TIME TO RETHINK PUBLIC HOLIDAYS

It is probably quite fitting to write this article today - Labour Day in Trinidad & Tobago. Nobody who has a modicum of justice flowing through his veins or understands and appreciates history and the significance of this date can grudge this holiday. 

Indeed, I would argue that it is right and mete and absolutely necessary that we celebrate this holiday as well as others. But my argument is a simple one: except for those days that can't be moved (e.g., Independence, Christmas. Eid, Divali, etc.) for reasons that ought to be obvious, we have a  bunch of other holidays, like this one, that we can celebrate by making it fall on a particular Monday in a particular month. For example, why don't we celebrate Indian Arrival Day on the last Monday in May? And we can do so on other appropriate Mondays, (e.g. we can have Emancipation Day on the first Monday in August? Or Republic Day on the last Monday in September?) 

I was thinking about this because everybody I know (except those born on an actual public holiday) has had a birthday fall on a weekday but had the celebration on a weekend. The birthday party is still special but everyone can enjoy the party especially because they don't have to go to work the next day.

So? Why can't our country do the same as we all have done at one time or another? Research has shown time and again that the country's productivity falls drastically when a public holiday falls on, say, a Tuesday or a Thursday - greater than when it falls on a Monday or a Friday. People tend to make it a long weekend if this happens, with the resulting drop in productivity.

Let me be clear: I am NOT arguing for the abolition of ANY holidays. The abolition of any particular holiday (religious or otherwise) would be a whole other argument. I am simply arguing for a rethink or streamlining of certain non-religious holidays in the interest of making T&T (admittedly only a little) more efficient.

THE UNC INTERNAL ELECTIONS

 Well, the UNC's internal elections are over and (surprise, surprise) Kamla's slate won. The fact that it was such a complete wipeout of Rushton Parry's slate raises more questions than answers. The first (and probably the most important) question is what safeguards were in place to assure that there was absolutely no cheating at the polls and that this result is something that can be relied upon? Does this result actually and accurately reflect the opinion of the wider electorate?

The next question that comes to mind is that does this (honest?) result mean that the UNC faithful are 100 percent behind Kamla and have absolutely no qualms about her and her people leading the party in the next general election?

The third question is, will those who so overwhelmingly voted for Kamla's slate admit that they were wrong IF Rowley & Co. are victorious in the next general election? And as a 'sub-question' (if that is a word) what will they do if they discover that Kamla & Co. do not have the support of the majority of the population?

One of the big problems that most people have is that they are very often most unwilling either to admit that they were wrong or that their choice was wrong. If those who voted for Kamla's slate were right then glory halleluiah, don't bother listening to me ever again. But what if they were wrong?

WHY?

 In a book by a man called Robert Paxton Called "Anatomy of Fascism" he quotes Mussolini (Adolf Hitler's good friend and the dictator of Italy) who answered a question about how he planned to govern after he became Prime Minister as saying in effect that his plan was to destroy any and all opposition to him. (He actually said "The democrats of Il Mondo ( a newspaper in Rome) want to know our program? It is to break the bones of the democrats of Il Mondo. And the sooner the better." Authoritarian movements don't just hate truth telling journalists, they also want to destroy any knowable truth other than that which the leader insists on. When you come across someone who is not just wrong but proudly irrational, they are simply looking for a fight.

So, let's look at the fight that is going on inside the UNC for control of that Party. On the one hand you have Rushton Parry's slate which has noticeably refrained from any type of personal attacks  on their opponents while on the other hand you have Kamla Persad Bissessar's team which has chosen to ignore the fact that Mrs. Persad Bissessar has lost just about every election that she has led the UNC in since the general election of 2010 (which she won).

You might say that the Persad Bissessar faction of indulging a little bit of "head-in-the sand" complacency because the general feeling in the country right now is that it is split right down the middle between the UNC and the PNM. And this is at a time when the ruling PNM has screwed up very, very  badly. By all that is normal, the UNC should be way ahead of the PNM right now. But its not. and the supporters of Mrs. Persad Bissessar are not asking the critical question: why?

