself. I disagreed completely. My attitude is and was that I will not share any platform with a child molester, a drug dealer, a murderer or a racist. And my definition of a racist includes a person who will sing a racist calypso. I don't care to be associated with anybody who espouses views that ought to be condemned by right thinking members of society, and I refuse to debate with such a person.

Well, my co-host called my producer who said that she saw nothing wrong with having Crocro on the show. I then left the station. It's their station, but it's my good name. Several persons from the station did call me the next day, but the bottom line was that they refused to agree to my demand that this was my show and as a result I had the ultimate right to refuse to have on it any person that I considered undesirable. Their argument was that as a State owned radio station they had to include all views. My view is that this is fine ... just not on my show. They could give that person any time they wanted on any of their other shows ... just not one with which my name is associated. I will debate with anyone whose views are different to or from mine ... whether it's about politics, religion, or the weather! And I genuinely respect persons who hold different views from me on any given subject. But I will not now or ever descend into debating (whether publicly or privately) with one who espouses racial views! I quit!

2011-02-02T12:34:00.001-04:00

LEAD, FOLLOW OR GET OUT OF THE WAY!

William Lucie Smith writing in today’s Express puts forward a defence of sorts for Mr. Dookeran’s handling of the economy. In essence Mr. Lucie Smith says that we ought not to be worried that our dollar’s purchasing value is in steady decline against the US dollar and other major currencies as this is all part of a grand plan to keep the economy on track. And it is on track, he argues citing, for example, the good credit rating that Standard & Poors recently gave us.

With respect, I really cannot agree with Mr. Lucie Smith. From where I sit the economy appears to be completely stagnant. Nothing is happening … and if it is, it appears to be a well kept secret. Nothing has been settled … CLICO, the PSA dispute, Petrotrin, and other major problems … are all still up in the air. The average person is no better informed today that he was on 23rd May, 2010 (the day before the last general election) about the state of our finances or even the truth about the state of our finances. And it certainly is not good enough to try and pass off this serious lack of information by saying that Mr.Dookeran is not the most articulate person in the world. We know that, but surely he (or his minions) could write a speech which he could read! (He can read, can’t he?)

What defenders of the Finance Minister have to understand is that many people are concerned over the apparent drift that is taking place in the economy. If what is taking place now is deliberate then at the very least we have a right to know why you (“you” being the Government and in particular the Finance Ministry) are doing what you are doing. We have a right to information which will assure us that you really do know what you are doing. But you aren’t giving us any information at all! And the insult is that you were the person who since 2007 campaigned up and down the country preaching transparency and open government. It is insulting to treat those of us who have the temerity to ask “what are you doing?” with contempt and to ignore us. Where is the “new politics” in this?

Of course, if Mr. Lucie Smith is one of the privileged few who actually do know what is happening and why the Finance Minister is allowing the dollar to slide, why he is not paying the contractors (although he once said that they had been paid), why he is not keeping the original promise to pay the CLICO policy holders, why he is allowing the PSA dispute to drag on, why he is not bringing Mr. Errol McLeod into the settlement talks, why there is this big silence over Petrotrin, why (if all is indeed well) the private sector is shipping money out by the plane load and why the plan is to allow the dollar to devalue, then perhaps he would like to share this information with the rest of us uninformed ones.

One of the reasons that the country got into the admitted mess that it is in today is because although there were persons outside of the then ruling PNM who were critical of what was going on, there was nobody inside raising a whisper against Mr. Manning and his policies and plans. And anybody who tried to do so (Keith Rowley comes to mind) was quickly isolated, received no support whatsoever from his colleagues and was “killed” (politically, of course).

In early 1986 I was then a member and supporter of the PNM. At a cottage meeting in or about April, 1986 I criticized certain things that certain Ministers of the then PNM Government was doing and warned that if they did not correct their course the PNM would face defeat at the coming polls. To my great surprise not little annoyance, Tony Jacelon who was then a Minister in the Ministry of Finance stood up and said that he had not come to the meeting to listen to criticisms of his ministerial colleagues. I replied that all I was saying was what was being said “on the street” and if we were not allowed to discuss it “in house” we were certain to lose the elections. Unfortunately, they did not listen, and the rest is history!

It is stupid, myopic and foolish just because you voted for and support a particular political party not to criticize it when you see it going off course. It is just as stupid, myopic and foolish for the leaders of that particular political party not to pay attention to what their supporters are really thinking. I am not today a member of any party, but I say quite openly and frankly that I voted for the Partnership Government. I want them to succeed. But they will not succeed if they continue as they are going, and if they do not want to listen to this message from their friends, believe me, they will certainly be given the message later on from their enemies. No. It’s all about the economy, and the Finance Minister has to deal with us squarely and up front . If he fails to do that (and so far he is failing), then he will fail. And if he fails, the country fails. The only test of leadership is to lead, and to lead vigorously. So, once again I would appeal to Mr. Dookeran: Lead, follow, or get out of the way!

2011-01-28T10:07:00.002-04:00

WHAT WERE THEY THINKING?

This Rishmi Ramnarine/SIA affair has me troubled at a number of levels. First of all, let me put my own personal cards on the table. I voted for this Government. Like so many of my fellow citizens I was absolutely fed up with Patrick Manning and his PNM on a plethora of levels or issues and I welcomed the promise of change, transparency and open government, and an end to"business as usual". 'At last,' I thought, 'we would eventually move or begin to move our little country out of the grip of the neo-colonialists and into the 21st century. At last we would begin to be truly independent in our thinking and the tribalism and not so covert racism would begin to be a thing of the past'. That is why I voted for the People's Partnership. You could say that all my reasons could be summed up in one word: Hope!

Further, as if to reinforce the correctness of my decision to vote for the Partnership, since the general election the PNM has done nothing to convince me that it has learned anything from its defeat. Keith Rowley has (so far) been living proof of the Peter Principle ... where a man is promoted and promoted until he is promoted out of his level of competence. Dr. Rowley may yet show that he has the capacity to grow into a national leader, and one can fervently hope that he does ... it is not in the country's interests that we do not have a competent opposition. Sadly, though, almost from day one he has proven to be a huge disappointment as far as national leadership is concerned. Some (unkind) wags have even said that he makes Patrick Manning look good!

But this post is not about Dr. Rowley and his failings. That can be discussed at another time. I merely mentioned it in passing because this is one of the factors that have me most concerned, i.e., that there is no credible alternative to the People's Partnership at this time. And that is most worrying! A country gets the best from its elected Government when the politicians know that if they mess up there is a credible alternative ready and waiting in the wings. Perhaps the best example of this is the Panday regime (1995 to 2000). At all times Mr. Panday and his boys knew that one false move could and would have Mr. Manning and his PNM charging back! (Which is, of course, exactly what eventually happened).

But the Government's handling of the "Reshmi Affair" has been awful to say the least. the biggest problem with the affair is that it has damaged very badly not only the Government's credibility, but that of the National Security Minister as well as the Prime Minister herself. Brigadier Sandy's reputation is in tatters. He may or may not resign. The truth is that is exactly what an honourable man would do. How can he possibly not? And if he stays, what would the country think about any future contraversial pronouncements that he will most certainly have to make? Talk about damaged goods!

But the most serious (as well as the most worrisome) damage has been to the Prime Minister's credibility. She has not emerged from this matter without some serious wounds to both her image as well as her credibility. And her PR advisers clearly have neither the political knowledge nor the political experience to help her over this particular hump.

Oh! She'll get over it. And this will pass. But the Partnership is going to discover very soon (if they haven't found out already) that political credibility is something that once lost never quite comes back. Put another way, if, say, the Partnership's credibility the day after the general election was at one hundred percent, and the "Reshmi Affair" has caused its credibility to slip, say to eighty-five percent, they may (if they work hard) restore some of their lost credibility to, say, ninety percent. But it will never come back to one hundred. The problem is that if their credibility gets another sideways blow that reduces their credibility by, say, another fifteen percent, then they will only be able to claw back five percent, which means that they would then be down to eighty percent. And so it goes on until their credibility falls below the critical level ... and then they are finished!

And the tragedy is that it was a self inflicted wound that was not only completely unnecessary, but the result was completely predictable. What in the name of heaven were they thinking?

2011-01-27T09:15:00.002-04:00

NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUES AND THE COMMISSION
OF ENQUIRY INTO THE 1990 COUP

So, almost 21 years after the event we are finally getting a Commission of Enquiry (CoE) into the 1990 coup. It is going to be interesting to see what comes out of it. So far, there has been nothing that we didn't already know ... then Prime Minister A.N.R. Robinson was shot, the policeman outside police headquarters was murdered in cold blood, the Muslimeen stormed the Parliament and took the Parliamentarians hostage, then Minister of Planning Winston Dookeran was mandated to "negotiate" with the Muslimeen, and so on. But the really serious issues which have been kept out of sight and not discussed are what we need to know, for these unanswered questions can help us understand the past and plan appropriately for the future.

First of all, there is the very, very serious question that has not been addressed, i.e., the terrible lapse in the State's security apparatus that allowed the Muslimeen not only to import into the country the terrible firepower that was so obviously in their hands, but actually to be able to use it with such devastating effect. Prime Minister Robinson was head of the National Security Council (NSC). What reports was he getting before the coup? Did he have any information on teh activities of the Muslimeen? If so, what information exactly did he have? What steps did he take to deal with that information? And if he took none, then why not? The buck for national security at the end of the day stops with the Prime Minister. Mr. Robinson has got a lot of explaining to do and the CoE has a duty to extract that information from him regardless how sympathetic (or pathetic) a figure he may cut at the age of 84 where he is clearly weak and fragile. No right thinking person can approve in any way the treatment meted out to Mr. Robinson by the Muslimeen. he did not deserve to be shot, nor did he deserve a boot in his face, nor any of the other indignities suffered by him at the hands of these men. But that does not take away from his responsibilities to the nation for this very obvious lacuna in the nation's security. He is/was ultimately responsible for the breaches and we need to know how these breaches in security came about. For if we don't know, they can happen again ... and again, and again, and again!!

There are other obvious questions as well: How did the guns for the coup get into the country? Who facilitated the entry? Were they brought in on regular containere ships and smuggled through Customs? Were they brought in by small boats from Venezuela? How did they get here? There must have been agents for the Muslimeen buying these guns in the United States. We know that one person has already been convicted in the USA for purchasing these weapons. Were there others? If so, who? This was before e mail, Facebook and Twitter. How did they communicate with their co-plotters back in T&T? Were the Muslimeen's communications being monitored back then? If not, why not? If so, then what reports were going up the chain of command to the regular autorities?

It is important to remember that at the time of the coup the Jamaat al Muslimeen were being closely monitored by the State and there was an army outpost at the Jamaat's lands in Mucurapo. How the Muslimeen were able to leave their compound on that fateful Driday afternoon, under the very noses of the army, armed to the teeth, and be allowed to go into Port of Spain unimpeded is a serious question that has never been answered to date.

There are also peripheral questions which need to be answered, for they too are most serious. For example, both Messrs. Manning and Panday were not in the Red House when the rebels stormed in. This could well be coincidence and certainly over the years there has not been one iota of evidence to suggest that either or both of these men had foreknowledge of the crime of treason that was committed by the Muslimeen. But rumours persist that both men knew in advance of the Muslimeen's intentions. This is most unhealthy for everyone, not least Messrs. Panday and Manning. The CoE has a duty either to clear the names of these two men ("they had nothing to do with the coup and had absolutely no foreknowledge of it" or "they knew about it in advance and that is why they absented themselves. In the circumstances, they ought to be charged with being an accessory before the fact to treason"). The fact is that asuuming (though certainly not accepting) that either or both men knew about the coup in advance and did not alert the authorities then they would be guilty of being an accessory to the crime of treason. Treason and murder, by the way, carry the death penalty in T&T!

If the hard questions that have remained unanswered over the years are not answered now then this CoE will have been (like so many before it) a total waste of time and money. If the CoE does ask and get answers to these questions then it will have done a tremendous service to the country and the Caribbean as a whole. All of this comes at a time when national security is in the spotlight with the imbroglio over the appointment of Ms. Reshmi Ramnarine. In other words, it underscores the critical importance of competent persons being at the reins of the nation's security apparatus ... which, of course, is the reason why there has been such a fuss made over the appointment of the unfortunate Ms. Ramnarine in the first place!

2011-01-17T10:21:00.002-04:00

WHAT PART OF "IT'S THE ECONOMY, STUPID!" IS
IT THAT YOU DON'T UNDERSTAND?

There have been 'rumblings and a'tumblings in the atmosphere' coming out from certain quarters in T&T that seem to indicate that there are a lot of people in decison making positions that just haven't got it. I am specifically referring to the Minister of Finance and his cadre of advisers as well as the Minister of Labour. I will readily admit that there may be others, but these two gentlemen are the chief culprits in the crisis that is slowly approaching us.

Let's deal with the Finance Minister first: He just doesn't seem to get it! The economy is at a standstill and there is serious capital flight. Why? The newspapers reported on Saturday that last year (2010) some $700 million TT fled the country. And yet, Trinidad 7&Tobago has ample foreign reserves and international rating agencies such as Standard & Poors are giving us an excellent credit rating. So why is there a shortage of foreign currency and why are wealthy persons preferring to convert their money and send it abroad stashing it in banks where the return on investment is barely 1%?

The answer has to be a ringing lack of confidence in the Finance Minister and his ability to handle the various problems that beset the country. Enter the Minister of Labour. He too has to take a major part of the blame. His absolute refusal to intervene in the ongoing PSA dispute has been noticed by the private sector. And they (the private sector) have voted with their dollars. "Let's get them out of here", the private sector has said, "at least until we are satisfied that things will settle down again". The Minister has categorically refused to use his considerable influence and credibility with the labour movement to help to settle this dispute, preferring instead to leave his colleague, Mr. Dookeran, spinning helplessly in the wind while the economy goes down the tubes. And you can talk until you are blue in the face! The private sector's first (and last) loyalty is to their own personal bank accounts. The wealthy did not get wealthy by "putting country first"!

The Prime Minister is trying to tiptoe around this problem. She has sent a clear signal that she is unable to deal with Mr. McLeod by putting another trade unionist, Mr. Rudy Indarsingh, in the Ministry of Labour, obviously hoping that Mr. Indarsingh's labour credentials will be enough to be able to talk to and appease Watson Duke, the head of the PSA. We can only hope that this move will solve the problem ... but Mr. Indarsingh will still only be a junior minister in the Labour Ministry, and my personal guess is that the unions will all look for a signal from his substantive boss, Errol McLeod. And Mr. McLeod and his sidekick, David Abdullah, have both made it crystal clear which side they are coming down on and that no such signal to settle will come down any time soon!

So the bleeding of foreign exchange continues; the currency continues to devalue; the Minister of Finance continues to dither and his advisers seem hopeless and helpless to deal with the deteriorating situation. And the economy remains stalled with inflation climbing and jobs being slowly lost!

If you were to ask me what to do, I would say to the Prime Minister that she has to have a very serious talk with Messrs. Dookeran and McLeod and tell both of them that they have a very limited time to perform or "get off the pot". Their mutual dithering (for different reasons, no doubt) is causing serious heartache. We haven't got a long time again to solve our problems and get the economy moving.

2011-01-10T14:48:00.003-04:00

WHAT WOULD YOU ADVISE?

My wife asked me a very good question this morning: "If you were the adviser to the Government for one day ... and they would listen to you ... what would you advise them to do?"
"That's easy", I thought. "I would ...!" And then I stopped. What the heck would I advise them to do? There are a host of problems to deal with. And all of a sudden it was my responsibility to solve them?! It's really easy to fix the problems of the country from the luxury of your armchair ... or computer, but when you actually have the power, what would you do? What would I do?

So I stalled for time. "Why are you asking me that?" I said. "Because', she replied, "You are always so critical. What would you advise? How would you fix things?" Well, I don't really think that I am so crititical, but then beauty is in the eye of the beholder, and if my wife of all people thinks that I am ... well, maybe there might be something in the criticism. (Just 'maybe' ... the lawyer in me says never admit anything!). And she was right! You shouldn't criticise unless you really believe that you have a solution to whatever you are being critical about.

