ARE THE BANKS REALLY A LAW UNTO THEMSELVES?

 it doesn't feel like a big thing, but gradually - ever so gradually - the banks in this country are collectively  making life more difficult for all of us. What am I talking about? let me give you a very smn small example:

My balance has gone completely "wonky". It is now extremely difficult, and almost close to impossible, to do ordinary things like get out of a chair. Standing up for even a moment is almost impossible. When my balance first started going "off" I went to my doctor who told me that nothing short of an operation on my brain could stop the problem - and there was no guarantee that it would solve it, Unsurprisingly, I turned i t down  down preferring to live with the problem than having somebody operate on my brain. I  am a lawyer. for crying out loud!  What could I do to make MY life better? I thought that perhaps the answer lay in giving somebody that I trusted implicitly a general power of attorney, so that my attorney could handle everything for ne while I was still alive. So said, so done. I gave my wife my power of attorney and arranged for her to be able to sign all of my accounts - both  business and personal. So you can imagine my great surprise when I was told that I had to go in person to collect my  new debit card, 

Why? 

Apparently, the bank feels that they are protecting me, despite the fact that the power of attorney which I gave to my wife is registered and is valid. According to the bank they don't feel that they have to follow or accept the law, Basically, they are saying that the law is whatever they say that it is..

 So the next time that a lawyer advises you to give someone a power of attorney be aware that there are those who feel that they don't have to accept it. And this applies to everything else as well, the law is whatever the banks say that it is - and they are free to change it at any time..

Perhaps I should add a little post script - the bank in question was RBC Royal Bank and the head of tits legal department was too busy to speak to me. (The manager of the branch (Maraval) was very nice but she could do nothing 

And this advice goes for everything else else as  well.

MABURRO vs. DRUMPF

 My wife asked me this  morning about how I felt about the Americans flying their war planes over Venezuela. The question got me to thinking. You see, it is a truism that countries don't have friends - they have interests. So? What interest could the Americans have under President Drumpf  (the misspelling is deliberate)? I guess that it could be argued that Maburro's  (again, the misspelling is deliberate) policies are creating  a national security problem for the USA because something like 10 million Venezuelans have fled their country and settled in the United States because of the Donkey's terrible policies. That is about one third of the population who have fled their country. Here in T&T we have also been affected by the Donkey's policies  thus creating for us  an economic problem.

But there is a counter argument to that , which says that what Drumpf is doing sets a very bad precedent for both the Region and the world. If, the argument goes, the Americans don't like a particular regime they can and will remove it regardless.

This argument is also valid. Certainly, the argument against Drumpf is that it is, amongst other things, against international law which says that a people should be free to choose their own leaders.

The obvious problem here is that the Venezuelans under Maburro cannot be described as 'free'. Indeed, Maburrro cheated in the last election which was anything but free and which he lost by a huge margin but still hung on to power.

So? Do two wrongs make a right in this case? Its difficult to answer dispassionately. On the one hand it is clear that Maburro should be removed as quickly as possible. On the other hand, it is difficult (if not impossible) to justify Drumpf's actions.

My own feeling is that (a) the Americans are engaging in actions that cannot be justified in law, BUT  = and it is a big |but| (b) the sooner Maburro is dethroned the better, for both Venezuela and the Region, In other words, Maburro should be forced to go - one way or the other.  What do you think?

HAS MABURRO MADE LIFE BETTER FOR THE PEOPLE?

 It strikes me as very strange that those who support Maburro (the misspelling is deliberate) and are criticizing  the Americans for "invading" the Caribbean Sea have absolutely nothing critical to say about the Donkey's rule and the FACT that practically one third of the population has fled the country!. Venezuela started with a population of more than 30 million when Maburro came to power, Today close to 10 million have fled the country - the wealthiest country in South America in terms of minerals (such as gold and oil.)

Now, you must understand that there is only one reason for politics - one reason for government:  and that is TO MAKE LIFE BETTER FOR THE PEOPLE! There is no other reason!