P.S. Are there  safeguards in place to prevent either side from cheating at this Sunday's internal election? If so, what exactly are they? Don't you think (regardless of who you would like to win) that this is important?

ARE ELECTIONS CONSEQUENTIAL?

 Do you believe that elections are consequential? Will your life change depending on who wins the next general election? If the answer is 'yes', then what changes are you hoping for? If the answer is 'no' then why are you bothering to vote at all? Put another way, if 'your side' wins the election how will that affect you personally? And what happens to you if you 'side' loses?

You see, the only reason for politics - the only reason for Government - is to make YOUR life better. Full stop! There is no other reason. You can understand why those who are offering themselves want the job - they will certainly become better off if they win. But how will YOU benefit?  Okay, you will prevent 'them" (whoever 'them' are) from having a better life. But what's in it for you? This is a very serious question that I don't think that a lot of people think about. We all get caught up in the hype - 'vote PNM' or 'vote UNC'. But do you ever stop to think about what's in it for you? Of course, the reality is that the answer to this basic question is often overlooked in all the excitement surrounding an election - whether it is an internal or a general one.

Have you noticed, for example that most people are worse off today than they were ,say, 10 years ago? And yet, the PNM seems to be running neck and neck with the UNC. Why?  Certainly, one can look at the UNC's leadership and say that it is falling short, but isn't the PNM leadership also wanting? The UNC has some internal elections about to take place that will almost certainly impact how that party is perceived by the wider electorate. So the question for a UNC supporter is do you think that your party has done a good job of keeping the PNM Government on its toes? If you do, then why is your party doing so badly in the polls when by all that is normal at this stage the party should be preparing for Government?  And they are not!

And if you think that its all the fault of those who oppose the current UNC leader, do you think that she can heal the party enough to persuade non UNC people (the floating voters) to vote for her in the next round? So? Do you vote to change things or are you happy with the status quo?

 The last 9 years of PNM rule have been marked  by a series of disasters - the closure of Petrotrin, austerity, the pandemic and a series of other vague, but just as troubling, marks of failure. It has been argued that while the State withers the charlatans take over and you give up on progress and simply hope that this particular chapter of all this nonsense will end. But a country cannot move forward without honestly reckoning on where it has gone wrong. There is enormous social inequality and exasperation with corruption that is generating massive discontent. Which leads back to my original question: do you believe that elections are consequential?

THE BANKS

 While existing legislation is supposed to keep the banks in check, the balance of power has swung far in their direction and they are acting with deepest impunity. Don't believe me? Have you seen how many millions the banks are reporting in profits every year? Their profits are up - way up - not down - in a time when people are catching hell to make ends meet. 

For example, how many people have noticed the small bank charges that seem to proliferate just for the privilege of having an account? And I thought that computerization was supposed to make things quicker and easier and less expensive; it hasn't. Why does it not in Trinidad & Tobago? In Canada, for example, my son reports that it took about 10 minutes for him to open an account when he went to university. Compare how long it takes down here. The banks in the North are very efficient, but they actually provide a service. Down here they operate as if they are doing you a favour by taking your money and holding it. Most diplomats report that it takes them about two days to open an account. Why? And  then they ask you all sorts of rather intrusive and personal questions.

And yet the big banks and their big clients are reporting record profits. But more people are being pushed into poverty than ever before. Why? Is there no co-relation? Why is no politician talking about this? Is it because  'money talks and you-know-what walks'?  But I have always thought that the only reason for politics was to make life better for the people! I guess that the old saying about money talking is very true - at least in T&T! Certainly, unless you are a 'big-wig' in a bank or a big company, but just an ordinary person, you are not better off. Is this right? Is it fair?

IS RACE BEHIND THE SEDITION CHARGE?