I must confess that I found this a very difficult question to answer. But here is the summation of the advice that I would give to the Government (who, of course, in an ideal world would listen to these 'golden nuggets' of wisdom and act on them):

First of all, I would deal with crime. At the end of the day the solution to crime does not involve more laws. It involves catching the bad guys and locking them up. This involves better policing. We have had about a million crime plans, all with varying catchy names like Operation Anaconda and so on, but none of them making so much as a dent in the terrible statistics coming out day after day and week after week. Let's face it, if the system of policing that we have now involves an inexorable rise in the crime rate, the solution does not involve making excuses for the rise, the solution lies in changing the system. So far, all we have done is tinkered with the system. But we haven't changed it! The Police Service is badly trained, badly paid, badly equipped and badly educated! Deal with it! Nothing! Absolutely nothing is going to change until we deal with that problem head on.

Next, I would deal with the economy and what Indira Sagewan-Ali called the biting issues. For example, I would tell the Minister of Finance that he had to settle with the Clico policy holders now. What exactly the settlement would look like, unfortunately I can't say today because I do not have the necessary figures from the Treasury ... but if I were the adviser ... well, I would have them, wouldn't I? But I would tell the Finance Minister that he had to start practising what he preached for so long ... transparency and open government. Trust the people with the truth.

Then I would turn to the Minister of Labour and tell him to get off his fanny and intervene in the PSA dispute. Either the Government has the money to pay the public sector workers or it doesn't. If it does then he should come out and say so and force the Minister of Finance to bend. If it doesn't then he should do the same thing and use his credibility with the Labour movement to convince them that the Government simply can't pay. But this sitting on the sidelines and coming up with the neo-colonialist bleating of "There is a process to be followed" is just so much ... I almost wrote a four letter word beginning with 'c'. Let me just say that it is so much rubbish!

I would then call all the Ministers together and tell them that even though their Government is a coalition and they all come to the table with differing agendas, they are going to have to understand that they are the Government of Trinidad & Tobago. In this regard they have got to learn to speak with one voice and to control their respective mouths and their respective Parties. This squabbling in public has to stop. It ain't good for anybody, not least the country.

Finally, I would tell the Prime Minister that she still has a lot of goodwill left. But she is squandering it uselessly. There are too many events which the public recognises as 'PR' and too little action taking place on the ground where it counts. I would tell her that she has got to be seen to have a firm grip on the reins and to be leading her fractitious MP's in a manner that engenders confidence. I would tell her that it was time to take the velvet glove off of her iron fist.

By then my day would be over and as there would be no second day for this adviser, I would have to go quietly home and see if any of my ideas actually worked! (Which is, of course, the big test!) Of course, there would be many, many more issues that I had not had the time to deal with ... but, maybe if my first ideas worked they might come back to me for a second day! (Yeah! Right! But I am dreaming, so I have the right to make comments like this.)

But being serious again, that's what I would advise. What would you advise? Think about it. It's not nearly as easy as it looks. And although I have been a little facetious in places in this post, the question is a most serious one.

2011-01-06T10:37:00.002-04:00

IT'S THE ECONOMY,STUPID!!!!

On my radio program on Monday afternoon ("Counterpoint", Radio 91.1FM, Mondays to Wednesdays from 4pm to 6pm) I had the good fortune to have as a guest on the show the noted Trinidadian economist, Indira Sagewan-Ali. I asked her several questions including what did she think that economy will look like come December of this year? Ms. Sagewan-Ali replied that she could not answer that question with any degree of certainty as everything depended on what happened with the economy by the end of the first quarter. If things did not get better by then, she said, we would face a bleak end of year ... things would not get better! But, she went on, in order to fix the economy there were six major issues that the Government had to deal with ... and deal with them quickly ... or face a continued 'backsliding' that will have us all worse off.

1) Crime: The economist pointed out that crime not only was affecting the personal lives of everyone, but that it also was affecting the economy in that investments that otherwise might be made by both local as well as foreign investors were either not being made at all, or plans for such investments were being put on hold. Further, the extremely bad publicity being given to our local tourist industry because of crime was seriously and adversely affecting our tourist industry. Put another way, crime was making us seriously un-competitive in just about every area of the economy that requires investment.

2) We need to get a clear sense of direction from GOTT: Just about everybody has been complaining about the lack of a sense of direction from the Government of Trinidad and Tobago (GOTT). Those sympathetic to the Government (including me) have pointed out in its defence that the new government inherited a heck of a mess and has had to spend an inordinate amount of time 'putting out fires'. The answer to this from the economists is that this is all well and good, but there has to come a time when you come to the country with a clear message of the way forward. I agree with that. The truth is that there is only one test of leadership, and that is to lead, and to lead vigorously.

3) All Government Ministers must "speak the same language": Well, just about everywhere you go you hear people complaining about this. The sad reality is that too many Government Ministers have been making contradictory statements that have led to confusion in the minds of people as well as ill will between the various factions that make up the People's Partnership. The truth is that this cannot be allowed to continue. It simply does not make for stable government.

4) A quick resolution to "biting" issues: Probably the biggest "biting" issue is CLICO. And the need for a quick resolution to that particular matter is (or ought to be) obvious. But there are other "biting" issues as well. Ms. Sagewan-Ali pointed out that the ongoing PSA dispute needs to be settled quickly, again for reasons that ought to be obvious. There is also the question of the Petrotrin $18 billion debt, which is receiving no publicity at the moment, but which nevertheless is a most serious matter that is bound to rear its very ugly head sooner rather than later.

5) Approach to social intervention: Although the Prime Minister has appointed a young and energetic Minister of Social Development who seems to be always at the ready at the drop of a hat or the coming of a flood to be on hand to give out hampers and blankets, there does not seem to be any real approach or policy behind the Government's actions. 'You have a problem? Well, here's a hamper', seems to be the Government's approach to the social problems of the society. Okay. I agree that the foregoing appears to trivialise the Government's approach, but the exaggerated example was given in order to emphasise the perception that there really does not seem to be any policy or philosophy driving the Government on this very important matter.

6) Capital flight: For most of last year there has been a steady flight of capital with many wealthy Trinidadians and business people betting that things will get worse economically instead of better. Indeed, our floating dollar now trades at around TT$6.40 to US$1.00 ... down from its peg of $6.30 to $1.00. This slow but steady slide is not being halted ... indeed, the only thing that can and will halt it is a return of confidence in the economy. But nothing seems to be happening. There is no payment of past bills to the contractors who are owed several billion dollars. There was no big capital investment program announced in the last budget (which unfortunately can best be described as "wooly"), and the Minister of Finance is not projecting the confidence that investors need to feel secure. The truth is that many, many people (and I am certainly one of them) want this Government to succeed. And most people are still prepared to give them time to get their act together. But the truth is that time is running out and the Prime Minister is soon going to have to make a very serious decision as to whether or not she has got the right persons in the right job or as to whether or not a re-shuffle of her Cabinet will bring about the changes in the economy as well as a return of investor confidence that is so clearly needed. In thinking about her options I would remind her of two old adages:
- Doing nothing is not an option!
and
- The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again
while expecting a different result! (Albert Einstein)

2011-01-03T09:49:00.002-04:00

TOURISM AND TOBAGO

The story of the British couple who were viciously attacked in Tobago several months ago is a tragedy for all parties in this terrible drama. It is an obvious tragedy for the Greens. Here was an elderly couple, not wealthy, who invested their retirement monies (or a substantial portion of it) in what they thought was an island paradise only to be viciously attacked and almost killed by a young Tobagonian who clearly couldn't care less as to how badly he hurt them or as to whether they lived or died. It is a tragedy for the attacker who has been caught and is now languishing in jail. A wasted life! It is a tragedy for Tobago and all those who depend on the tourist dollar for a living ... the taxi drivers, the hotel workers (from the desk clerks to the maids) and those who own hotels and restaurants. And one of the biggest tragedies is the T&T society, the majority of whom simply don't get it.

I have seen comments in the press and on the internet from Trinis who can't understand why this country should have to compensate a white English couple (with all the obvious racial overtones in that attitude) who apparently have more money than most Trinis. These mis-guided souls simply don't get it. And so, I will try and explain what has happened and why we should compensate the Greens.

If you are one of those who are of the opinion that we do not need tourism at all, then don't bother reading any more. The arguments in this post are valid only if you think that we do need tourism in Tobago.

To answer those who say that the Greens are not deserving of any compensation I would like to point out the following:
(1) There is on the Statute books of Trinidad & Tobago a Criminal Victims
Compensation Act ... and it has been ther for a long time. But, (and it is
a big "but") no Government has yet appointed a Board to administer
the compensation. So no monies can be paid out that is properly due
to victims of violent crime under the duly enacted laws of Trinidad &
Tobago.
(2) In the United Kingdom (where the Greens come from) there is a law
which is enforced where victims of violent crime are compensated by
the State. (This is addressed to those who say that a Trini would not
receive compensation from the British Government).
(3) Even if there was no such law on our Statute books, the Tobago
House of Assembly made a promise at the time to do so. It sits ill in
the mouth of the THA leader, Orville London, to try and deny this
now.

In other words, on the one hand there is the law to justify such a payment. On the other hand, there is the question of a (broken) promise ... or at the very least, the perception of a (broken) promise. Under our laws, if a Government makes a promise to pay for something (whether the Government was laible or not) then the person at the receiving end of the promise to pay gets a legally enforceable right known as "legitimate expectation". And tell me, don't you think that it would have been better to have dealt with the Greens in such a way that they did not complain to the Daily Mail rather than have to pay for damage control?

But the issue of compensation to the Greens, in my opinion is almost a red herring. Far more serious are the allegations of racism and the Tobago Minister's reaction to these allegations. Stop a moment and look at the facts: Two white English people talking to a very widely read English newspaper have made some terrible allegations of racism and bad treatment received by them while in hospital. Now, tell me: What do you think that the average white English reader will believe? That the allegations are true or false? No prizes for the correct answer! And in those circumstances, what do you think that the average English reader will believe when the Tobago Tourism Minister who has announced that an investigation into these allegations reveals (and I'll bet you dollars to doughnuts that this will be her report) that she has found no evidence to substantiate these allegations?!

And, do you think that this report will calm the fears of those who are thinking about taking a vacation in some sunny spot in the world and encourage them to come to Tobago? Do you understand the old adage about perception being reality?

I'm sorry. My own view is that this tragedy has been terribly mis-handled from start to finish. Further, tourism in Tobago has effectively been killed for at least ten years ... if not longer. The tragedy of the Greens is symptomatic of a much deeper seated problem. The average Tobagonian does not understand the difference between "service" and "servitude" and does not want tourists in his island. (Indeed, there are too many Trinis who don't understand that difference either.) No! Tourism in Tobago is dead. The Tobagonians and the authorities have made it crystal clear by their deeds as well as their words that they really do not want a Tourist industry. If and when they do, you will see a sea change in attitude. Until then, we should stop wasting money in pretending that we want such an industry. We clearly don't!

2010-11-23T10:11:00.003-04:00

SPYING AND KAMLA'S HOUSE

Being one of the persons whose name was called in Parliament some 10 days ago as one of the citizens whose telephone conversations and e mails were tapped and spied on, you will undoubtedly appreciate that I had more than just a passing interest in the debate on the new wiretapping legislation that began in the House of Representatives on Friday last. I was particularly interested when I heard that former Prime Minister Manning was going to speak and as a result I made it my business to tune into Channel 11 (the Parliament channel on TV) in order to hear for myself exactly what this man had to say.

My "flabber" was completely "gasted" however, when I realised after a little while that the former Prime Minister had absolutely no intention of dealing with the very serious issue of the terrible breach of the rights of all those individuals who had been spied on so callously and illegally. Instead, the man spent some time in justifying the existance of the SIA and the history of how it was originally set up during the Panday regime. (In this regard he seemed to be making the extremely questionable argument that as Panday had started the spying, his regime should not be blamed for continuing it!).

Assuming (though certainly not accepting) that everything that Patrick Manning said about the history of the SIA was true, he never touched even lightly on the illegal spying on citizens by his regime. Instead, he succeeded in pulling the wool over a rather gullible press by producing large glossy photographs of Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar's new home under construction for the last 8 years or so, and making the terribly outrageous suggestion that not only did it cost a fantastic amount of money ($150 million), but that the Prime Minister had financed this palatial mansion from contributions of Drug Lords! And the press fell for it!

Speaking for myself (and many others who have expressed similar sentiments to me) I do not for one minute believe any of the outrageous allegations of Patrick Manning as regards Mrs. Persad-Bissessar's new home. I do not believe that it cost any where near $150 million or even 10 per cent of this sum. I do not believe that Mrs. Persad-Bissessar has ever had any dealings with any Drug Lords, much less taken money from any of them. I consider Manning's allegations as scandalous in the extreme and extremely dangerous in that it appears that he is prepared to say and do anything that might take attention away from his own terrible actions. This is awful, and quite frankly beneath the dignity of a former Prime Minister. He ought to be ashamed of himself.

The wiretapping scandal is outrageous. Ramesh Deosaran was right when he said that it was more dangerous than the 1990 coup attempt because of its insidious and secretive nature. The persons responsible should be made to pay ... and pay dearly. There is a great suspicion that Manning himself was involved in the spying. After all, just about every name on the list (including mine) were persons who either opposed and continued to oppose Manning, or who at some time or the other had opposed him. There was absolutely no justification for spying on those persons on the list.

Mrs. Persad-Bissessar has caused a pre-action protocol letter to be written to Manning for his terrible and defamatory remarks about her. Good! I hope that she sues him for every penny that he has got. I will sue him too ...as soon as I get the evidence that will stand up in Court that proves that he caused my phones to be tapped.

2010-11-04T13:56:00.002-04:00

SHUBH DIVALI

The deep significance of Divali and all that it stands for ... the ultimate triumph of light over darkness is a beautiful and universal message for all mankind. May I extend to all of my readers a happy and holy Divali. I pray that Mother Lakshimi may shower you with her choicest blessings, now and forever more.

2010-11-01T12:24:00.002-04:00

ANALYSIS: SHOULD THE PEOPLE'S PARTNERSHIP BE
PAYING ATTENTION TO THE U.S. MID-TERM ELECTIONS?

The short answer to the above question is a definite 'yes'! President Obama came to power in the November 2008 Presidential elections preaching change (sound familiar?). The American electorate was war weary and justifiably terrified at the economic precipice that their country (and the world) was falling into. They were looking for new leadership, a new direction, and above all, hope that Obama would "deliver them from evil".

Enter Kamla Persad-Bissessar at the beginning of this year with a very similar message to a Trinidadian/Tobagonian electorate that was simply fed up with the leaders of both of the main political parties. The electorate basically felt that the leadership of both the PNM and the UNC was arrogant and out of touch with their needs, wants and desires. If you had asked almost anybody of whatever race, creed or religion in the street this time last year whether he thought that either Manning or Panday genuinely cared for him and his family you would have been met with a resounding 'NO'! And it wouldn't have stopped there. If you had asked whether either of the two leaders had his feet on the ground, his finger on the pulse of what was going on, again you would have got a shouted 'NO'. (Nobody was really taking any notice of the COP which was whithering on the political vine until Kamla handed them a lifeline.) It was therefore (especially in retrospect) hardly surprising that Mrs. Persad-Bissessar's message of hope and change would resonate so resoundingly in the country or that she would win so convincingly in the May election.

People were worried about almost everything: Crime, the economy, their future, corruption! You name the problem and you would have found a sizable segment of the population concerned about the particular issue.

But the new Government has now had some five months "to settle" and you are beginning to hear concerns that nothing is happening. Everything seems to be at a standstill and there is a lack of direction ... a lack of leadership that is disturbing to say the least. And most of it is emanating from a lack of movement in the economy. The banks are reporting that borrowing is way down and that everybody is in a 'wait and see mode'. The budget that was presented in September was long on rhetoric but very short on specifics, and the failure to get the new State boards up and running has crippled many businesses who are depending on getting paid monies that are now long overdue. Real estate values are declining by the week and the 'engine of growth' that has traditionally been the government seems to be in the repair shop for an unduly long length of time.

Like most people I voted for the People's Partnership. Like most people I genuinely want them to succeed. Unfortunately, like most people I am now beginning to become concerned. The appearance or perception is that they do not have their act together, that they do not understand the basics of governance. I genuinely hope that this is not so. I do not want them to fail. It is not in this country's interest that they fail. On the contrary, it is in all of our interests that they succeed. But if they continue in the direction that they are heading they are going to find (as Obama is now finding) that the people who supported them and voted for them will turn against them as sure as night follows day.

What is causing the "dithering" (for want of a better word) is not yet in the public domain ... although we are all hearing the rumours which are daily gaining strength as well as credibility. And the "boys" ought to be aware that effective opposition to a government rarely comes from within the Parliament ... it usually comes from outside. Therfore they should not count on the fact that Keith Rowley is proving himself to be an ineffective opposition leader. Dr. Rowley's lack of leadership potential will not save them. Nature abhors a vacuum, and the same can also be said about politics. In fact, the lack of a credible alternative often leads to greater instability.