So when there are those who are criticizing the United States (where everybody thinks that they will be better off) and the Trinidadian Prime Minister for supporting the Yankees, it would certainly sound a lot better if they explained why they think that it is acceptable for one third of a country to flee a regime ere those who have fled think that life has to be better than where they were born and raised. Can  you imagine how desperate you must feel to leave your home, your family, your friends, your memories - EVERYTHING behind! And those who have fled to Trinidad have done so despite the fact that by and large they can't speak English! Ten million people!

No! To those who support Maburro I call each and every one of you stupid to your face (and any other derogatory name that you can think of).

"THE ENEMY OF MY ENEMY..."

 "The enemy of my enemy is my friend". I think that everybody (or almost everybody) believes that this old saying, which, like most old sayings carries  a lot of truth in it.  I was thinking about this the other day when the news reached me that the American President had ordered his military allegedly full of drugs and carrying them to Trinidad. For the avoidance of doubt, let me say that I consider ANYBODY engaged in the trafficking or distribution of illegal drugs (from drug lords to traffickers and everybody in between) to be my enemy.

Therefore, I was quite pleased with this news, but (and it is a big "But") when I started to think about it, I realized that the very action which pleased me was also an action that all right thinking people should condemn, You see, at the core of our democracy (and every democracy) is the belief that everybody is entitled to a fair trial. And although I am more than willing to believe that the destroyed boat was full of drugs, I don't know this beyond any reasonable doubt. And according to the news 11 men were killed in that exercise. Were they guilty? Without a trial , it is not possible to say. Do I believe that they were guilty? The short answer is 'yes', but do I KNOW? The short answer is 'no'.

Either we believe in a system of justice, or we don't. And our system requires - no, demands - that everybody is considered innocent until proven guilty. The 11 men who were killed may have been guilty of trafficking drugs. But the case against them was never proved nor was any evidence presented. And either we adhere strictly to our rules or we don't. Let me put it this way: if we accept this killing because we believe them to be guilty (without them being tried), where and when is any extra-judicial killing (i.e., where there is no trial) justified? Believe it or not, your answer (to yourself) is more important than you think.

WHY ARE MUSEUMS IMPORTANT?

 There are three questions about museums -

1) What are they for?

2) How do they tell society's stories?

3) Who gets to decide?

I think that the answer  to the first question is rather obvious. Museums are for telling and recording our history. In so doing they must strive to be accurate and to record our stories as completely as possible

In answer to the second question I think that our national museum does a very poor job of recording our history. The history of Trinidad can be divided into 6 parts: (a) before the Spanish; (b) after the Spanish and before the English; (c)  the English colonization, slavery and indentureship; (d) after slavery  and indentureship and before independence; (e) the union with Tobago and Tobago's history; (f) after independence.

Our national museum does not adequately tell or explain any of these stories - and in failing to do so, in fact does a tremendous disservice to the country. History is important. History explains who we are and where we came from. For example, do people generally know why the town of Sangre Grande is called Sangre Grande? (The answer lies in our history -  "sangre grande" means much or great blood in Spanish. After the Spanish came they enslaved the local Amerindians who rose up in revolt. A terrible battle took place where the town is presently,  and almost the entire Amerindian population was wiped out.)

Incidentally, the Caribs were a warlike people who largely came from South America. Most of the Caribbean Amerindians were in fact Arawaks a peaceful tribe who had no word for 'war' in their language. You could argue that the word  "Caribbean" is in fact a misnomer of our area - but that is a whole other story

I don't know the answer to the third question except that the directors of the national museum are appointed by the Government. Isn't it time that we did something positive about the national museum?

ARE YOU BETTER OFF THAN YOU WERE A YEAR AGO?

 Let's call a spade a spade. Politics in Trinidad is race driven; it shouldn\t be, of course, but it is. Both politival parties are hopelessly driven by race  and not by ideas or policies. Basically, they both say that "we can do it better than them".  There are very few policies (if any) that are driven by policies .