 I looked up the Sedition Act Cha. 11:04 to see if I could find the meaning of the word "sedition". I couldn't. The closest thing that I could find was in Webster's dictionary which defined 'sedition' as "1. incitement of discontent or rebellion against a government. 2. any action, esp. in speech or writing, promoting such discontent or rebellion."

So, going back to the Act  the law says in effect that until the contrary is proved, anybody knowingly in possession of a seditious publication is guilty of sedition. It goes on to define  a seditious intention as an intention "(a) to bring into hatred or contempt, or to excite disaffection against Government ... ."

It would seem therefore that the charge of sedition under this rather antiquated British colonial law MIGHT have a chance of succeeding against the Canadian vlogger who seems to have been caught up in the politics of this country. (I have emphasized the word "might" because I haven't seen exactly what he posted or said.)  Certainly, if he was advocating the violent overthrow of the government of our Republic then I have no problem with "throwing the book" at him. 

But if he didn't, what then? Certain very nasty and most unfortunate suspicions would arise. In any case there are certain questions that need to be asked and answered, e.g. how come a Canadian can find alleged gang members IN POSSESSION of guns and the police can't find or charge them? Are these charges racially motivated?

You see, it is interesting that the person who has been charged is the reporter while the people being reported on are left to go free. And the person being charged is a white foreigner and the people being reported on are black. And the present Government is black. Is it unfair to notice this? Why? It has been hinted that a senior black PNM politician was behind this charge because what was said was embarrassing to the Government. Is there any truth to that rumour?

Let's see what happens next. But unless this whole imbroglio is settled soon there is going to be a bad taste in everyone's mouth.

THAT MULTI-BILLION DOLLAR MISTAKE!!

 Have you any idea of how much a billion dollars is? Unfortunately, it is highly unlikely that in your lifetime you will ever come near making that amount of money. Most people find this sum hard to even  conceptualize. After all, it is not an amount that they can ever even dream about making.

So let me help you: if I gave you one billion dollars on the day that they crucified Jesus Christ, and you lived forever and didn't get any interest on that sum and you spent one thousand dollars a day - every day; today you would have something like 110 years to go BEFORE you ran out of money! Unbelievable, eh? Check it out yourself.

My point here is that we see that there is a multi billion dollar mistake in the country's accounts as presented by the auditor general. Most people will have seen this news and shrugged their shoulders and asked, "so what?" Those who are rabid supporters of the Government will say in effect that nothing has been proven and in any case it is just an accounting error that anybody could make. Those who are rabid supporters of the Opposition will say that this is highly believable and is just another example of 'thievery' in the ruling PNM. Just about everybody will quietly say that they don't think that anything will come of it and that nobody will ever have to give an account that will be acceptable to all. In other words, whatever is reported, nothing will happen.

And yet, there is a mistake reported on the country's books that comes to several billion dollars! Is anybody concerned? Does anybody really care?

WHAT ABOUT US?

 I had been hoping against hope that I would have been proven wrong in my last post and that the Prime Minister, when he came home, would have given us at the very least, a full account of his trip, how much it cost and why he took with him whoever he took (apart from his wife), and what benefit to the country did they bring to the table, and so on.  Instead his press conference yesterday was just the usual 'blah-blah-blah' in which no useful information was given and we learned nothing. Whatever happened to the old maxim: "if you have nothing to say, don't say it!"?

I keep trying to make the point: there is only one reason for politics - one reason for Government; to make life better for the people! Full stop! There is NO other reason.  I was also taught that if you can't make your point in one sentence then you can't make it at all. So? in one sentence, how did Dr. Rowley's last trip benefit T&T? How did it make your life better? Did it bring the cost of living down? What exactly did it achieve? Can anyone answer this question in one sentence?

Isn't it about time that we start to hold our so-called leaders to account? That they are all living well is understood. But what about the rest of us?