Let me repeat: It is in our collective interest that this Government succeed. But they need to get the message early, rather than late, that they have to "get off the pot" and begin performing. Their honeymoon is over. And they have only to look at the U.S.A. to see what can happen when you don't deliver on your promises!

2010-10-29T11:00:00.002-04:00

THAT P.S.A. DISPUTE

It is difficult to understand what is going on between the Government and the Public Service Association with regard to the salary negotiations for public servants. Oh! It is fairly easy to understand the P.S.A.'s President, Mr. Watson Duke. His is the classic trade unionist's position: "We want more money". And there is nothing basically wrong with this approach ... at least as an opening gambit. But unfortunately things don't always work like that and a big problem right now for the Government is finding the necessary funds to meet all of its obligations including, but not limited to increased salaries for the public servants.

The present dispute is not, and should not be about whether or not the public servants deserve an increase. By and large they do. There are a few who don't deserve even the salary that they are getting at present ... but they are (thankfully) not anywhere near a majority, and it is unfair to effectively punish the majority of hardworking and deserving public servants because of an inefficient minority.

No. The real issue is whether we (the country) can afford any increase at all ... and if so, what is the size of the increase that we can afford. Now, it ought to be of great benefit to both sides of this issue to have as the present Minister of Labour a man whose trade union credentials are impeccable and therefore whose word ought to be trusted by Mr. Duke et al. But the Minister has been conspicuous in his silence on the issue and the question has to be asked: Why?

I can only think of two reasons why the Minister might want to keep quiet and not intervene now:
1) He is completely incompepent and does not understand his proper role and his duty to
the country; or
2) He simply does not trust his Ministerial colleague, the Finance Minister, and is not
personally convinced that the figures that are being presented by the Government (his
Government) are true and correct.

I am ready, willing and able to accept that there may be another reason (or even 10 more reasons) but I really can't think of any.

Now, speaking for myself and myself alone, I find it hard to believe that Mr. McLeod is an incompetent person. So, if he is not incompetent then his unwillingness to intervene must be (unless there is some other reason which I can't think of) because he doesn't trust his Government's figures and is unwilling to put his credibility on the line for his Ministerial colleague. Because, if he did trust his colleague and his Government he could and should call Mr. Duke and say something like "Hear what Watson. We just don't have the money to pay all yuh." And he could and should then lend his name and his prestige to finding a solution to the present imbroglio instead of leaving the Chief Personnel Officer to twist and turn in the wind. He has the pretige and the clout and the credibility to bring both the P.S.A. and the Government into line.

But he is not doing that at all! The closest he has come to commenting on this most serious dispute is to support David Abdullah marching with the P.S.A. ! What does that tell you?

The only test of leadership is to lead, and to lead vigourously. The Minister of labour has to "get off the pot" and lead the parties out of a dispute that could have serious adverse consquences for this country. And he has to do it now!

2010-10-26T10:01:00.002-04:00

THAT CLICO PROBLEM ... AGAIN!!!!

Probably the biggest problem that exists for the general public (both the taxpayers as well as the CLICO depositers) is the absolute dearth of information about the true state of affairs in the felled behemoth. Let's face it: We just don't have any real information. For example, does anybody (besides the Minister of Finance and the Governor of the Central Bank) know the answers to any or all of the following questions?

- What exactly caused the collapse? Is it true that the collapse was caused by the
Manning Administration pulling $200 million out of the CLICO bank?
- If so, who made that decision and why? If not, what caused the collapse?
- Was CLICO insolvent for a long time? When did CLICO become insolvent? Was it 10
years ago as alleged by then Attorney General Ramesh Maharajh? If so, what
responsibility does then Governor of the Central Bank Winston Dookeran (now Finance
Minister) and then Finance Minister Gerald Yet Ming (now placed in charge of CLICO
by Dookeran) have for the present debacle? Could /should they have done something
then? If so, what?
- What responsibility does the present Central Bank Governor have for the mess?
- What responsibility does the former Finance Minister, Karen Teishera, have?
- Did the last Finance Minister have inside information about CLICO's imminent demise
which caused her to take her money out mere weeeks before the collapse?
- What did Patrick Manning, who was not only Prime Minister but Finance Minister for
five long years, know?
- CLICO's reach extended deep into both the PNM as well as the UNC. We know, for
example, that CLICO gave the PNM $5 million in 2007 for its election campaign. Did
these political contributions efffectively prevent the regulatory authorities from doing
what they were supposed to do in the first place?
- If the answer to the above is 'yes', is this not a form of corruption?
- If the answer to this is also 'yes', what politicians are likely to be charged?
- Why does the present Minister of Finance who campaigned for two years on the
promise of more open government and transparency not tell the public exactly what
has happened and give the public all the information concerning this disaster?
- Why after almost two years do we have little more information than we had at the
beginning?
- Is there a cover-up? If so, why? Who is being protected? Why are they being
protected?
- Why have the assets of the principal "players" in CLICO not been frozen? When the
Madoff and Stanford scandals hit the first thing that the American Government did
was to freeze the assets of the leading players before any criminal charges were ever
brought?
- Has there been fraud? Is there evidence that suggests fraud? If so, why has nothing
been done for almost two years? Is this part of a cover-up? How long does it take to
figure out if fraud has taken place?
- According to the newspaper reports some $7 billion of public money was poured into
CLICO. What happened to it?
- Why has there been absolutely no accounting to the public by the Minister of Finance
concerning the public money already spent and planned to be spent in this company?

I could go on, but you get the point. We have no information concerning CLICO. It was unfair (and not a little insulting) for the Finance Minister to make that infamous $75,000 offer and say in essence 'take it or leave it'. You ought not to treat people that way. And if he really believes in his own rhetoric and is not a hypocrite he will agree without equivocation. We need information.

The Government of Trinidad & Tobago made a promise that it would see the depositers paid. The credibility of the Government now hangs on that thread of a promise. As to whether that promise should ever have been made in the first place ... well, that is a different story!

2010-10-25T13:41:00.002-04:00

POOF ...IT'S GONE!!!

An organisation called The World Gold Council puts out a monthly report that shows the official gold holdings of every country in the world. Unsurprisingly, a check on it's website will show that the United States has more gold than any other country. But readers will find it interesting to note that the Council's report for March 2010 showed that Trinidad & Tobago had 1.9 tonnes of gold ... which works out to be about 50,000 ounces, or a value of about US$650 million in gold at then current prices. The website can be found at

http://www.gold.org/assets/file/value/stats/statistics/archive/pdf/World_Official_Gold_Holdings_Mar_2010.pdf

You will find Trinidad & Tobago at no. 90 in the top 100 countries in this list.

But if you check the same list for September, 2010 you will find that the gold holdings of Trinidad & Tobago has seemingly disappeared! Now, US$650 million is more than 4 1/4 billion Trinidad & Tobago dollars. So, what happened? Were the country's gold holdings sold? When? Why? (Gold has been increasing in value this year. It's not exactly the best time to sell.) Who took the decision to sell? Who bought it? Was this done before or after the elections in May? Have we been told that we sold all of our gold holdings? I can't remember any announcement being made.

In these hard times $4 billion is a lot of money ... well, even in good times that is a lot of money! So, what happened? Don't you think that we are owed an explanation?

2010-10-20T11:33:00.002-04:00

IS THE PEOPLE'S PARTNERSHIP GOVERNMENT
FALLING APART?

A lot of people have been asking this question for a few weeks now. The source of this query can be traced back to a few things. First of all, there was the Prime Minister's apparent slapping down of Jack Warner over the airport lighting fiasco. The newspapers were rife with speculation that there was a rift between the powerful Minister of Works and his boss, the even more powerful Prime Minister.

But what has really got the tongues wagging has been the very public criticisms coming from leading members of the COP that they (members of the COP) had not got their fair share of the "spoils of victory", meaning their fair share of appointments to State boards.

Let's deal with the Jack Warner issue first: Mr. Warner has come to public office with a "can do" and "let's get it done" approach that is both refreshing as well as being desperately needed in a country which has long wallowed in neo-colonialist leadership and thinking. He is one of a few Ministers that are really trying to effect "change" (as opposed to "exchange"). The newspapers (especially the Express) seem to have "get Jack at all costs" attitude, and are ready to crucify him at the drop of a hat. The facts are that this airport lighting business has been on the table for the longest while. Further, there is a real danger to the travelling public and the matter is urgent. It needs to be dealt with. Finally, the relevant law was amended by the then PNM administration which gave the Minister the authority to sign off on such a contract. Mr. warner received professional legal advice that he had the legal authority to sign off and approve the contract. He did just that. But (and it is a long "but") Mr. Warner has his fair share of detractor's who decided that here was a perfect "Ah!Ha!" moment (as in "Ah!Ha! Now we have him!"), and they promptly began to make a huge fuss, the essence of which underlying the fuss was there was the possibility that the old Jack may have had his fingers in the kitty.

The Prime Minister had no choice really but to step in and put the brakes on the award. Not to do so would have given grist to her enemies' mill who would have yelled (without any proof or regard to the facts) that here was a perfect example of Partnership corruption ... which, of course, was simply not true. Mr. Warner has taken the seeming rebuke in a proper and statesmanlike manner saying in essence, "well, pray that nothing goes wrong and don't blame me if it does!" He's right. Next point! But this sorry episode simply cannot be taken to reflect a rift in Partnership leadership.

Unfortunately, the recent COP (mis)behaviour is something else again. The claims for a share of the "spoils" by COP activists is as repugnant as it is hypocritical. Didn't Mr. Dookeran base his campaign from the very beginning on "Country first" and "no more jobs for the boys" politics? So what are these guys like Vernon DeLima, Hulsie Bhaggan, Joseph Toney and others talking about? Would we have been hearing from them if they had got appointments? Forgive me for thinking that the answer is 'no'.

In any case, part of the problem is clearly that the COP boys want to behave as if they are equal partners when in fact they are very junior partners in this Government. There are five COP seats which are held by Winston Dookeran, Prakash Ramadar, Carolyn Seepersad Bachan, Anil Roberts and Errol McLeod. If all five walk out the door the Government will certainly not collapse, nor will it be threatened with collapse. In any case, which of these five do you think is prepared to give up his Ministerial appointment for Messrs. DeLima et al? My guess is none! And the truth is also that the COP has no real support in those constituencies contolled by the UNC. Put another way, apart from some huffing and puffing and helping the newspapers to increase their sales, the COP is in an extremely weak position. And the sooner they realise this the better.

So, in answer to the question that headlines this post, I would say no, nat at all!

2010-10-20T11:13:00.002-04:00

WELCOME TO THE PLANET

AVA ELIZABETH GRACE DINSDALE

The express purpose of this Blog is to discuss matters of importance in Trinidad & Tobago, the wider Caribbean and Latin American region, and the rest of the world (in that order). At 9:04am (Eastern Australia time) on Monday 18th October, 2010 my beautiful granddaughter, Ava Elizabeth Grace, was born in a hospital in Sydney, Australia. She weighed 8lbs 12 oz and is thriving!!

Mother (Natalie) and father (Ryan) are over the moon with happiness. And the Montano bloodline continues!!

Readers will undoubtedly understand and agree with me that this was a most important event and will share my pride and joy over this latest arrival to our planet.

2010-09-29T11:42:00.002-04:00

THAT CLICO HOLE ...AGAIN!

There was something very interesting about Finance Minister Dookeran's latest statements regarding (what I suppose can loosely be termed) "the CLICO Affair", and that was about his reference to the existance of "ghost accounts". What the heck could he be referring to? What is a "ghost account" exactly?

Now the following is pure conjecture on my part and I don't know that any of it is true. I put it forward as pure speculation. But then, in the absence of full disclosure we are all going to speculate about what is going on:
What if these "ghost accounts" are in fact accounts that were established for certain persons where no money had actually been deposited? In other words, what if, for example, John Smith was holding a certificate of deposit for, say, $10 million with interest at 10 per cent for, say, five years, but this fictional John Smith had never actually deposited $10 million with Clico in the first place? well, this could be classified as an arch-typical "ghost account". You realise, of course, that in such a case John Smith would not only have the capital of $10 million, but be being paid interest of $1 million a year! Is this why the Government does not want to pay interest on those accounts which apparently include the "ghost accounts"? Because they know that a lot of these holders ... or some of them ... are not really entitled to the money in the first place?

So, the next question would have to be why would CLICO (or CL Financial or any CLICO subsidiary) issue such a certificate? Why indeed? A possible and probable answer could be was that it was issued to John Smith for some sort of "services" that he rendered. But what kind of services? Could it be some sort of pay off? Obviously if this was so then it would have to be some sort of pay off. But for what? A bribe? The question is asked open ended, but you can see how it makes sense to ask such a question. Then, if so who was being bribed? And for what?

Now, if John Smith was some sort of public servant or some sort of politician then the whole thing would begin to make a little more sense. So, the next logical question is obviously whose names are on these "ghost accounts"? And if these "ghost accounts" do exist, why has it taken approximately 21 months for this information to come out?

Because make no bones about it, if there are "ghost accounts" this suggests a massive fraud that goes beyond the CLICO executives and could possibly involve certain politicians. But who?

We need to know why CLICO failed. We need to know when CLICO started to fail. We need to know why no red flags went up immediately, or, if they did go up why was nothing done. Who was responsible? Where were the auditors? Why did they apparently say nothing? Why did the Manning Administration decide to bail out CLICO with taxpayers money but not bail out the Hindu Credit Union? What was the difference? Did it have anything to do with the possible fraud inside CLICO? What? Why hasn't any action been taken to freeze the accounts of the CLICO executives while the investigation takes place? This is done all the time in places like the United States where executives find their assets frozen before any charges are brought in order to safeguard their possible dissipation. Why did Dr. Eurich Bob and Claude Mussaib-Ali resign from the CLICO board last year? Did they see certain things that made them very unhappy? We never got a satisfactory explanation for the resignations of these honourable men. Why not?

There are too many unanswered questions that affect too many honest people. But more and more it is beginning to look like there has been a massive cover-up and the present Administration is not being as open and as forthright as they promised that they would be. And we are left with the obvious question: Why? One thing is clear: People are hurting badly!

2010-09-23T10:04:00.002-04:00

LOOKING AT S.A.U.T.T

The summary firing of Brigadier Joseph, the (until recently) head of the Strategic Anti-Crime Unit of Trinidad & Tobago, known to all and sundry by its acronym SAUTT, has drawn criticism in some quarters. The editorial in one daily newspaper this week complained that this firing as well as the rather curt and summary dismissal of the former Commissioner of Police James Philbert was not right and that these men should not have been put out to pasture the way that they were.

It is difficult to comment on the Philbert sacking without knowing all of the facts. My personal bet is that there must have been something that happened to have caused the abrupt dismissal, and that something is probably of a national security nature. That is the only explanation that makes sense. But I will readily admit to the possibilty that there is another (nonsensical?) reason.

But Brigadier Joseph is clearly a horse of a very different colour. Frankly, I am surprised that he wasn't dealt with before. Let me explain: First of all, SAUTT has spent millions of dollars with no discernible results. We have the infamous "eye in the sky", also known as the blimp which has cost "a pound and a crown" but which has not made a dent in the crime situation. Indeed, over the years that Peter Joseph presided over SAUTT the crime situation got steadily worse. So, from a value for money point of view, what did we get?

Then there is the question of the wiretapping of telephones. Almost everybody who was opposed to the Manning regime believed that his or her phones were tapped at some time or the other. I can't prove it, but I too believe that my phones were tapped from time to time. Indeed, right at the beginning when ANR Robinson had (wrongly) installed Manning as Prime Minister I set up with a friend of mine a little "sting" to see if my phones were being tapped. At that time Manning and Panday were meeting to discuss a possible way out of the 18/18 impasse and were supposed to meet at the Hilton to discuss same. I called my friend (by pre-arrangement) the day before the meeting was supposed to take place and told him that we had a "bomb" to drop at the meeting. I said that we had been meeting secretly with Keith Rowley and that we were going to go to the Hilton meeting and demand that Manning step down and that Rowley be made the Prime Minister. If he refused we were going to go to the President and tell him that Rowley had our support. I said that we had done a deal with Rowley for the Cabinet posts. None of this, of course, was true. And, this was a private conversation between two UNC activists - me and one other.