Let me prove it to you. Quickly. What are the main POLICY differences between the PNM and  the UNC? Aaah ! You had to think about that one, didn't you? So? How do you choose who you are going to vote for? For some people the thinking is that "they (whoever "they"  are) have screwed up so I'll give the other guys a chance." Unfortunately, these people are in a minority - a minority who can make a difference because the Indians and the Africans are almost evenly divided. But I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that none of them can tell me what the POLICY differences are between the two parties.

In other countries (e.g., Canada the U.K., France, etc.) the competition is always between ideas and policies. But here i good old T&T we elect our political leaders because they are black or Indian and we conveniently ignore the fact that there i only one reason for politics - one reason for government: and that is to make life better for the people.

ARE THE RECENT BOARD APPOINTMENTS BY THE NEW UNC GOV'T RACIST IN NATURE?

 The Chairman of the Opposition Party - the PNM - is quoted in the newspaper as saying in essence that the recent appointments to State boards are  racist in nature in that only Indians have been appointed. That this is patently not true, it is also a very careless and potentially dangerous mistake.

It is careless because it is simply not true. Any check on the names of the appointees will show this, not to mention the photographs, one of which was published in the very pro-PNM newspaper,, Newsday. 

But it is also dangerous because this country is almost equally divided between the blacks and the Indians (45% to 55%) with the Indians very slightly in the majority, The statement tends to lend itself to stirring up racial feelings. Is the erstwhile chairman saying that the recent State board appointments do not reflect the real numbers and divisions in the society? Or is he saying that while the PNM did so, only the PNM is allowed to do this? Or is he saying that now that the shoe is on the other foot that only PNM supporters and Africans can be appointed without any adverse comments? Or is he saying or implying that the firing and replacement of the old boards is racial in nature? Or is he saying or implying all of these things?

One would expect that the State board appointees would be dominated by supporters of the particular Party that won  (or wins) an election. To pretend that this is just wrong and should be otherwise - is just that: a pretense! Even in countries where there is no obvious ethnic division the winning Party's supporters are "rewarded" with State appointments.  We can discuss whether this act is right or wrong. But how are we going to prevent this - especially when it can be argued that the PNM was guilty of this when it was their turn?

'INDEPEDENT' SENATORS?

 Question: what exactly is an "independent"  Senator? Webster's dictionary defines "independent" as being 'free from outside control' = 'not depending on another for livelihood or subsistence' By this definition we cannot truly say that we have any "independent" senators  -  any or all of them can be removed at a moment's notice by any President.

We have come to mean  that our 16 "independent" senators - (and yes, it is 16. One of the "independents has always served as the President of the Senate since Independence) - are really supposed to be without any political affiliation and thus are entrusted with enormous constitutional power when matters become very political. By convention, the presiding officer - the president of the Senate - is SUPPOSED to cast his vote in the event of a tie, with maintaining the status quo. indeed    , the few times that  such a vote has been cast in the Senate this has always happened, but there is no constitutional provision that it HAS to happen. Indeed, this is not the first time that an "Independent" Senator has been appointed by a PNM elected President.

I mention this because the President of the Republic has appointed as an Independent Senator  a former PNM Cabinet Minister. Clearly this particular Senator will have a bias in favour of  her (presumably) former party, assuming that she will vote with the PNM Opposition on matters that come before the Senate, this would mean that the President of the Republic has in one fell swoop managed to negate the  overwhelming mandate that the UNC Government got at the recent polls.

Do I agree with President Kangaloo's decision? No! Do I understand it? Yes.

Perhaps the best way to fix this from the UNC's point of view might be for the Constitution be changed whereby the President;s term is limited to the shorter of  either wnen there is a general election or five years,

KAMLA"S PROBLEM

 The Prime Minister has a serious problem: her credibility is at stake.