DEALING WITH INCOMPETENCE

 It is almost an unwritten rule: when things are going bad for the country, then Prime ministers like to travel - especially on official visits. After all, there is no daily barrage of bad news, you are unreachable, and any media coverage of you is almost always favourable, You are often treated like a hero and as the "greatest thing since sliced bread". You have very few problems to deal with other than which school are you going to open today, or what colour tie will you wear tonight at the cocktail party in your honour. The problems at home are far away and your trip is often most relaxing and enjoyable. There will be no awkward questions at any press conference and your hosts will be anxious to please you.

But all good things must come to an end and sooner or later you will have to go home and face your own electorate. Your first line of defence will be to keep quiet; your second line of defence if keeping quiet doesn't work, will be to blame the Opposition for the country's problems - whatever they might be. Another line of defence (but not the main one) will be to report on how "successful" your trip was and how much the country will benefit from your travels.

T&T's Prime Minister is reportedly off on yet another foreign trip - this time to Ghana. Why Ghana? Well, the obvious answer in one word is race. Oh! It will not be presented as plainly or as bluntly as That! No! Dr. Rowley will return with a lot of hot air and empty promises about how Africa is a huge untapped market and one which we have ignored for too long. There will be promises of new business and more jobs - all of which will be brought to us by Santa Claus on his sleigh. And by the time that those promises do not materialize he will have beautifully segued onto some other issue and we will all have forgotten not only the empty promises but not even how much of our money that his little jaunt has cost us.

Of course, this will continue to happen time and again until we learn the obviously difficult lesson that the present load of politicians (on both sides) are simply in that business for themselves and not for us. After we learn this lesson, the next question will be what are we going to do about it? 

FIX THE CRIMINAL JUSTICE SYSTEM - CATCH THE CROOKS

 Following on this last weekend's shootout and murders (where 12 people were wounded and 4 killed) unsurprisingly there have been renewed calls for harsher penalties. However amidst all of the weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth nobody has hit on the simple fact that the criminals and murderers are simply not being caught.

I remember reading somewhere a few years ago that for every 100 murders the conviction rate was somewhere in the vicinity of 7 percent and that most of those convictions related to what can loosely be called 'domestic disputes'. The arrest rate for what might  loosely be called 'gang related' murders and crimes were somewhere around 3 percent and the conviction rate for these types of crime was less than 1 percent!

My guess is that the arrest rate percentages are even lower now, and as for the conviction rate!  Well that is just about non-existent! 

So? Think like a criminal: if you had a less than 3 percent chance of getting caught would you hesitate to commit the crime? My bet is that you wouldn't give it a second thought. And if by some chance you were actually arrested and charged, your chances of being actually convicted are so close to zero that no threat of any penalties will deter you!

Think about it! We don't really need more stringent, "hang-em high" laws; what we need is for the police to actually do their job and catch the crooks. Then we need for the justice system to work quickly so that between an arrest and a verdict from a trial, less than one year has passed instead of the very long wait - sometimes/often more than10 years - that pertains now. 

Until we fix this we are simply whistling in the wind! Politicians can give us as much "basket" as they want - and we can all cheer lustily while they hold expensive meetings in first class hotels (which we pay for, by the way) that come up with all kinds of fancy rhetoric that make them sound as if they know what they are doing. But nothing that ANY politician has said has ever provided ANY solution as to how they propose to catch the crooks. And until the crooks start getting caught our crime situation will just get worse. Watch!

CAN THE UNC WIN BY ITSELF UNDER KAMLA?

 A friend of mine has written to me saying that Mrs. Persad Bissessar and her supporters are concentrating on the upcoming internal UNC elections and are pushing the line that those who oppose her are simply trying to divide the party. Left unspoken is that a divided party cannot defeat the PNM in the general elections due next year.

While that last sentence is obviously true, it really does beg the question as to who is dividing the UNC?  You see, by all that is normal the UNC should be way ahead in the polls right now of the Rowley led PNM.  The only people who are better off than they were some 9 years ago when Rowley et al came to power, are the financiers of the PNM and a handful of party insiders. Everybody else has seen his/her standard of living fall and become more expensive. There have been seemingly countless errors of judgement that have cost the country dearly. And yet, the UNC is running 'neck and neck' with the PNM! Something is obviously wrong somewhere.