Well, what happened next was most interesting. Manning cancelled the meeting and the talks broke down. Coincidence? Or was my phone tapped and the conversation reported to Manning? Because make no bones about it, if what I had said was true (and I repeat, it was a complete fiction) then Manning was in serious danger of losing his Premiership and it was definitely not in his interest to have that Hilton meeting.

Now, does this little story prove that there was wiretapping? No. But it certainly does suggest it, doesn't it?

Put another way, speaking personally, my personal opinion is that there was wiretapping of political opponents by SAUTT and there would have to be really conclusive evidence to prove to me that there wasn't. I believe that Kamla's phone was tapped. Can I prove it? No. Do I know that for a fact? No. But you know the old saying about if it walks like a duck ...?

2010-09-21T11:56:00.002-04:00

THAT BIG CLICO HOLE

There are several problems associated with the Finance Minister's proposal for dealing with that huge CLICO hole. But probably the biggest one is the absolute lack of transparency and information surrounding this terrible mess. Nobody (outside of, I suppose, the directors, the Minister and certain Central Bank and Finance Ministry officials) seems yo have any idea of exactly what the state of affairs is in that troubled conglomerate, nor does anybody really seem to know exactly what happened.

And this is a very important question. What the @#$%^& happened? How did this huge financial monolith fall so hard and so far? Was there fraud, as some people have suggested? If so, why haven't there been any charges laid? It's been almost two years for crying out loud! But if there was just bad management, where were the regulators? What was the Central Bank doing? Is it true that for several years before the collapse that warning signals were being sent out? What were the auditors saying? Were they giving the group a clean bill of health right up to the end? If so, what is being done about that? And, if they (the auditors) were sounding warning bells, then where were the regulatory authorities?

With the dearth of proper information there are millions of ugly rumours and even more ugly speculations swirling around ... the sum total of which is that absolutely nothing is going to be done to deal with the men and women responsible for this disaster and depositors are just going to have to "suck salt".

But the Minister cannot continue to treat the depositors with what appears to be scant courtesy and great contempt. It's simply not good enough. In a first world country he could never get away with this. But he is getting away with it here. Tells you something, doesn't it? Why can't we be told the whole truth? Is somebody being protected?

And what about the rumours that the prime assets (like the Express and Republic Bank shares, etc.) being quietly sold to "the boys"? Is there any truth in these rumours? Are deals being quietly done? Is this why the Government has come out with this $75,000 cash offer plus a 20 year no interest bond? To clean up the balance sheet and allow the assets to be sold off to "the boys"?

No. there is something smelling here. What it is, I don't know. But everything that has happened with the CLICO affair points to something going on under the surface that we aren't supposed to know about. And the question has to be asked: Why?

2010-09-20T12:38:00.002-04:00

JUSTICE VOLNEY'S BLUNDER

Justice Herbert Volney's diatribe against the Chief Justice (CJ) last week was wrong on so many levels that it is difficult to know where to start. Perhaps the best starting place would be the question of whether or not the Chief Justice was wasting tax payers money by renting a supergrade house in Goodwood Park. The answer to this is simple: he is entitled to it. If Mr. Volney wants to debate whether or not a Chief Justice should be entitled to a luxury house at State expense, that is another matter. I, for one, would argue that the Chief Justice of Trinidad and Tobago should have a supergrade house. He is, after all, the Chief Justice, and his office should carry with it a certain social status for reasons that hopefully are obvious.

Mr. Volney spoke about the two former Chief Justices living in their own homes, and questioned why the present Chief Justice wasn't doing that. The implication was that somehow this was wrong of Chief Justice Archie not to do as his predeccessors had done. Again, this should not need defending. The present CJ has decided not to live in his house but to live in a State house. He has decided not to collect the tax free housing allowance but to occupy a State house instead. If his predeccessors had done this (i.e., occupy a State house) and Mr. Archie had decided that he was not going to do that but collect the money instead, one rather gets the impression that the former Judge would say that this was wrong. In other words, its heads Mr. Archie loses, and tails he loses again.

And while the reasons that the last two CJ's did this (lived in their own homes) do not need to be discussed at this time, the fact is that they both had very good and legitimate reasons for doing so. Put another way, it was to their personal advantage to do so ... and nothing is wrong with that!

Of probably greater interest though is what will the Prime Minister do about this imbroglio. Mr. Volney has obviously deeply offended the sitting Chief Justice. Mr. Archie has shown commendable restraint so far, but he must be highly annoyed. And Mr. Volney is the Minister whose mandate requires that he deal with the Judiciary on a plethora of matters. How is that going to work? You are going to have two men, who clearly do not like each other, having to deal with each other on a regular basis. The Prime Minister has sought to put a band aid on the problem by saying that the views expressed ny the former Judge were his own personal views and not those of her Government. But surely this cannot be good enough? Mr. Volney has seriously defamed the present Chief Justice and is refusing to apologise. Mr. Volney has also breached the rules relating to Parliamentary privilege. Frankly, the PNM Opposition (if they were on the ball ... which they are not) should report the former Judge to the Privileges Committee of Parliament. Unfortunately, that Committee is always stacked with Government M.P.'s so it is most unlikely that Mr. Volney will be dealt with in a proper manner.In other words, he will probably get off. But the report should be made, for the attack was most certainly a breach of Parliamentary privilege.

The Prime Minister is on the horns of a very obvious dilemma: What Mr. Volney did should result in the very least of his being moved from that Ministry. But the firing of a senior Cabinet Minister, or even a Cabinet re-shuffle so early in the game could result in all sorts of political trouble for the Prime Minister, not the least beimg having to deal with the accusation that her team is not a good one. It would be an admission that her judgement in appointing Mr.Volney to that post was flawed. In other words, Mr. Volney has put his Prime Minister in a very bad political position. I would strongly recommend to the former Judge that he start taking lessons in politics and how to behave as a senior Minister. What you can say in opposition is not always acceptable when you hold the reins of power. And finally, I will also give the Minister a piece of good advice: Be aware that the true opposition in the country will not come from the Opposition inside the Parliament; it will come from the people! And the people are not stupid. You have got a lot of goodwill ... still! But a few more unforced errors like this and you will blow it, not only for yourself, but for your entire team!!

2010-09-17T09:39:00.002-04:00

THAT 2010 BUDGET

Now that the Budget debate is over I must confess to a certain disappointment with both the quality as well as the content of the contributions from M.P.'s on both sides of the House. Starting with the Government side first, I am a little concerned over the apparent death of information that has emerged over the Government's plans, hopes and aspirations. Let me give you an example of what I mean: Let's take the deficit of approximately $7 billion. Is it unreasonable to presume that this is going to be used for the CLICO/Hindu Credit Union bailout? If so, how much of this is going to be used for the bailout? What exactly is that bailout going to cost and how exactly does the Government intend to make good on that debt (i.e., the cost of the bailout)?

The question assumes great importance as there are some very "heavy" rumours circulating around the City that the Government intends to put many of the CLICO assets up for sale. The rumours also say that the sale of the various assets have all but been concluded already and thatthe deals have been struck with certain "big players" who have been literally salivating at the thought of gaining control of various plum assets like the Republic Bank shares and the shares in the Express newspaper's holding company (to name but two). Is there any truth to any of these rumours? If so, what is the truth? All of them? Some of them? If only some of them, which "some" are true? Are these "done deals" of the sort being rumoured, in the national interest? If so, why? If not, and assuming (though not accepting) that there is truth in the rumours (either whole or in part) then why are the deals going ahead?

You get the picture. The budget debate was an ideal place to deal with these rather serious rumours and put them to bed one way or the other, either, for example, by denying them outright or by confirming the truth (whatever that might be) and explaining it to our (the citizenry's) satisfaction.

There are other questions for the Government. For example, in the PNM budgets they used to have a line item showing what particular energy projects were slated for the ensuing budgetary year. For example, so many billions for an aluminium smelter. There are no such line items in this year's budget. Does this mean that there will be no big energy projects in the next 12 months?

I also felt that the Finance Minister missed an opportunity in his presentation in that as this was his Government's first budget that he might have set out not just his plans for the next year, but his Government's vision for the next 5 years. Maybe he did do this, but if he did it wasn't clear to me. Was it to you?

But my biggest disappointment in the debate was in the quality of the PNM's response. Dr. Rowley did not come across as a man who really understood what was needed, nor even that he was aware of the history of the recent past. He sounded like a pot hound barking at another pot hound that is a mile away at 3 o'clock in the morning. He also came with downright peurile vague accusations of corruption for which he clearly had no real or any evidence. The country and his Party are ill-served by this sort of leadership. as for members of his team like Donna Cox and Marlene Macdonald ... well, perhaps somebody should tell them that the strength of their arguments is not increased by the strength of their voices. The PNM for the first time in its long history was unable to present itself to the nation in this debate as a real alternative government that can be taken seriously.

On balance the budget gets a passing grade from me. I will be the first to admit that it is always easier to snipe from the sidelines than to be the actual decision maker and there will always be things that will require further explanation. My hope is that the matters that are raised in this post will be expained ... and soon ... together with other matters that haven't been raised as yet. That is what I meant when I said that I was disappointed. I had hoped for more details and better explanations. Will we get them? Stay tuned.

2010-09-14T10:15:00.002-04:00

EXPOSING THE MYTH OF MINIMUM WAGE

Finance Minister Dookeran has managed to keep the new People's Partnership (PP) Government on an even keel. While the budget cannot be described as breaking new ground or as being brimful with new and innovative ideas, most responsible commentators have given the budget a more than passing grade and say that they expect that the economy will right itself in a relatively short period of time. At the moment there seems to be no reason why we ahould not accept the general consensus and congaratulate the Finance Minister. he certainly seems to have created a much needed confidence in the business sector. And without confidence no Government can succeed. Just look at Patrick Manning's regime for a classic example of how to fail and you will understand what I mean.

But what has me more than a little agitated is the nonsense that spews from the mouths of certain politicians and trade union leaders concerning minimum wage. 'The minimum wage must be raised to at least $20' more than one of these so-called leaders have spouted during the recent general elections and afterwards. I even read a report where Ancil Roget, the head of the powerful OWTU, has expressed his disapointment over the fact that the PP Government has failed to raise minimum wage.

These politicians and trade unionists are either being fundamentally dishonest or are really more stupid than they look (or both) when they call for a raising of the minimum wage. Let me state quite categorically a fundamental fact of economics and life: Minimum wage has nothing to do with helping poor people or low wage earners make a better living. Minimum wage has every thing to do with raising a country's productivity! You can test this in several different ways, but for the sake of keeping this short (and hopefully readable) I will use only two different examples:

Example One: The countries in the world which have the highest productivity are the ones with the highest minimum wage. The countries in the world with the lowest productivity have the lowest (or no) minimum wage.

Example Two: Let's say that you have a small mechanics shop where you employ two young boys to sweep out the garage and help with minor repairs every day. You pay them each teh minimum wage ... $9 per hour for 8 hours a day at 5 days a week. In other words, your wage bill is $720 per week ($9 x 8 hours per day x 5 days a week x 2 boys). If minimum wage were to be doubled to, say, $18 per hour, your wage bill would go up to $1,440 per week. The problem is that you aren't making enough to pay those wages. The only way you can survive is to keep one boy and lay off the other. The one that you keep now has to do the work of two ... in other words, his productivity now has to be twice what it was. The one who has been laid off either has to go and re-train in order to get a better job, or has to understand that when he does get another job he is going to be required to work harder than he did before. In other words, for both boys their productivity is forced to increase.

I am sure that you get the point. And politicians, despite what they may say on the campaign trail, understand this fundamental fact that minimum wage is always about productivity and nothing else. And you can see from the two examples above that too great an increase in the minimum wage can and will result in serious ditortions in the labour market as marginally unproductive and/or unproductive workers are laid off.

The new Government has started well ... with a few hiccups, that is true ... but they have started well. One of the things that they must do is to remain honest and true with the people. At this time there is no reason to doubt that they will do just that!

2010-09-02T14:23:00.002-04:00

THE IMPOVERISHMENT OF VENEZUELA

Hugo Chavez came to power in late 1998 on a populist wave that sent tremors down the spines of the country's elite. Almost to a man every single upper class or upper middle class Venezuelan expressed loathing for Chavez and the change which he represented. But Venezuela's social and economic progress did not reflect what had happened in the rest of the world. To a large extent, the attitude towards the lower economic classes evinced by the upper and upper middle classes was eerily similar to the attitudes of their counter parts in Trinidad in 1959. The country was just waiting ... no, begging for somebody like Chavez to come along. He was, you might say, an accident waiting to happen. And when he finally burst onto the scene the poor flocked to his banner in numbers that no Presidential candidate had ever seen before.

But his promise of a better tomorrow has been squandered by his complete failure to understand that the world has moved away from the socialist rhetoric of yesteryear and his worshipping at the feet of one of the world's worst dictator's, Fidel Castro ... a man who has beggared his country by his stubborn adherence to socialist policies and principals which have all been disproved by bitter experience... has not helped matters any. Cuba is today one of the poorest countries in the Western hemisphere. But that's another story.

Instead of realising that he had a unique opportunity to become one of Latin America's greatest heroes by utilising Venezuela's vast oil resources for the benefit of his people, President Chavez chose instead to declare a virtual war on all who dared to oppose his ideology. It is perfectly true that Venezuelan society needed to change, and to change radically. It is also true that wrenching social change is never easy, and it is more than likely that those opposed to him would never have embraced him no matter what he did. But history has shown again and again that extremism, especially in politics, is never a good thing and that it will usually produce the exact opposite of what is really intended. Indeed, it is noteworthy that Lula in Brazil (a man who is probably just as left leaning as Chavez, and who came to power in a country that also needed serious social and economic reforms) has managed to achieve great social and economic change in Brazil to the great benefit of all Brazilians in more or less the same period. In other words, one has to question seriously whether Chavez ever understand the word "governance". Because today Venezuela is in a crisis to which there does not appear any answer that could bring a modicum of hope to thinking people.

Venezuela's official exchange rate is now around Bolivars 2,500 to the US dollar. The black market rate is at about 8000 Bolivars to the dollar! And the answer to that from President Chavez is that persons caught trading will be locked up! Yeah! Right! And this will engender confidence in the economy? In the currency? In the country? Exchange control is a tool that governments which have no confidence in their ability to control their economies institute. It is supposed to ensure fiscal as well as exchange rate stability. In real life, all exchange control does is create a further lack of confidence in the economy and a black market in which the real value (i.e. the market value) of the currency is traded to the detriment of the ordinary citizen.

Venezuela's annual inflation rate is well over 20 per cent. There are shortages of basic food items in the groceries in Caracas. The other day it was sugar and milk. The cost of everything has gone through the roof and ordinary Venezuelans are "catching their tails" to make ends meet. There has been no new investment of any significance in plant and machinery by manufacturers who are gradually closing down. Venezuela's import bill continues to climb. Unemployment has risen and life is harder now than it was, say, ten years ago.

There are Congressional elections due on September 26th. Opinion polls show that the Opposition forces are running just about even with the support for Chavez and his Unified Socialist Party. But new rules as to how many representatives each State can send to Caracas may make it difficult for the Opposition to win control.

On top of that there is the issue of corruption. The accusations and stories are so many that it is difficult not to believe that there is a lot of "fire" behind this particular "smoke". Indeed, a new wealth class has arisen in the last twelve years. The Chavistas are now the ones with the money.So much so that you can be forgiven if you go to Venezuela today in thinking that what the Venezuelans got twelve years ago was not change, but exchange!

Then, of course, there is crime. More people are being killed annually in Venezuela than in Iraq! Daylight robberies and kidnappings are virtually commonplace. No Venezuelan goes out into the street with a gold watch or any kind of jewelry again. And the conviction rate is worse than good old T&T's!

Underlying all this is the economy. How much longer can Chavez keep things ticking over? I don't know. But sooner or later reality is going to bite. what will happen then is anybody's guess. I wish that I could be more hopeful. The country is physically blessed and is beautiful. Venezuelans are by and large a warm and generous people. They deserve better.

2010-08-30T12:19:00.002-04:00

SAFE PRACTICES?

On Friday August 20th at around 12:30pm the BP owned/managed deep water oil rig, Constellation, which is the furthest rig off Trinidad's south east coast, suffered an electrical failure. By that I mean that all electricity on the rig was completely lost. As I understand it, a complete failure of electrical power to an oil rig is potentially very dangerous because amongst other things there can be no monitoring of the oil and gas lines and there can be an unobserved or un-monitored build up of pressure in the pipeline which can result in an explosion. And we are only too painfully aware of what happened to a BP rig in the Gulf of Mexico. It is sometimes forgotten that not only was there the worst oil spill in history, but something like eleven workers lost their lives in that explosion.