Her problem stems from the promises that were made before the last election. In one sentence, the UNC under the (now) prime minister basically promised that they would make life better and less expensive  for the people. A large majority of voters decided that they had had enough of Dr. Rowley and the PNM  and decided either not to vote or to vote for the UNC.

The Prime Minister's present problem stems from the fact that ,so far, she has been unable since she took power to show or even tell the population exactly how she will make things better for the people.

Oh, we are hearing about fixing the easy things, like stamping out corrupt contractors. But we aren't hearing about the difficult things like creating more jobs, bringing down the debt, lowering interest rates, making things easier for the ordinary person when he/she goes to open a bank account, and so on. (This list is not meant to be exhaustive.)

If there is only one reason for politics, one reason for government: to make life better for the people - who can say honestly that his/her life is better right now than before the election?  Of course it's "early days" and there was a lot that needed fixing - some might even say with a great deal of justification that there was too much - but The Prime Minister's problem is  that she is running out of time. She gave the impression that she would and could  fix all that needed to be fixed in a relatively  short time. So far, there is no sign that things are going to get better. Of course, there are arguments that since our general election that things overseas have gotten worse and that President Drumpf's (the mis-spelling is deliberate) tariffs things are now set to make things worse - to which I can/will only say that it is really a good thing that Rowley and his minions aren't running the show any longer. 

 All I am saying now is that both the Prime Minister and her ministers need to come to us now to tell us what exactly they are going to do to fix things and when we can/will see that their ideas  are indeed working. We understand that it is more difficult to fix something that is broken and that fixing things could take  more time  than it took to create the problem in the first place - but we need to know when we can expect to see some "daylight". Vague promises are not enough. We need to have a clear path to things actually getting better.

WHY CORPUS CHRISTI IS A PUBLIC HOLIDAY IN T&T

 When I was a young lawyer an old Queen's Counsel told me: "If you ever want to understand a problem go back to basics". I have found that to be excellent advice - probably the best advice that I have ever received - and so I started thinking 'why'.; why was Corpus Christi a national holiday?

So, I checked it out - after all Corpus Christi is a Roman Catholic feast day and this country is not a Catholic country. Heck! It's not even a Christian country. The Christian community in Trinidad & Tobago numbers about 45 percent of the total population! This particular feast day is not celebrated  in even Catholic countries such as Venezuela and Brazil which are both about 98 percent Catholic. And the feast of Corpus Christi is a peculiarly Roman Catholic one which is not particularly observed by the other Christian religions. (FYI, the statistics show that while Roman Catholicism is the majority Christian religion in the country  the Roman Catholics' number  less than a quarter of the  total Christian population.)

So? Why? Why is this particular Roman Catholic feast day so important that it merits a public holiday? 

Remember what I said at the beginning of this post: if you ever want to understand a problem, go back to basics. 

It seems that what happened all had to do with that chap, Napoleon Bonaparte . Trinidad was originally ruled by Spain. (Tobago was, for the purpose of this post, British). England was at war with France when  the British general, Sir Ralph Abercromby,, sailed into Port of Spain and lobbed 2 or 3 cannon balls into the town. The Spanish governor, Chacon, who hated the French (remember  that France had conquered Spain at this time and that France had conquered Spain- which meant that all the Spanish colonies in the New World belonging to Spain now belonged to France) was safely ensconced in the then capital of San Jose   (St. Joseph). So far from being a coward (as they used to teach us in school) he was simply acting out of hatred for Napoleon and preferred to be under English rule.

England signed many peace treaties with France during this period of the Napoleonic wars. By the Treaty of Amiens , 1802, England handed back to France everything that she had taken in the period leading up to the Treaty EXCEPT Trinidad and Ceylon. One can understand why the British wanted to keep Ceylon. After all, it lay directly in the path to England's crown jewel - India. But why Trinidad?