And yet, Mrs. Persad Bissessar and her supporters cling to their diminished power and influence, proving the old adage about it being "better to rule in Hell than serve in Heaven" It is as if the theme of the UNC in the next elections will be 'they have screwed up but we can do better'.  Left out of that equation is exactly how they will do better. No real policies have been defined and Kamla's crew is blatantly incompetent (except for one or two able people like Roodal Moonilal). Her leader of Opposition business in the Parliament, for example,  screws up time and again, but is very adept at getting Mrs. Persad Bissessar to blame others for his mistakes.

Look, the ONLY reason for politics - the ONLY reason for Government - is to make life better for the people! Full stop! Punto finale! There is no other reason! Mrs. Persad Bissessar seems to be operating on the premise that the only reason for politics and Government is her personal well being.  She has made countless statements that she is prepared to lead again, but she has failed to lay out a clear path to victory for the UNC or how she will make your life better. She has also failed to excite the wider electorate that she will need if she wants to win. A dispassionate observer can be forgiven in concluding that she is just interested in just herself and not the wider community that she wishes to represent.

So my answer to the question asked at the beginning of this post is that if an election were to be called tomorrow, UNC will lose if it does not make an alliance with the smaller parties - and even then it will be a toss up. They look very much at the moment that they will lose.

Having said that, it should be noted that there are competent potential leaders waiting in the wings (unless, of course, the UNC leader "kills" them first - which seems to be happening).

CROOKS AND MOOKS?

We are constantly bombarded with political promises that promise dramatic life improvement for us and/or relief from our troubles. These promises all come to us saying in essence that "if you vote for me/us then productivity will improve and you will live a happier life". In short, the promise is in one word - Nirvana. We also get pundits telling us that we will be better off if we vote for X instead of Y. Sometimes these pundits give us their reasoning - which is often faulty, but in the end simply goes back to the promises of Nirvana.

Don't buy it!

I was reminded of these promises and pundits this morning when I saw a newspaper article that reported a very prominent former (now retired) banker, Ron Harford, whose opinions I have always respected. Mr. Harford was reported as saying that if you have a choice in voting for a crook or a mook, then it is better to vote for the crook. Now, I can understand his reasoning: while you can be fairly certain that the crook will steal, the mook simply won't have any idea on how to fix things and because of his/her inefficiencies,  inabilities and total incompetence, the mook will simply make things worse. The crook, on the other hand, while stealing, will probably do somethings right, and therefore we will all benefit - not as much as could if the crook wasn't a crook, but still we would get some benefit. The erstwhile Mr. Harford did not identify anybody who he thought might be a crook or a mook.

So, in keeping with the erstwhile Mr. Harford's non-identification of anybody, I have only one question for him: what if the crook is also a mook?

THOSE FOREIGN TRIPS

 I have said it over and over again: there is only one reason for politics - only one reason for Governments : to make life better for the people! Full stop! There is no other reason!

So when Dr. Moonilal told his political supporters that following a Freedom of Information request it was revealed that between 20th September 2020 and 29th February 2024 - a period of a little over 3 years and 5 months -  the Prime Minister, the erstwhile Dr. Keith Christopher Rowley, had spent $10.6 million on foreign travel a reasonable question that needs to be answered is what benefit or benefits did Trinidad & Tobago get out of all these trips? There are some rather obvious supplementary questions such as how much money did T&T make on this $10.6 million investment, and who in the society  (apart from Caribbean Airlines which I presume is what the  Prime Minister travelled on) benefitted directly from these trips? Who benefitted indirectly from these trips? Indeed, did anybody in the country benefit from these trips? And if so, who and how did he/she benefit? What exactly was the return on our investment of more than $10 million?