I do not know why there was a loss of power on the Constellation rig. In other words, I do not know whether the loss of power was as the result of poor maintenace of the generators, whether it was the result of human error, or whether it was completely unavoidable ... one of those things that no matter what you do it's going to happen. What I do know is that BP was unable to get the power going on the rig until some eleven hours later (more or less). Power was finally restored around 11:30pm.

So, what's the big deal? Well, the big deal as far as I am concerned is that there were about a hundred and twenty-five men on board the rig when power was lost just after mid day. BP did
not make the call to the helicopter services to evacuate the men until about 6:30pm ... just at around sunset. And as a result, the first helicopters did not arrive at the rig to begin evacuating the men until around 8:30pm. In addition calling late, the weather was very bad. One helicopter pilot told me "well, I earned my salary for the last three years" on that Friday night. He said that the wind and rain hampered the helicopter rescue. I asked him when was the latest that (in his professional opinion) that BP should have made the call for the helicopters. "About 4:30pm", he said. So why didn't they call before, I asked? Should they have been aware of the approaching bad weather and shouldn't they have been concerned to have got the men off the rig as quickly as possible? He said that he preferred not to speculate as to why BP didn't act earlier, but that yes, anybody in that business, in that situation ought to have been aware of the approaching bad weather, the approaching darkness, the time that it would take to evacuate the rig, and the danger to the men remaining on the rig without electricity. If there was no danger to the men then there would have been no need to mount an expensive rescue operation. He said that when power was finally restored the helicopters had removed all save about ten or eleven men.

There are obviously very serious questions to answer here. There is also a very serious need to monitor not only BP but all of the oil companies operating in our waters. Are they (the oil companies) cutting corners when it comes to safety? Are they paying close attention to the safety of their workers? What about the potential for pollution? The matter is serious and quite frankly I consider it a matter of grave concern that BP made no statement whatsoever on this near disaster. (At least, if they did I saw nothing of it in the newspapers.) One inference to be drawn is that the company did not want to draw attention to it and thereby avoid potentially embarassing and troubling questions. But, is the avoiding of having to answer potentially emabarrassing questions more important than the health and safety of a human life?

2010-08-27T10:12:00.003-04:00

WHEN IS A TERRORIST NOT A TERRORIST?

The answer seems to be when he is a Roman Catholic priest. In July 1972 there was an IRA bombing in the Northern Ireland town of Claudy which killed nine people. This week the Police Ombudsman for Northern Ireland has published a report that says that a Father James Chesney was believed by the police to have been the IRA's director of operations in south Derry and was directly responsible for the Claudy bombings.

The report goes further and says that the then Secretary for Northern Ireland Willie Whitelaw basically conspired (there is no other word for it) with Cardinal Conway, who was the Cardinal for Ireland, not to arrest and try Father Chesney but to allow him to be transferred to a parish in Ireland, out of the reach of British police and the law.

No matter how you look at this it is an absolute scandal and a serious disgrace. This is yet another mortal sin that the Catholic Church is guilty of ... proving, I suppose, the point that while the Church may not be corrupt, there certainly are a lot of very corrupt men in it.

But that is not the point of this particular post. Today we have to deal with terrorism coming from another religious front: Islam. Let me say unequivocally that I fundamentally disagree with, and condemn fanatics like Osama Bin Laden and his ilk. And all those Imams who preach jihad at their mosques every Friday are anything but holy. They are fundamentally wrong in their advocacy of violence and the sooner all right thinking peoples tell them so and turn away from them the better.

I hear a lot of people criticising Islam for the extremists in the midst of right thinking and decent Moslems around the world, but there is a dreadful silence in the Christian community when it is shown that some Christian Churches not only condone violence but actively participate in murder. We are not going to solve the problem of Islamic terrorism unless and until we are prepared to "remove the mote" from our own eyes (as I believe some rather famous revolutionary advocated some two thousand years ago). Hypocritical behaviour is always noticed and causes more, not less, problems.

2010-08-26T13:57:00.002-04:00

POLITICS OF IMPOVERISHMENT

It is often difficult when you win an election by an overwhelming majority to keep up with all the rhetoric that you splurged out during the campaign as well as to keep your campaign promises. Reality has a way of biting when all of a sudden you find yourself like the dog who was chasing the car and all of a sudden you have caught it! What do you do? What does the dog do? I'm sure you get the point.

The new Kamla Persad-Bissessar Government has not exactly hit the ground running. Oh sure, many Ministers were there for their constituents when the floods hit, and it is clear that this response (to the flooding) was a million times better than the casual, 'don't really care but we'll go through the motions any way' attitude of the PNM Ministers when they held the reins of power. But empathy, blankets and matteresses, and (well deserved) "cussing" of the ODPM only goes so far. It has now been a little over three months since Kamla's historic victory and ... well, if truth be told, nothing of any consequence seems to have happened. The new State boards are not in place, the new ambassadors are not yet appointed and their is a general sense or feeling of drift. The Minister of Finance is not saying anything of any consequence and the whole country is just sitting and waiting. And the question has to be asked: why? What is taking so long? Why are we not at the very least being brought into the picture?

One can't help but compare that other recently elected coalition Government in the United Kingdom with ours. They brought in almost immediately what theyd eclared to be an emergency budget to save the country from disaster. Although the budget contained many very harsh measures (e.g., VAT was raised to 20 per cent) the population accepted that austerity was called for and that the new Government was taking the bull by the horns and working. We have been hearing that things are bad, but how bad? Do we really have to wait for maore than three months to get a report in the budget debate that begins on September 8th? Why? Why can't we be told up front and early? Does the Government not trust the people?

And as if this is not bad enough, Keith Rowley appears to be floundering as Leader of the Opposition. Why is this a bad thing? Because the best governance usually takes place when a Government in power has a competent Opposition snapping at its heels. A classic example of this was the Panday regime. Basdeo Panday's Government is widely regarded as one of the best that we have ever had. But Panday knew at all times that if he made the slightest slip that Manning's PNM would come charging back ... which, of course, is precisely what happened when he did eventually slip!

But Dr. Rowley just hasn't cut it as a leader. One wag told me (rather unkindly) that he never thought that anyone could make Manning look good, but Rowley is managing to do just that! Dr. Rowley has not been able to find his "groove" either inside or outside of the Parliament. His early cricicisms of Prime Minister Persad-Bissessar came across as peurile and downright silly. Nobody took either the criticisms or Dr. Rowley seriously. His Senate appointments have made no impression whatsoever on the public and whatever opposition that exists in the Senate is more on the Independent benches than any where else.

Well, the Budget debate is coming soon and everybody on both sides of the Parliamentary divide will have his/her chance to show the nation how good, bad or indifferent he or she may be. Based on performance to date, I believe that the Government side will do better than the Rowley led Opposition both in the Lower House as well as the Upper one. The PNM Parlaimentarians tend to believe that the length of their speeches is more important than the content. (Actually, that criticism probably applies to more than a few on the Government side as well.) We would be much better off there really was clearly an alternative Government. Unfortunately, there isn't ... at least, not at the moment. And therein lies the rub!

At least we can hope that this three month long hiatus will finally come to an end and things will get moving again. The only test for leadership is to lead, and to lead vigourously. We need leadership now. That Kamla and her team are capable, I truly believe. But they have got to start performing now.

2010-07-27T13:54:00.002-04:00

IS OUR SYSTEM OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT THE MOST EFFICIENT - OR CAN WE DO BETTER?

Maybe the best way to assess this question is first to go back to basics. What are the responsibilities of a Regional or City Council? Basically, the local Council looks after things like the state of the roads, the sidewalks, the garbage collection, the regulation and placement of the markets, traffic regulation and parking. To do all of this the Council needs money. Most of its money comes from subventions handed out by the central Government. If the Council is starved of funds from the central Government it will not be able to carry out its functions in either a timely or efficient manner. And therein lies the rub!

Many councils have complained from time to time that they were being denied funding from the central Government because they happen to be controlled by the political party that formed the opposition. In other words, the central authority was using its power of the purse to punish the region/city/borough for having the temerity to vote against the ruling party of the day. While most of these type of complaints have come (with considerable justification) from the then UNC controlled Councils, the truth is that when the UNC was in power similar complaints were heard from the then opposition controlled PNM Councils. In other words, though both sides vehemently deny ever indulging in this type of behaviour the truth is that there are far too many complaints not to believe that there is a lot of fire behind this particular smoke.

So, what can be done? It is clear that the present system can be manipulated by a Government in power. Heck! The elections can even be postponed indefinitely ... a fact that we are all too painfully aware, though I don't think that any other Government abused this power as much as the recent Manning regime did. This system needs improving, but short of giving the Councils the right to raise taxes in thier own districts ... something that I certainly wouldn't support ... and fixing a date (e.g. the first Monday inSeptember of every third year), I really can't see a viable solution to these problems.

In thinking about the problem and possible solutions I also thought about the fact that we really are a very small little country of approximately one and a half million souls and a total land area that is probably maller than Greater Miami. So why do we need Local Government? What would happen if we were to abolish it completely? Well, if we did that it's fairly obvious that we would have to replace it with something else. So ... what?

Answer: why don't we do just that ... abolish all local authorities (including the Tobago House of Assembly). There are 41 constituencies. We could divide each consituency, say, in two so we would have then 82 districts. Each district would be represented by a Representative (or as they are called in the United States - Congressmen). The lower House of Parliament, the House of Representatives would be made up of these 82 men and women. They would be elected on a fixed date(say, the first of September) for 2 years only. They would be full time Representatives and have responsibility in their district for all the functions and activities currently carried on by the local authority.

But 2 years is a very short time, and the upper House would have to have a longer time. So our Senators would no longer be appointed but would be elected ... from the 41 constituencies ... for a perod of 6 years and on a fixed date (the same date as elections are held for the lower House). But we would have one third of the Senate being elected every two years. Then we would have an elected President elected every 4 years. His cabinet would be appointed, but every appointment would have to be approved by the Senate.

And yes, it is basically the American system. Do I like everything about the American system? No. There are things that I definitely do not agree with, e.g., the fact that their judges face the electorate. But there is a lot to admire in the way that they set up their system. And it would work a lot better for us than the Westminster system does. Incidentally, one of the big attractions for me is that a U.S. type President wields a lot less power inside his own country than a T&T type Prime Minister has in his ... but that is another story! What I want to discuss here is how can we improve Local Government. What are your ideas?

2010-07-19T14:51:00.002-04:00

CHANGING THE WAY WE THINK -THE UNIVERSITY OF TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

It was the extreme far sightedness of India's first Prime Minister, Jawarhalal Nehru, that caused to be founded the Indian Institute of Technology ("IIT"). Today the IIT is by far and away the world's premier Information Technology school and one in which the world's best and brightest students try their hardest to get in. The students who apply to the IIT have listed as their second and third choices such prestige schools as Oxford in England and MIT in the United States. The IIT not only has the highest entrance standards in the world (thus making it the most difficult university in the world to get into) but also is the most difficult to stay in once you are there. Successful entrants to the university cannot rest on their laurels, but they must keep their grade averages at the university's extremely high levels. The result is that graduates of the IIT are literally fought over by the world's leading IT companies. The heads of Microsoft and IBM, for example, are graduates of the IIT! Indeed, more than 90% of the companies in California's famed Silicon Valley have IIT graduates as their CEO's! And everybody is keenly aware that India itself is now forging ahead in the IT sector.

So, that got me thinking: Sorry to say it, but the truth is that the University of the West Indies is a third rate university. You are offended by this statement? Test it yourself: Take a young UWI graduate in any field you like and let him apply for a job where his competition is a graduate of, say, Oxford, or Boston University, or McGill University, or any other top university in the world (you pick the school) and guess who will get the job? The UWI grad? Please! Give me a break! He would be lucky just to get a seat in the waiting room. But we can't really do a thing with UWI. There are too many other islands involved and a raising of UWI's low standards would be politically difficult, if not impossible. By the way, this is not to say that there haven't been bright and able young people passing through UWI's halls of learning. There have been ... a lot! Our brightest kids are well able to compete on the world stage despite the handicap of third rate schools. (You could only imagine how far they could go if they had first rate schools ... but that isn't the thrust of this post). The problem (to paraphrase Shakespeare) lies not in the students, but in the quality of the school that is UWI. It ain't the best!

So, as I said, that got me thinking. We can't do anything about UWI, but why don't we do something with the University of Trinidad & Tobago ("UTT")? UTT is right now probably worse than fifth rate. It's entrance standards are abysmally low and it seems that the men who founded it were more concerned about fooling those persons who are admitted into UTT that their degree will be worth something, when the reality is that a degree from UTT is about the equivalent of a diploma from a not very good trade school. Again, if I sound harsh it is because the truth is harsh. This world is not going to be kind to us simply because we like to boast about God being a Trinidadian.

No. In order to compete in the twenty-first century we too have to become the best. We have got to raise our stadards up ... not lower them for the cheap convenience of a few votes. And we should look to do so in areas in which we already have a home grown advantage.

What am I talking about? In a word ... energy! Did you know that the first oil well in the world was drilled in Trinidad? We have an abundance of expertise in the energy sector that has made us leaders all over the world. You can find Trinidadians in Houston, Saudi Arabia, Brazil, Nigeria ... andthe list goes on. I would like to bet that on a per capita basis (and no, I do not have any statistics to prove this) we have more people in the enrgy sector than anywhere else in the world. So, why don't we capitalise on this and make UTT the premier energy university in the world the same way that the IIT is the premier school for information technology in the world? It could be done ... and with a little effort it could bring fantastic benefits to Trinidad & Tobago. For example, while when we Trinis talk about energy we really mean oil and gas, the UTT could become a twenty-first century school specialising in all types of energy ... wind , solar, etc. We don't have to be limited to oil and gas. With a first class specialst university at home we could retain our effective dominance in the energy sector indefinitely. And why not? We could do it ... if we really wanted to!

2010-07-16T10:44:00.002-04:00

SEX AND SLAVERY -HUMAN TRAFFICKING IN T&T

It seems that nobody in this country has really been paying attention to a rather serious problem that exists in many countries around the world, including our own sweet little Trinidad & Tobago. I am talking about the trafficking in sex workers who are being brought over primarily from Columbia, Venezuela and the Dominican Republic. These women, in an effort to escape from desparately poor conditions in their native countries, are seduced into coming over here ... many of them enterimg the country illegally ... and then are reduced into bondage by the unscrupulous men who grab their passports and tell them that they have to pay them a huge sum of money (I have heard reports of something like US$6,000) before their passports are returned. In addition, if the women refuse to work for the traffickers they find themselves being reported to the police who come and arrest them, throw them in jail, and after a long while eventually deport them. The women often have families (read young children) back home who are dependant on monies being sent back on a regular basis. Any stint in jail will result in literal starvation for these children. As a result the majority of these women are forced into prostitution. They are damned if they do and damned if they don't.

From time to time the police will raid a brothel, arrest the women and deport them ... I have heard it said that these raids usually take place when the brothel owner stops paying his protection money or is late with his payments. I don't know if that is true ... but it sounds believable, doesn't it?

The conditions which exist for these women are little better than slavery ... in fact there are many critics around the world who do refer to this trafficking in women as slavery! I agree with them.

So, what can we do about it? What should we do about it? You don't have to look very far to find a solution nor do we have "to re-invent the wheel". Sweden did it a few years ago. We need to change the law so that the women are no longer arrested for prostitution. In other words, let's legalise prostitution. But (and it is a big "but") let's make it illegal to hire a prostitute! In other words, the woman will no longer be arrested for the crime of prostitution, but any man who uses a prostitute will be treated as the criminal.

Will this cut out the problem? No. But it will reduce the demand for prostitutes and it will cut back on this terrible problem. The statistics coming out of Sweden show that the legalisation of prostitution and the criminalisation of the 'johns' has done just that. We have got to try something and soon. What is being done to these women is terribly wrong. A fair, just and humane society should not tolerate this. Don't you agree?

2010-07-09T12:34:00.002-04:00

FINANCIAL LEADERSHIP AND MISSED OPPORTUNITIES

"An opportunity missed", my father used to say, "never returns". Over the years I have found this old adage to be so true that sometimes it hurts! Which is why right now I am beginning to become slightly concerned with the opportunities that the new People's Partnership Government seems to be missing. The Government's honeymoon period is going to be over soon ... probably by September/October ... and if they do not take advantage now of the extraordinary goodwill that they have at the moment they will find that despite their huge Parliamentary majority, their ability to carry the country along with them will become more and more difficult.