That answer has a little history behind it. There had been a great exodus from France of the French nobility when the French Revolution took place  (for obvious reasons) and many of the aristocracy came to the French islands of Martinique and Guadeloupe Unfortunately for them the revolution followed them out there and when the executions started they packed up their bags and slaves and fled to Trinidad. The Spanish King had earlier promised land for free to whoever started an estate in Trinidad.

In any case, all these French aristocrats were, needless to say, thrilled that the island was now British and that the hated revolutionaries and Napoleon would no longer be in charge. But when they heard about what was being discussed at Amiens they were worried. (After all, the British were Protestant (which in their minds was only marginally better than being heathen) and they were Roman Catholic. So they lobbied for a clause in the Treaty which they felt would protect their Roman Catholic religion - that henceforth the Roman Catholic feast day of Corpus Christi would be a public holiday in the colony, thus keeping their religion front and centre forever.

And that is why this Roman Catholic feast day is observed as a public holiday in a country where the majority is not even Christian - much less Catholic!

LOOKING AGAIN AT OUR NATIONAL HOLIDAYS

 Before going further, I think that its important to note that I agree with ALL of the reasons for Indian Arrival Day and Emancipation Day as public holidays. I also agree with and understand the reasons for fixing the two dates for these holidays on 30th May and 1st August respectively in each and every year. I think that both days are important for the nation to remember and observe these two days.

But (and you knew there was a "but " coming, didn't you?) I was thinking how nice it was for the WHOLE country that these two dates will each be celebrated on a Friday this year. After all, approximately half the country is not Indian and approximately half the country is not African. Yet, it is important that the whole country celebrate and remember these two days and the history behind each one.

Having said that, I think that its time to think about all of our national holidays and recalibrate those that are not international in nature (e.g., Christmas and Divali). Why don't we take those holidays (e.g., Emancipation Day and Indian arrival Day and put them on a Monday instead? For example we could put Indian arrival weekend on the last weekend of May and Emancipation weekend on the first weekend of August, and making the Mondays after each weekend public holidays.

There are good and obvious reasons for this, not the least being that studies have consistently shown that a country's productivity is more adversely affected when a holiday falls in midweek than on a Monday or Friday. After all, there are probably no adults whose birthdays have fallen mid-week who haven't postponed the celebration to the nearest weekend, especially when the next day is a working day. Why can't we do this with days like Emancipation Day and Indian Arrival Day?

It is important to note that this proposal is not to be applied to religious holidays or even days like New Year's Day. There are some other days which we cannot or should not change, e.g., Independence Day, again for reasons that ought to be obvious. But does that mean that we can't or shouldn't look at the rest?

A CASE FOR TOLERANCE

 THE country (T&T) has become noticeably less tolerant of divergent views and opinions over the last few years. Whether this is simply caused by the rise of social media where people feel free to criticize another when he/she is not face-to-face with the person being criticized (as some have suggested) or the causes are more deep rooted and the lack of tolerance for opinions that differ from one's own is the result of genuine differences of opinion on a given topic, is not easy to say.

But it seems clear that at least people feel free to criticize others more today than yesterday. While the reason(s) for this is/are arguable, certainly there appears to be a greater lack of tolerance than there was before.

So the question arises: why? Why is this happening? Is it a good thing? Are we as a society losing our capacity to be tolerant of differing opinions? If so, does this spell a long term danger for us? Will it cause a further fragmentation of our society?

Nobody enjoys criticism nor does anybody enjoy disagreements with his/her beliefs and/or opinions. But if, for example, I thought that it was a good idea (which I don't)  for there to be a law that all men should wear green pants, why should my (rather stupid) opinion matter to you? And if I can persuade others that this  opinion was indeed a good idea , then surely what you should do is put forward arguments that show why my argument is a stupid one; but you don't have to be insulting about it.

Hopefully, by this admittedly stupid argument I have made the point about whether or not  the political Party (whether the People's National Movement -PNM or the United National Congress _ UNC) is in your opinion the one that is best suited for the country at this time. (But, if you ask me,, I support the Free Democratic Action Trinidad & Tobago party - better known as FDATT). 