You see, I consider myself reasonably well informed as to what is going on on T&T but I really can't say what tangible benefits were received by the country - whether in cash or otherwise - that might justify such a huge travel bill. And I certainly don't know who benefitted from these trips. Of course it is always possible that the country or some persons did benefit from these expensive trips. It is just that nobody seems to have answered (or even asked until now) the very basic questions. Isn't it time that our political leaders (on BOTH sides) account to us for everything that they say or do? Or should we be just content to let them do whatever they want? 

EID MUBARAK

 Eid Mubarak to everybody. On this rather auspicious and most important day, it might be a good time to consider a more rational approach to our public holidays - and Carnival Monday and Tuesday are included in this. You see, there are a lot of holidays that are purely secular (e.g., Indian Arrival Day and Emancipation Day). It is also obvious that certain religious holidays can't be moved (e.g., Today, Eid ul Fitr - which marks the end of the holy month of Ramadan - Divali, and Easter. However, for all the rest - the secular, non-religious ones - why don't we celebrate the holiday on a particular Monday? 

Take, for example, the holiday of Indian Arrival Day which celebrates the arrival of the first Indians in Trinidad; this holiday is on the 30th May in every year. But when the 30th May falls on, say, a Tuesday or a Thursday, the country's productivity is adversely affected as many people make it a true long weekend by taking the Monday or Friday off. 

Now, how many of you have had a birthday fall on, say, a Wednesday but have had a party celebrating your birthday on either the Saturday night before your birthday or on the Saturday night after? In other words, what is important is the celebration which you have  to mark the occasion rather than the actual day itself. And I believe that just about everybody has done this at least once.

The point here is (and continuing with the example of Indian Arrival Day) why don't we have it on, say, the last Monday in May?  Or the first Monday in June? The whole idea of this holiday is to celebrate and honour the first people who arrived here and whose descendants have made a sterling contribution to our society. The honouring of our ancestors will be no less if it is not done on the exact day and will create  for everybody a long weekend.

And, please, I have only singled out one national holiday for the sake of brevity; but the point applies to every other secular holiday.

THE DEATH PENALTY

 With crime on the rise perhaps now is a good time to revisit our laws on the death penalty. So, question: what is the best deterrent for crime? Answer: the fear of getting caught along with the fear of being punished after you are caught, Both of these fears go together because if you get caught and you know that there will be a punishment of some kind then you are more likely not to break the particular law

You can test this hypothesis by looking at the behaviour of drivers when they know that the police are timing people who are speeding. Everybody slows down!

But we have on the books the draconian  death penalty for certain crimes, e.g., murder (although we haven't executed anybody recently). Yet still, despite this penalty, murders are on the rise, so the obvious question is why? The answer is equally obvious: if you commit a murder you have less than a 90 percent chance of being caught (and here I am talking about the "hits" and other similar types of crime and not those related, e.g., to murdering your spouse). And then, if you are caught the justice system is so inefficient that you can spend 10 years or more in jail before your matter comes up for trial and by then some of the witnesses could be dead or forgetful or unreliable. As a result, you get off and then might have a claim against the State for damages for wrongful imprisonment.

No. Our entire justice system needs a major overhaul - beginning with the police. If they can't (or won't) catch the criminals then what good are they? Why do we need them? Then the court system needs to be ramped up so that a person charged with a crime faces the court quickly - e.g., within 3 months, although I think that is probably too long. I mean, how would you feel if you were locked up for 3 months for a crime that you did not commit?

As a person who has had a beloved family member murdered and having full knowledge as to who at least 2 of the killers were (they were never caught or even charged - but that's another story) I know and subscribe unequivocally to the principle of the presumption of innocence - even for my cousin's murders. But, hey, his murderers effectively got away with it because of corruption and inefficiency in the police service.

We cannot bring down the crime rate to any kind of "acceptable" level unless we really tackle the 2 problems that I have highlighted here. Then we can look at the other problems.