My father taught me a lot ... much more than just the adage about missed opportunities. One of the things that he taught me was that the real opposition to a government hardly ever came from inside the Parliament but from the country, and that for a government to succeed it had to ensure at all times that it had the majority support of the country. If it did not it risked not only an ignominious end a la the Manning and Robinson regimes but it also risked such unpopulartity that even when it came up with good ideas and/or proposals that the country simply would not want to listen.

To be fair, Prime Minister Bissessar is not displaying any of the arrogance or hubris of her predecessor, and most of her Ministers seem to be making themselves much more accessible than their former PNM counterparts. But (and this is a big "but") in the critical area of the economy and finance we are not being told what is going on nor are we being told what exactly are our problems. And forget about solutions or possible solutions! There is simply no discussion!

I blame Winston Dookeran for this. Mr. Dookeran is widely regarded as being an excellent economist and a man whose grasp of financial matters is better than most. But unfortunately that simply ain't good enough. You see, politics is about bringing the people along with you. Mao Tse Tsung once said "if you want to lead the people, lead from behind". In other words, give the people the necessary information in order for them to come to their own informed decisions on whatever the problems of the country are. But if the plan is to wait until the budget debate in September then that will be a case of too little, too late. And it certainly will not be practising the art of "new politics" that we have been hearing about for the last few years. In fact, it will simply be more of the same old neo-colonialist type of governance that we have had for the last almost fifty years.

We need to know what are the "holes" that have to be filled and what ideas are currently on the table on how to fill them. We know, for example, about the $18 billion Petrotrin hole. I have previously written in this blog that I could only see two ways to fill that particular hole: devaluation or retrenchment. A friend gave me a third option the other day after he read my blog; he said that a third option was a sale of the State-owned oil company. Well, that is a possibilty, but any buyer would probably engage in some serious retrenchment after taking over the reins. So that would not really be a third choice or option. The consequences for the workers and/or the country would be the same. But are there other options? If so, what? This is a serious question that requires serious debate. Retrenchement would have serious economic consequences for the workers who are laid off. Devaluation would have even more serious consequences for the whole country. Talk about being caught between a rock and a hard place!

But we are not debating these problems at all! Why not? The Finance Minister ought to be leading the debate and doing so now. He can't come in September and simply shove his solutions down our throats and say in effect 'well, these are the problems and this is how I propose to solve them'. (Well, actually he can ... but surely that would not be "new politics" but simply more of the same old,same old!)

The debate needs to start now. And it needs to be led by the Finance Minister. If he does not do so he is going to cause a lot of problems for his Prime Minister and his Government that could and should be avoided. he needs to buy into his former rhetoric about "new politics" in such a way that the country really does feel that we all have a clear idea of where we are, where we are heading and where we can go. Somebody once said (I think it was Teddy Roosevelt, but I am not sure) that "the only test of leadership is to lead, and to lead vigorously". It's time for the Finance Minister to lead.

2010-07-06T10:13:00.002-04:00

THE NEW POLICE COMMISSIONER

Well, we now have a new Commissioner of Police (CoP). There have been a lot of arguments as to whether or not we should have brought in a foreigner and whether the process of selecting the CoP is flawed or not. My own personal view is that these arguments are for another day. The fact is that for better or for worse this is the process that the Manning regime saddled us with and this is the person who the process turned up. in other words, I support the decision of the new Government to get the show on the road and to stop all this "acting" nonsense. I also believe however that the Government ought to look again at the process that was used to appoint the CoP and to fix it, if indeed it needs fixing. And I say that last bit about 'if it needs fixing' because I genuinely do not know whether the process is flawed or not. I haven't heard all of the arguments both for and against the process in order to be able to come to a reasoned decision one way or the other.

My own (again) personal view is that while I have no problem wth a foreigner being put in charge of our police, I would prefer, if it was possible, to put a local man instead. But all of the information necessary for us to make a reasoned decision as to whether or not Mr. Gibbs is indeed the best man for the job has not been put out in the public domain ... or, if it has, the press has not reported on it sufficiently for the ordinary person to come to a reasoned decision. Again, that's another argument.

Let's understand something: Everybody (except the bad guys) must want this new Canadian CoP to succeed. At the end of the day, we don't care if he is from Canada or the moon if he can fix and actually does fix our police service so that it not only works, but works well. I have no doubt that there will be a small minority who for their own personal, selfish and myopic reasons will want the Canadian to fail. Hopefully, there will be sufficient right thinking persons who will want the new man to succeed, not for his own personal aggrandisement, but for the benefit of the wider society as a whole.

One of the things that the new guy is going to have to do is to change the culture in the police service so that the police are seen by the community as being on the side of the people. The truth is that one of the reasons that the police are failing so badly right now is because the average citizen simply doesn't trust them ... with anything! When, for example, a woman can drive into a police station blowing her horn to attract attention, and the criminal can not only murder her, but can get away right from under the noses of the police officers you begin to understand why the average citizen simply does not believe that the men (and women) in grey are trustworthy. And without the trust of the community the police really cannot be effective.

As I have said, that is only one of the things that the new CoP has to address. I am certain that we can all think of a dozen more. But my argument today is that we should give the new guy a chance to perform and should not try to undercut him from the word 'go'. My message to Mr. Gibbs though, is that you are not going to be given a long time. We expect and demand results ... and quickly. Also, you come from a first world country and have been accustomed to dealing with the citizenry there in a first world manner. Unfortunately, to date our leaders have all operated in a neo-colonialist manner and have not cared to take the citizenry into their trust and confidence. Certainly, it is easier to behave like our past leaders than it is to behave in a first world manner. Please do not fall into this trap. Please continue to act while you are down here as you did when you were in Canada.

Oh! And finally, good luck! You're going to need it!!

2010-07-01T14:11:00.002-04:00

WOULD YOU KILL THE FATMAN?

Like most people (or at least an overwhelming majority) I was very pleased with the May 24th victory of the People's Partnership at the polls for reasons that hopefully are very obvious. (If they aren't to you, then I'll happily debate them, but there are more important matters to discuss at the moment). What concerns me now that the new Government is settling down and settling in is that there are a number of economic or financial "potholes" (for want of a better word) left in the way of the new Government by the Manning administration that can de-rail the Government before it even gets off the ground.

Let me put it to you this way: Let's say that you were in charge of a railway switch. Coming down the track at ninety miles an hour is a huge locomotive that is totally out of control. Now, if you leave it on its present track it will run straight into a very fat man and kill him immediately. If, however, you throw the switch and send the train onto the other track it will run into twelve people a little further down the track and kill all of them in five minutes from now. You cannot warn either the fatman or the twelve people about this imending disaster. If you do nothing, everybody dies. What do you do? would you kill the fat man in order to save the other twelve? Everybody is innocent! It's a terrible choice, isn't it?

Well, that is something like the choice facing the new Government on a variety of matters. In other words, Prime Minister Persad Bissessar is going to have to make some very harsh decisions very soon that will hurt a lot of people. The first "pothole" or "runaway train" that we are facing is the crisis at State owned Petrotrin. Petrotrin has a debt of somewhere in the vicinity of TT$18 billion! There is no way that the company can survive unless something is done, and soon. The only options that appear to be on the cards are:

(a) massive retrenchment (approaching something like fifty per cent of

the work force), or

(b) a devaluation of the TT dollar which would increase the TT dollar

earnings of the Government and thus make this debt more

manageable (remember that the vast majority of the Government's

income is in US dollars).

Then there is the CL Financial/CLICO "pothole" or "runaway train". That particular hole is about TT$50 billion. The last administration was most reluctant to sell of the CL Financial assets, but it is difficult to see how the new Government will be able to avoid doing so. In any event, even with a sale the hole remains uncomfortably large.

Then there is the question of Errol McLeod's influence in teh Cabinet. Will he go along with a reduction of the workforce at Petrotrin if that is the recommendation of the experts or will he insist on a devaluation? In other words, will the pain be confined to a few or to the whole country?

There are other problems as well. It is clear that Mrs. Bissessar's team have inherited a huge mess. It is also clear that there is going to have to be a series of rather harsh and difficult measures that will be needed to get the country back on track. The question that has to be on everyone's minds is what exactly does the new Government propose? Well, we shall all find out soon enough I suppose. But make no mistake about it, they have their work cut out for them!! I genuinely wish them well. If they fail we are @#$%^&*!!!!!!!!!!

2010-07-01T14:06:00.003-04:00

I'M BACK!!!

Okay! For a variety of reasons (most of them personal) I haven't been able to post anything on this site since the elections. I have at last managed to get my business in order and am now able to start posting again. There will be at least one new post a week (probably ... hopefully ... more). But for now you can look forward to checking me out every week. In return, I am looking forward to all of your comments and feedback. There is a lot to discuss!!

(POSSIBLE) REASONS FOR CALLING THE 2010 GENERAL ELECTIONS

2010-04-30T13:02:00.000-04:00

Okay. I admit up front that I do not have a "hotline" to Patrick Manning nor have I consulted the Oracle at Delphi, nor have I consulted any seer women (or men),so what follows is purely speculation on my part. But the words that Sir Arthur Conan Doyle put in the mouth of his great fictional detective, Sherlock Holmes, have always stayed with me:

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible,
whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"
So, on that basis let's examine the possible reasons for calling the elections half way through a term when Manning had such a comfortable majority in the Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago:

(Possible) Reason #1
Manning said that he called the election because the logical consequence of a no-confidence motion is that an election be called. So, he decided to give the Opposition what they wanted and has accordingly caught them by surprise and he will whip them at the polls.
I think that we can safely regard this as balderdash. And I don't think that any reader of this blog really needs an explanation as to why I say this.

(Possible) Reason #2
The economy is in serious trouble and harsh economic decisions are going to have to be made by September. For example, Petrotrin has an $18 billion dollar debt that it simply cannot repay. Accordingly, there are going to have to be massive lay-offs at the State owned oil firm ... some experts are predicting that at least half the work force is going to have to be sent home. Further, there is the CL Financial bailout to be considered. Word on the street is that this particular "black hole" is $47 billion deep. The exact position is difficult to ascertain because, quite frankly, there has been a dearth of information on this particular subject. But for those who pay attention, the recent high level resignations (Eurich Bob et al) are cause for raised eyebrows, if not outright concern. What was the real reason that these guys quit? Not very many people believe the reasons given. Also, the word is that there is a looming deficit that is even worse than the one that was predicted.
In these circumstances, the Prime Minister may well have realised that he would need a new mandate to govern. His moral authority to do so had already been badly damaged by the UDECOTT Commission of Enquiry and there was the very serious perception in the public mind that his government was corrupt. (Interestingly, to date corruption has not been a big issue on the Opposition campaign platforms).
So, it could well be that Manning called the election because he realised that his moral authority to govern had been seriously undermined by the UDECOTT fiasco and that without this authority he would be unable to hold things together when the harsh economic decisions that are coming down the pipeline have to be taken.

(Possible) Reason #3
Manning knew that he was going to lose the no-confidence debate. It was no secret that he and Dr. Keith Rowley were "at daggers drawn". It also does not take a political genius to realise that if Manning were to be "killed" (politically, of course ... this blog certainly does not advocate violence of any kind) tonight, Rowley will become the leader of the PNM tomorrow morning. The no-confidence motion was presenting Rowley with a really good chance to do away with the Prime Minister. The Opposition had 15 votes. Rowley's vote would make it 16. All that was needed was 5 more votes. Would Penny Beckles, for example, have sided with Rowley? She certainly had motivation to do so. Were there 4 more PNM M.P.'s? There is evidence to suggest that certain others might also have wanted to think about voting against the Prime Minister and had in fact lined up behind Rowley to do just that and that there were in fact 5 others who would line up with Rowley to vote against Manning and bring him down.
You must remember that the Motion was a motion against the Prime Minister and not the Government. If it had been carried Manning would have had 7 days to resign or call an election. If he had chosen not to resign but to call an election, his party would have probably revolted and thrown him out before the election and replaced him with Rowley. Either way, he was finished.
You must also remember that a Prime Minister is head of the National Security Council, and as such gets security reports on every thing that is going on that affects the security of both the State and his Government. If such a plot was afoot Manning would have got wind of it. That is for certain!

(Possible) Reason #4
The Americans told Manning that if he did not call an election that they would destabilise his regime. The Americans in fact destabilised the George Chambers regime way back in 1986 when they "cooked" the IMF's books and forced an unnecessary recession on Trinidad & Tobago. All that is now history and it is not relevant to this post as to why the Americans did that then. So, why would they want to interfere now? Because they have major economic and political interests in Trinidad & Tobago which could be seriously threatened if there was social unrest ... and all the signs were there that the country was heading for a serious period of social unrest (see Reason #2 above). The Manning Government had suffered serious body blows to its credibility and its moral authority to govern had been seriously undermined by various mis-steps (Calder Hart, UDECOTT, even the "$2 million flag", etc.). In the circumstances, the order was "call an election and we won't interfere. Don't call one and we will!"

As Conan Doyle so aptly said, "... when you have eliminated the impossible, whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth."
Well, Trinidad and Tobago, what do you think?

THE 2010 ELECTIONS – THE CONTINUING SAGA

2010-04-27T10:03:00.000-04:00

Personal matters have prevented me from writing for the last two weeks, but life goes on and certainly there is a lot to comment on since my last post. The Opposition Parties have now come together under one banner and have agreed on not only a distribution of seats, but also that Kamla Persad-Bissessar will be the Prime Minister should they win the elections. The election is now less than a month away. Prime Minister Patrick Manning has spent the last few days attacking the coalition as being inherently unstable and predicting that they will fall apart soon after they gain power … if they gain power.

Unfortunately for Mr. Manning, this prediction is one that doesn’t look likely to gain traction with the voters. People are more interested in the recent past and the PNM’s handling of their problems. For example, one of the PNM candidates, Peter Taylor who represents Princes Town South, was roundly booed and jeered in Moruga (a part of his constituency) by people who declared quite openly that they normally voted for the PNM. This time they are saying that they will go for the Coalition. Taylor’s seat which was once considered a “safe” PNM seat is now quite clearly a marginal.

Feeling vilified, Mr. Manning has begun to use negative tactics while on the campaign trail. His latest salvo was to resurrect the infamous Scott Drug Report which the NAR Government of A.N.R. Robinson quite wrongly laid in Parliament way back in 1987. Robinson was terribly wrong to lay that Report in the Parliament because it accused many people of being involved in the heinous drug trade without giving any of them the opportunity to defend themselves from the terrible accusations. No doubt there may have been many people who were in fact dealing in drugs, but equally there were probably an awful lot who weren’t. The terrible thing is that nobody knows who is guilty and who is not. For example, the Report named “a director of Queensway” as being involved. Now, the directors of Queensway at the time were John Rahael, a former PNM Minister of Health, and his brother George. Mr. Manning must have been satisfied that the Report was not true of either of the brothers, and I make no criticism of either his appointment of John Rahael as a Cabinet Minister nor do I make any allegations against either of the brothers. Mr. Manning also appointed Camille Robinson-Regis as a Minister. But her husband was named in the Report as being involved in the drug trade! You get the point?
Mr. Manning has obviously cleared the Rahaels and Robinson-Regis (who later got a big job in WASA) but he doesn’t clear Suruj Rambachan, the deputy political leader of the UNC. And he tries to beat Rambachan with the Report on a public platform. Why? Some twenty-three years later nobody has been charged for any of the alleged crimes that are contained in that Report. That ought to tell us something.
(Maybe this last point isn’t so strong … 13 years after my cousin’s murder nobody has been charged, although everybody knows who did it and who helped to cover it up. But I make it nonetheless.)

Back to my point about the elections:
Negative campaigning obviously comes from both sides in this contest, and one could argue that the UNC and COP have been firing their salvos for two and a half years to prepare the election "battlefield."
Negative campaigning can only carry you so far. At the end of the day the average voter wants to know how are you (the politician) going to make his life better. There is a high degree of “fedupness” with Manning especially and with the PNM in general that may well prevent the PNM from a strong showing at the polls.

The election remains Kamla’s to lose. We are in what you might call the period of a “phony war” right now. This is highlighted by the very slick "Made in America" ads running for the opposition. The real campaign will certainly heat up after the Parties launch their campaigns with the traditional rallies where they present their candidates and present their manifestos. Kamla has been towing a fairly soft, fairly bland line so far. But there will be a lot of “slings and arrows” flung at her and the Coalition in the coming weeks. She is going to have to make sure that her shields and defences are in good order, and there is no doubt that she is prepared to fling back.

If I could advise both sides I would say to them to try and stay positive. We (the people) are not really interested in the bacchanal and ‘mauvais langue’ (as much as we … being Trinis … like to hear them). We really want good governance.
To the PNM, I say justify what you did with all that money that you have had over the last 8 years. Tell us in clear, concise and easily understandable language where you invested it and why. Tell us also how you propose to solve our common problems and why they seem to take so long to solve.
To the Coalition, I say tell us in equally clear, concise and easily understandable language what you think are the problems confronting us now and how you propose to solve them. Tell us what sort of principals you stand for and why you are deserving of the public trust. We know that we are in for a rough ride. We also know some of the problems. But we need you to identify them and tell us how you are prepared to deal with them.

The game is on. Let’s see what happens next!

R.I.P.

2010-04-24T16:59:00.003-04:00

Shelly-Ann Ramharack Joseph
24 May, 1970 -- 9 April, 2010

On the evening of Friday 9th April, 2010, at approximately 7:00 p.m., when she was about 5 minutes away from her home, my loyal secretary, Shelly, was killed in a stupid motor car accident. The car she was travelling in was hit from behind by another car. As a result of the blow, her car jumped the median of the highway and was hit by an SUV that was barrelling down the other side. The car that caused the accident did not stop. Up to now, no arrests have been made. Shelly was sitting in the left front passenger seat. She died on the spot. She was a great secretary and a fabulous human being. "Sweetheart" is the word that everybody has used to describe her.

She leaves to mourn a husband, a daughter aged 13 and a son aged 7 ... and me! I have lost not only a good friend but just about the best secretary I have ever had. She was my left hand, right leg and right arm!! Rest in peace, my sweet Shelly. You will be missed by all who had the pleasure of knowing you.

A DISPASSIONATE LOOK AT THE COMING ELECTIONS

2010-04-08T16:18:00.000-04:00

It has finally happened. With the Parliament of Trinidad and Tobago now officially dissolved and general elections called for 35 days from now, it is a good idea to take a step back and look quite coolly and dispassionately at “the state of play” as it exists today. You didn't think I was unprepared for this event, did you?
Remember always that a week is certainly a very long time in politics, and now that Prime Minister Patrick Manning has called the election we will have five long weeks of campaigning before the country makes up its mind. So, without further ado let’s take a look at the three main players:

The Congress of the People
The COP’s greatest (and probably its only) strength is its management capability. Inside the Party are a number of capable and competent managers who do have a recognised ability to get things done. Unfortunately, the COP’s biggest weakness is that it is top heavy on management but is without a single salesman to sell the Party’s brand. The sad truth is that there is nobody in the front line who could sell a hot stove to an Eskimo on a cold winter’s night.
The COP top brass project a certain arrogance (whether intentional or not) that tends to turn off the masses. COP also has the problem that a large percentage of the people who voted for the Party in the 2007 general elections have now migrated back to the UNC now that Kamla has taken over the leadership of that Party. How many exactly? Well, that’s difficult to say without the benefit of a poll … but I think that it is safe to say that the number is significant. Put another way, the COP’s ability to damage the UNC in the coming polls will not be like it was before … unless, of course, something happens. And in this country you can never rule that out!
But the COP remains with the very unpleasant truth that it cannot win a seat. The most that the Party can hope to do is to act as a spoiler if it doesn’t get what it wants in the unity talks with the UNC… and even that is doubtful today. And finally, the COP is flat broke without any real ability to raise money. And elections are very expensive things!

The United National Congress
The UNC approaches the coming polls with a fair number of obvious strengths under its belt. Probably its most visible asset right now is its leader Kamla Persad Bissessar. Kamla has been a breath of fresh air not only to the UNC’s politics, but also in the poliyics of the country. She has become the media’s darling and is enjoying quite a little honeymoon with the Press. She is bright, articulate, and does not wear her femininity as a weapon, but is not afraid to be a woman. The truth is that the coming election is hers to lose.
In addition, the UNC has a solid base of fifteen seats and an organisation that can perform in the six marginals. (Remember that the magic number is twenty-one!) The Party’s electoral strength is solid and has been enhanced with the defections from the COP. It will be a formidable contender when the election bell is rung. Further, money should not be a problem for Kamla. Even if she did not have Jack Warner of ‘deep pockets’ fame by her side, she has enough wealthy backers that she ought to be able to more than raise the necessary funding to run this election campaign.
Jack Warner is also a formidable asset for the Party. Apart from having apparently limitless funds, he has proven himself to be a shrewd and capable politician who does not lose a battle … or at least not easily. He clearly has great organisational skills and is not somebody to be taken lightly at all.
But the UNC’s obvious strengths are also masking some rather serious weaknesses. The biggest danger for the UNC comes from within: what can be loosely termed ‘the Panday factor’. Kamla has several dissident sitting M.P.’s that she must deal with: There is the old Bas’ himself, his daughter Mikela, his brother Subash, Kelvin Ramnath and Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj. In addition she has to keep a wary eye on the St. Augustine M.P. Vassant Bharath who didn’t exactly embrace her after her victory over Panday in January.
The danger here is that if she allows them to go back as M.P.’s and she wins the elections this group or clique could pull her down as Ramesh et al did to her predecessor in 2001. It is unlikely that the UNC will win more than twenty-one to twenty-two seats. She will have to rely on their support if she wins. But, if she doesn’t allow them to go back she will have to face the rather obvious manoeuvrings that one or all of this group might engage in. Already, her deputy political leader Suruj Rambachan has made what could be a potentially damaging political error in saying that he is going up as a candidate in Panday’s seat of Couva North.
Why do I say this? Because Basdeo Panday still has support. What if (for example) he were to have, say, five hundred supporters turn up at Rienzi Complex when screening is being conducted for Couva North, and these supporters are there basically to boo Rambachan and cheer Panday? How will the ensuing debacle play on the evening television news and the next day’s papers? What if the others (Ramnath, Maharaj, etc.) also do something like this? In other words, Kamla has to have a plan in place to deal with these very possible exigencies. Failure to do so could present an image to the country of weak leadership.

The People’s National Movement
The PNM’s greatest strength is its formidable organisation. No other Party in Trinidad & Tobago is as organised as is the PNM. This organisation extends down to a fundamental understanding of its supporters and how best to ensure that they turn out to vote. Do not discount this ability!
The PNM also comes to the electorate with a fairly solid base of at least fifteen seats and with strong organisational skills already in place in the six marginal seats … and make no mistake about it: this election will be won and lost in the six marginals. The rest of us could almost stay home. The PNM also has deep pockets and ought to have a fairly strong war chest for this occasion. Further, the PNM does have enough financial support to replenish its coffers and ensure that there is enough for the coming battle.
But the PNM also has some rather glaring weaknesses. The obvious ones are what has been dominating the news for the last year or so: Calder Hart, UDECOTT, the new Revenue Authority, the Property Tax, etc. All of these can probably be summed up by the phrase ‘the PNM’s track record’. The PNM also has only one salesman … Patrick Manning … to carry its banner high into battle. Manning has “killed” Rowley and despite all the rumblings that we are hearing, it would be absolutely earth shattering if Keith Rowley was a PNM candidate in the next election.
The lack of a team of salesmen to carry the flag will tell in the campaign. With the exception of Colm Imbert, none of the present front liners have the ability to sway a crowd. Look for a rather lacklustre PNM performance on the hustings. The corruption bogey will also haunt the PNM on the campaign trail.
And finally, the media is fairly set against the Party. While the daily newspapers pretend to be balanced, the truth is that you don’t have to be a genius to figure out that they would like to see Manning go down.

So, where does this all leave us? Waiting and wondering. At the moment, my prediction is that the fight will be remarkably close and will go down to the wire. Is that prediction cast in stone? Not at all! I don’t pretend to be an oracle, and I reserve the right to change my mind when things change or new matters come to light. Having said all that, if I had to bet with you today I would bet a dollar to a doughnut on Kamla.
We will decide afterward who will pay the dollar and who will pay the doughnut.

IS A LANDATE PROBE REALLY A WASTE OF TIME?

2010-03-25T12:44:00.003-04:00

The Trinidad Guardian in screaming headlines has reported wealthy contractor Emile Elias, the owner of NH International Company Limited (NHIC), as saying that any probe into Landate would be/is a waste of time and money. According to Mr. Elias, there have been lots of probes into that project and they have all come up with nothing except a huge cost to the taxpayer.

I can understand that Mr. Elias would like all questions on Landate to simply go away if not disappear altogether. The problem is that it just isn't that simple, nor is Mr. Elias all that correct. Indeed, Mr. Elias in the Guardian story (assuming always that he was quoted accurately) has indulged in telling only half the story ... and everybody knows that half-truths are often more dangerous than lies.

The whole truth is this: way back in 2004 there was a Commission of Enquiry (COE) into the construction of the Scarborough General Hospital headed by retired Justice Annestine Sealey. The "players" were NIPDEC which was the owner of the project, and NHIC which was the contractor. (Incidentally, NIPDEC was then headed by Calder Hart!) There were several complaints surrounding the project including the question of rather serious cost overruns. Another serious question was whether or not materials were being transported from the Scarborough General Hospital site to another site where NIPDEC was also the defacto contractor. This site was owned by Dr. Rowley's wife and was known as Landate

The allegation was that valuable construction materials were being transferred from a public works project to the private Landate project illegally.

NHIC at first participated in the COE but withdrew before one of its senior managers could be cross-examined on this question of illegally transferring materials. The evidence that came out of the COE (amongst other things) was:

(a) that the terms of the contract were that the materials became the property of the owner (NIPDEC) as soon as they arrived on site (my emphasis);
(b) that the engineer had no idea that the materials were being moved;
(c) that, in the words of the Quantity Surveyor for the project Mr. Cleveland Leonard (partner to local Transparency Jefe Victor Hart), this moving of materials was "a recipe for chaos"; and
(d) that there had been no real or proper accounting concerning what materials had been moved.

NHIC at first tried to say that the materials belonged to their corporate entity and that they could do with them whatever they liked. They argued that in any case, moving materials from site to site without the knowledge or consent of the engineer was standard practise in Trinidad & Tobago. Unfortunately for NHIC, the only witnesses who supported this thesis were from NHIC. In addition, the contract clearly disproved the allegation that the materials belonged to NHIC.
Well, the COE recommended that the police investigate the matter with a view to seeing whether or not NHIC had breached the provisions of the Larceny Act. In other words, had NHIC stolen the materials?
NHIC would be guilty of theft if it could be shown that the materials that were removed from the Scarborough General Hospital site to Landate had not been accounted for and if in fact NIPDEC had paid for them. Remember, the engineer had no idea that NHIC was removing the materials!

The matter has lain fallow now for 6 years. The DPP reported about a year ago that the police said that they couldn't investigate the matter because they did not have the file and they didn't have a copy of the COE's report! Good grief! Only in a Mickey Mouse country could such an excuse be made. But, it has held water up to now!

Mr. Elias also says that the matter should not be investigated because the Integrity Commission (IC) already did so and the High Court has ruled on the matter. Well, again, that is only half true. What happened was that the IC decided that Dr. Rowley had breached the provisions of the Integrity Act in regard to his declarations on Landate and had decided to prosecute him. Dr. Rowley applied to the High Court for judicial review of the decision to prosecute him saying that he had not been given a chance to explain himself. The High Court agreed and said the IC was wrong not first to give him a chance to be heard. And that was all! The substantive question on the issue has never been determined.

So, let's see what happens next. Will the new Director of Public Prosecutions deal with the matter or will he just let it slide ... again?! Or put another way, is the Landate probe really a waste of time? Stay tuned, my friends.

Opposition Unity … Unachievable Fact or Achievable Fiction?

2010-03-24T10:16:00.001-04:00

There is a lot of talk going around about all the “work” that certain committees of both the UNC and the COP are doing to work towards a unity that will be real and lasting. Persons are calling for Mr. Dookeran to meet with Mrs. Persad-Bissessar quickly so that a united front can be presented for the looming Local Government elections which are due by September of this year (unless postponed again … but that is another story!).

Speaking for myself only, I am more than a little fed-up with the nonsense that is emanating especially from the COP camp on this subject of opposition unity. You see, I believe that if you ever want to understand a problem you should go back to basics. Now, if two (or more) political parties want to consider uniting the obvious questions are: what are our differences in terms of policies and philosophies? What are the policies and philosophies upon which we agree? On what issues are we prepared to compromise our values and beliefs in terms of the differences in our policies and philosophies and why would we want to compromise them?

Sort of obvious when you put it down like that, eh? But have you heard any COP or UNC leader talk about this? No! Why not? Answer: Because the truth is that there are no fundamental policies or philosophical differences between the UNC and the COP. None whatsoever! Or, if there are, they are so small that they could easily be resolved. No. The problem of achieving unity between the two political parties has nothing to do with ideology, but everything to do with jobs and positions. In other words, the ‘big’ boys realise that if they do have unity then a lot of them will have to give way and step down from the positions that they now enjoy. Mr. X will no longer be a deputy political leader, Mr. Y will no longer be a chairman, Mrs. Z will no longer … well, you get the point.

The problem is that there is a large segment of the population that is fundamentally opposed to the PNM and would like to see change. Some people feel more comfortable with the COP leaders being in charge and others with the UNC leadership holding the reins. The problem that the COP supporters have is that there aren’t enough of them in any one constituency to win a seat. The problem that the UNC has is that if they could get at least fifty percent of the COP supporters to vote for them (with the remaining COP supporters either staying home or voting for the COP) then the UNC would be assured of a victory at the polls. Unfortunately for the COP there are quite a few COP supporters who will vote for the PNM before they would vote for an enlarged UNC that absorbed the COP. Following on Kamla’s January trouncing of Mr. Panday in the UNC internal elections a fairly large segment of the COP support pealed off and “returned home” to the UNC. So, the COP has the problem of convincing their UNC counterparts that the remaining rump of their supporters will follow them “to the gates of hell” if necessary, and that these supporters are indeed numerous enough to make the difference between defeat or victory.

The UNC needs to approach the proffered chalice of potential unity with a great deal of caution. Frankly, if I was advising Kamla, I would tell her to run at least two different polls very quietly amongst the COP supporters to find out exactly how much COP support has indeed come over to the UNC, how much remains, how much will stay if some sort of accommodation is reached, what exactly are the issues that concern the COP supporters, and who in the COP is worth my while to keep and who should I discard. Why would I advise that at least two polls be run? Because when I get the results from the first poll I would immediately verify it with a second using a different team. If the results are the same, then I would know that I have a fairly accurate reading. If they are different then clearly somebody somewhere has made a mistake.

And why would I keep it quiet? Come on! You really don’t need me to answer that, do you?

LIFE IN THE TROPICS

2010-03-16T12:37:00.001-04:00

You really can’t say that life in good old T&T is boring. In the last two weeks we have been inundated with all sorts of developments in or on the country’s political landscape.

First of all, two days before the judgement in the UDECOTT judicial review case the allegations burst on the scene with documents that if true show that Sherrine Hart, the wife of Calder Hart, is related to certain directors of Sunway Corporation and CH Development. The allegations are serious indeed. Then, before we get a chance to breath the judge hands down her ruling in the UDECOTT matter. She said in essence that while Uff and his fellow Commissioners were negligent and while they did exhibit bias, that was not enough to set aside the Enquiry report. UDECOTT has still to decide if it will appeal. Then, the very next day (Saturday), Calder Hart resigns and leaves the country. Chaos appears to ensue in the Government camp as Prime Minister Manning also leaves the country for England to attend a Commonwealth function.

In the meantime, there is also the story of a $30 million church being built by a small Christian sect in the heights of Guanapo. What makes this news is that the sect is headed up by the Prime Minister’s spiritual adviser/prophetess/ seer woman (whatever you want to call her). Also, the church is being built by Shanghai Corporation. The obvious question: where did this little church get the money to build such a huge church has remained unanswered and as a result ugly and unnecessary suspicions and rumours are circulating all over the place. In addition, it was reported on hearsay that the Prime Minister himself has been seen up there “several times”.
Mr. Manning, in what can only be described as an extraordinary performance in Parliament, lambasted his critics on the question of the church likening their criticisms to “religious persecution”. Had it not been for the Calder Hart revelations the following week no doubt this matter would have continued to dominate the news. As it is, it has not completely gone away.
Then, just when we think that we have heard it all, out comes the news hard on the heels of an announcement that the President was going to appoint a new Integrity Commission on Monday 15 March, which he did. On top of this, we learn that “a former Government Minister” is being investigated for breaching the Integrity Act. Still with me?

The allegation is that the former Minister failed to declare a very large Cayman Island bank account run by his wife in which there was over US$6 million. As rumours began circulating as to the identity of this former Minister, Dr. Keith Rowley came out almost immediately and said that the rumours were all pointing at him but that they were not true. He said he does not have any money at all outside of Trinidad & Tobago.
That might be true, but I don’t think that that was the exact allegation. I believe that the exact allegation was that it was the wife of the former Minister who has the alleged account. But let’s face it, I certainly do not know the identity of this former Minister and I certainly can’t say that it was Dr.Rowley who was being targeted. I did find his denials though a bit strange in that they were very specific in one way -- ‘I don’t have any accounts outside T&T" -- but vague on whether or not he was connected in any way with this alleged Cayman Island account. E.g., through his wife or some corporation ultimately controlled by her.
Again, let me be clear: I am not saying that this is so, just that I found it a little strange that Rowley was not specific in one regard while being very specific in the other. In any case, my guess is that we will soon find out who the alleged former Minister is when the charges come down. And I have been told by persons who should know that charges are coming. We’ll see! If it is Dr. Rowley who is charged, that will be a political earthquake equivalent to the Haiti and Chile quakes combined. Any other former Minister would only be passing headlines.

Then the Prime Minister goes on a walkabout in San Juan and tells the nation that there is basically a war going on between his Government and certain elements in the construction industry. In this war, he says, “some soldiers may fall”, but he made it clear that this will be a fight to the finish! Wow!

No right thinking person can be happy with what is going on. There is an old African saying: “When elephants fight the grass gets trampled”. Most of us are grass in this fight between the elephants that are on the stage right now. But grass has a way of catching fire when there is too much heat and the elephants themselves can end up being burned in the ensuing conflagration.

In 1990 then Prime Minister Robinson started mounting a series of political attacks on the then opposition PNM that made everyone very upset. The explosion finally came on 27 July. I don’t want to sound as if I am condoning corruption of any kind. Neither am I advocating or condoning revolution. I am not. But I do think that everybody should take a deep breath and step back a little. We need to turn down the heat.

Life in the Tropics does not have to be a constant carnival.

BASIC EDUCATION

2010-03-08T15:55:00.001-04:00

A reader sent me the e mail below which I thought was so clear and so well written that I asked for (and received) his permission to publish it on this blog. Quite frankly, I agree with everything that he has said and really could not have put it better than he has done. My sincere thanks to him.

Over a period of years I have been bleating on in letters to the editor on this and several other similar subjects that should be part of the basic education of every Trini.
There should be a course on "home common sense" that should be obligatory in all schools.The idea is first to minimise possible risks to life and limb, then improve quality of life.
Here are some of the subjects that should be covered.

1. Disasters and emergencies (Hurricanes, earthquakes, tsunamis, etc)
2. Rules of the road and road sense. As pedestrian, rider, and driver.
3. Anger management and conflict resolution.
4. First aid for first responders.
5. General health and hygiene.
6. Risk recognition in everyday life. Fire, electrocution, drowning, falling, poisoning, stings and bites, and other "everyday" risks.

In the quality of life section should be;
1. Civil rights and responsibilities.
2. Basic manners, customs, and etiquette
3. An outline of services available to citizens, and how to access them.
4. Basic home economics, nutrition, and simple home maintenance.
5. Environmental awareness and basic agriculture.

A manual covering these subjects(and no doubt others that will be identified) should be easily available to every citizen, and should be a required textbook in all schools. It should be available in electronic form too.

A diploma in these subjects would be required for entry into any government employment, including the "10 days" type programs. The examinations should be arranged so that alternative assessment is available for those with various challenges, (including lliteracy!).

I hope I have not bored you, but it is my view that many of the "reluctant" students in our current education system would benefit at least in basic life skills from this or a similar curriculum, no matter what their academic inclinations.
What do you think?

Well, what do you think?

“PRIME MINISTER KAMLA SAID TODAY … “

2010-03-03T18:25:00.000-04:00

Harold Wilson once said that a week was a long time in politics. He made this now famous comment when the opinion polls were showing that his Labour Party’s popularity was extremely low and there was a General Election due in a few months. What he meant, obviously, was that his party’s fortunes could (as the Americans would say) ‘turn around on a dime’ and that they could be back in business before you knew it! Unfortunately for Mr. Wilson even though it is true that political fortunes can change very quickly, they didn’t change quickly enough for him. He lost!
Now, even though there is still almost 2 ½ years to the next General Elections in Trinidad & Tobago, it seems that they are Kamla’s to lose. By that I mean that unless things change, the next Prime Minister of Trinidad & Tobago will be Kamla Persad Bissessar.
There are many reasons for this. The first reason that one could cite is that there is a mood engulfing most of the western world for change. Trinidad & Tobago is no exception to this desire to see things go in a different way. Then-Senator Barack Obama, who is probably the best example, tapped into this mood in the U.S. most successfully a little over a year ago. Here in good old T&T one gets a distinct feeling from “the ground” that there is a great deal of dissatisfaction with the Manning Regime. The Prime Minister has not helped himself either, and has only increased this desire for change with the way that he defended his Spiritual Adviser/Priest/(or whatever you want to call her) in Parliament. People are asking very serious questions, yet he chose to lash out at just about every other religion in Trinidad & Tobago in a way that was guaranteed to cause (and did in fact cause) great offence. Unsurprisingly, he is getting hit from just about every angle on this issue and his cry of ‘religious persecution’ is falling on stony ground. Nobody is buying it.
On top of that, Mr. Manning is the only “salesman” in his Party. Having systematically decimated all of his leading “salesmen” (Ken Valley, Keith Rowley, etc.) he now finds himself with nobody but himself to carry his message and “sell” his visions to the public. And his senior ministers simply can’t carry the fight. Mariano Browne, for example, presents himself as a most competent individual, and to his credit, there has not been a whisper of corruption attached to his name. But Mr. Browne, competent as he is, is not charismatic and his message is often lost in the dry and uninspiring way in which he talks in public.
Kamla, on the other hand, has presented herself as the agent for change to a country that is growing increasingly fed up with Mr. Manning’s rather autocratic style of leadership. While the Prime Minister continues to present himself as the leader of a Government that is there to rule the people, Kamla is presenting herself as a leader that leads almost from behind … in other words, as a consensus builder. Her style is so dramatically different from that of the old lion (Panday) as well as Mr. Manning’s that even her critics are being won over. And since she became the leader of the UNC she hasn’t made a misstep … yet!
That “yet” is important, for while I said that the next election is Kamla’s to lose, the truth is that there are many pitfalls still ahead of her. The first thing to recognise is that while she has now become the “owner” of the UNC “brand”, that Party is presently broken, broke and in a most disorganised state. The Party machinery hardly exists, and that which does exist is in an extreme state of disrepair. Also (and more importantly), the Party is flat broke. Its coffers are empty. Now, it is true that the indefatigable Jack Warner (of deep pockets fame) is standing by, but way back in 1995 the UNC was accused (with not little justification) of falling into being “owned” by a small handful of financiers. The Party/Kamla will need to avoid falling into that particular trap again. If the perception is allowed to grow that Jack Warner now “owns” Kamla and the UNC, that belief alone (whether it is true or not) could be enough to sink her.

She also has the continuing problem of Basdeo Panday who has refused to exit with any degree of grace. Panday is now setting up (or trying to set up) a classic “triangulation” by saying that he is going onto the back bench and will stay there until Mr. Warner accounts for some $30 million allegedly given to him (Warner) by an unnamed UNC financier. That this accusation against Mr. Warner is patently ridiculous is irrelevant. Mr. Panday knows that some people will believe it and as long as he keeps it up he effectively undermines Mrs. Persad Bissessar even though he ostensibly now says that he accepts her leadership. Watch for him trying to create more trouble along the way.
Then there are M.P.’s like Vassant Bharath whose efforts to be on all sides at the same time are embarrassing, to say the least. The UNC’s constitution gives the leader the right to veto the nomination of any person going up for a seat. What will Mrs. Persad Bissessar do when the time comes for nominations to be made? Will she allow persons like Mr. Bharath to go up in safe seats like St. Augustine knowing that they could bring her down a la Ramesh or will she replace them at the appropriate time?
Then again, Mr. Manning is aware that he is in mid term. He can open the financial sluice gates next year, create a lot of jobs and hope that the apparent prosperity will save him. Will that be enough? Difficult to say at this stage, but a short answer is probably not.
There is a feeling of “fedupness” in the society that needs to be addressed and dealt with. He needs to re-connect with the people and come down from the ivory tower that he is perceived to be in. (Remember, in politics perception is reality). If he doesn’t, then in a little less than 2 ½ years from now you will hear a newscast on the radio begin with the words “Prime Minister Kamla Persad Bissessar said today…”

TT Making Progress Against Money Launderers

2010-02-24T11:18:00.001-04:00

As you may have noticed on Monday, my friends, the Trinidad Guardian erroneously reported Trinidad and Tobago as somehow part of a "blacklist" of terror-financing states. But did you happen to read this dire news in any of the other dailies? Or an internationally respected publication like the New York Times or London Times?
Of course not, because it isn’t true. A review of the facts reveals that Trinidad and Tobago is continuing to improve in our efforts to comply with global financing standards.
This one slipped through the editorial process, and the Guardian owes an explanation for the error. The misleading story ran with no by-line – an inconvenience for truth-seekers, but a hedge for hasty journalists and authors. In the story, the anonymous author builds the report around a recent report by the international Financial Action Task Force.
The Financial Action Task Force is a well-regarded body which reliably sets the global standard for identifying and stopping money launderers and terror financiers. As I’ve said all along, we must look to bodies such as this to measure our progress in TT.

Imagine my surprise when the Guardian turned this valuable report of the respected FATF upside-down.
Ignore the poor Guardian and read the report yourself.

The report only mentions Trinidad and Tobago with praise for recent progress and commitments to improve in the areas of Anti-Money Laundering and Combating the Financing of Terrorism:

"Trinidad and Tobago Trinidad and Tobago has demonstrated progress in improving its AML/CFT regime; however, the FATF has determined that certain strategic AML/CFT deficiencies remain. Trinidad and Tobago has made a high-level political commitment to work with the FATF and the CFATF to address these deficiencies, including by: (1) implementing adequate procedures to identify and freeze terrorist assets without delay (Special Recommendation III); (2) implementing adequate procedures for the confiscation of funds related to money laundering (Recommendation 3); (3) ensuring a fully operational and effectively functioning FIU, including supervisory powers (Recommendation 26)."

It is an unfortunate fact that small nations such as Trinidad and Tobago can easily be dragged into the dirty business of money laundering and terror financing. Thankfully in our case, the bad actors appear to be outside the government and we can marshal our forces against them. Whatever the faults of the Manning regime they at least appear to want to put a stop to dubious and dangerous financial behaviors. Trinidad has always been on the right side of history’s major conflicts and we should continue to remain on the right side of the global war on terrorism.

I’ve been saying for years that we must get serious about the issue of money laundering. This is not simply a problem of the rich trying to avoid taxes or otherwise shelter honest money. We must remain vigilant over our financial comings and goings as devious characters lurk amongst us, attempting to take advantage of our open, accepting and forgiving society.

In two earlier posts (Friday, 4th December and Friday 18th December, 2010) I wrote about the dangers of “State capture” and money laundering. There is no need to repeat here what I said then … just scroll down and you can read it. But the point is that this is another aspect of the dangers that a small society like ours faces. And we must also be wary of journalists and newspapers who do not report accurately. As to why the Guardian would want to turn a report on its head I cannot say. It is either sheer incompetence or somebody there has an agenda of some sort. Give me another reason?

In this space we will give credit where credit is due, and in this case Prime Minister Patrick Manning’s Government at least appears to be doing the right thing. Of course, a serious question remains as to whether or not there are persons lower down the “totem pole” who have an interest in making certain that no matter what the Government does (any Government whether Manning’s or somebody else’s) is frustrated. The society in general, and this matter in particular, is not helped by inaccurate reporting from a newspaper that boasts of its accuracy in reporting on serious matters.

IS THE COUNTRY IN “1986 MODE?”

2010-02-17T20:53:00.000-04:00

Most Trinis will understand the question. For those readers of this blog who are not Trinidadians (and, yes, there are quite a few) what happened in 1986 was that the then PNM Government which had won every single election was severely routed in that year’s general election, losing 33 of the 36 seats in Parliament. (Indeed, there are some who say that they lost Patrick Manning’s seat as well making it a loss of 34 seats, but that it was then Prime Minister A.N.R Robinson who prevented a recount thus saving Manning’s bacon.)

It was pretty clear to most observers for at least two years before the 1986 elections that the mighty PNM was losing support at a hitherto unprecedented rate. By March 1986 it was clear that then Prime Minister George Chambers had run out of steam and that the PNM was going down whenever he decided to call an election. The unions were marching. People were complaining bitterly about everything under the sun. The newspapers were highly critical of the Government. For example, one of the issues then was the amount of vagrants that were on the streets; the Daily Express newspaper ran a “vagrant of the day” picture every day in a prominent position in the newspaper … and many of the Ministers were perceived either as arrogant or corrupt or both! During the election campaign in December of that year one of the less competent Ministers, Desmond Cartey, stood up on an election platform and proclaimed to the world that “all ah we t’ief!” What he meant was that the allegations of corruption were unfair as during the oil boom of the late seventies and the early eighties that there many, many citizens who had cheated in one way or the other, e.g. non-payment of taxes, evading customs duties, overcharging for goods and services, etc. But his most unfortunate turn of phrase was seized upon by opponents of the Government as an admission of guilt (which in a very real way, it was) and is still remembered today some twenty-four years later!

Fast forward to today: What do we have happening? The unions are acting up. The Public Service Association (PSA) has booted out its old executive which was blatantly pro-PNM and replaced it with an executive which (for the time being at least) is fiercely independent of all political parties and which is simply refusing to go along with the Government’s plan to revise the Board of Inland Revenue and Customs and Excise by merging them into one authority. The PSA is promising some “serious heat” after Carnival. The powerful Oilfield and Workers Trade Union (OWTU) is also most unhappy with what is going on in the State owned oil company, Petrotrin, where layoffs are being contemplated.

Mr. Manning’s present team of Ministers, with a few notable exceptions, have left a bit to be desired. In a recent debate in the House of Representatives concerning the most contentious property tax, one junior Minister offended just about everybody by declaring that people had been “living off the fat of the land” and it was high time that they started to pay their way. He later attempted to explain this foolish statement away and tried to put a spin on it by saying that he was misquoted. Of course, nobody bought it. This followed a most embarrassing gaffe by the Sports Minister Gary Hunt concerning the erection of a $2 million flag at the national stadium. Mr. Hunt at first attempted to say that the flag only cost about $18 thousand. When the total cost of the flag installation came out ($2 million), the country erupted in anger. Then, four months later, Mr. Hunt, in a prime time television appearance, inexplicably raised the whole issue again by proffering a rather half hearted apology for the mistake and promising that it would never happen again. What?

The Opposition led by the formidable Jack Warner, immediately demanded his resignation. In a First World or developed country, this would have happened a long time ago. But Prime Minister Manning has defended his Minister and suggested that the nation should now “move on”.
Then there are water woes. The Water and Sewage Authority (WASA) has declared that because of a drier than usual rainy season our dams are at critical levels and all the signs are that we will experience a drier than usual dry season. Accordingly, WASA has ordered that there be severe restrictions on the use of water (no washing cars, watering lawns, etc.). On Wednesday (10th February) the Daily Express published a full front page picture of the very green Prime Minister’s residence lawn being cheerfully watered with sprinklers. The gardeners were promptly blamed and fired! But then we are regaled with a story (again in the Express) that President Max Richards’ gardeners having been doing the same thing! Most Trinis are finding it difficult to accept that ultimate blame in these stories do not lie elsewhere.

But the point here is not about water or the lack of it or Ministerial incompetence (real or imagined) or about perceived corruption. What I am trying to say is that there is a lot of grumbling on the ground. On top of that, Kamla Persad-Bissessar is presenting herself quite successfully as a credible alternative to the Manning regime. This factor, more than anything else, is making people think very carefully about where they will put their “X” next time in the coming election which is a little more than two years away. Put another way, the coming election, for the moment at least, is Kamla’s to lose. There are too many similarities between what is happening now and what happened before the 1986 elections for any PNM supporter to feel sanguine about his Party’s chances of success at the coming polls. Not only to me, but to many people who I have been talking to, the country appears to be in “1986 mode”. Can this change? Oh yes! Will it? I don’t know. Based on present performance, the PNM has a lot of work to do.