The short point here is that we -all of us- need to be more tolerant of others whose views might differ from our own without being insulting about it.

GETTING THINGS BETTER?

Evwerybody lies. I read somewhere that the average person lies between twenty to a hundred times a day. But what about the people who we elect/choose to rule us - the politicians?

Politicians usually lie  because they are craven or corrupt - or both. The most dangerous of lies is when  leaders lie to their own people. The truth is more likely to come out sooner or later - e.g., when a politician promises that he/she can fix the problems of the country without borrowing and making life more expensive for his/her citizens.

There are two other forms of deception: concealment and spinning. Unfortunately, it has become far too commonplace for politicians to avoid telling the truth by either spinning the facts in such a way  as to deceive the unwary listener or to conceal the facts in such a way that the average citizen will be decieved. One can argue that either (or both) of these behaviours can be classified as lies.

"Truth telling is when an individual does his best to state the facts and tell a story in a straight forward and honest way"(John J, Mearsheimer= - Why Leaders lie - The truth about lying in International Politics).  Deception (which includes lying) is where an individual actively takes steps to hide the truth or present it in such a way that the listener gets a different idea from the truth of what really took place. 

The clever politician will try to spin the facts in such a way that even when the lie is exposed he can say that he was misinformed, but he will usually be found out anyway, e. g., when he promises that he can fix things and make it better although he knows in his heart that he can't..

The recent general election in T&T is a classic example of this point. People (voters) were clearly  fed  up with the promises and lies of the PNM and as a result, many who identify with that Party simply stayed home and didn't vote or actively voted for the UNC. The biggest problem that the new UNC Government now faces is whether or not they can keep their main promise which was to make life better for the people. If they can they will stand a good chance of winning the next election. If they can't they will face an energized and resurgent PNM that will exploit their failed promise  to make things better.  And make no mistake about it, the ground work on both sides is already being laid down - on BOTH sides.

The PNM has managed to make itself the 'default' Party -i.e., the Party that the country can turn to if the 'experiment' fails. That happened when the NAR came into power in 1986 but then lost to the PNM in 1991.  Can it happen again? Yes, it's possible. Will it happen again?  Maybe. A lot will depend on what the new Government does in its first months in office,  Has the new incoming Government learned anything from 1986? Hard to say, but the signs are not propitious for them at the moment, They would do well to remember that within a few months the NAR was deeply unpopular as it was forced to "turn off the tap" of state largesse. When the new PNM Government under Patrick Manning came in  in 1991 it simply continued the NAR's economic policies - after a failed revolution against the NAR in 1990.That revolution failed because the army refused to back it.

So? Am I hopeful that things can get better?  Maybe. Can they get worse? Maybe.                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                                     es and spin of the PNM                                                                                                  

HAPPY EASTER

 Today (easter Sunday) marks the most important festival (for want of a better word) in the Christian calendar. Indeed, you cannot be a Christian if you don't believe that Christ died on the cross and rose from the dead three days later.

Because I have always had a curious mind and asked three uncomfortable questions, I used to ask; (1) how come Easter always moves every year? (2) Why do we call it Easter? Where did this name come from? (3) Why is there always a full moon in the week just before the Easter weekend?

Well, I found answers to these questions by going back in history. It seems that the Emperor Constantine was having a lot of trouble with the Christians who by 325AD comprised something like 30 percent of the Roman Empire.

 So he called all the Christian Bishops in the Empire to the town of Nicea (which is today somewhere in Turkey). This conference is known in history as the Council of Nicea. At this conference Constantine sought to align  Christian events and beliefs (such as the birth and death of Christ) with pagan beliefs, traditions and holidays.. For example  the Council agreed to move the date for the birth of Christ to December 25th which originally marked a pagan festival celebrating the date on which the sun starts to move North after hitting the Southernmost Tropic on December 21st.

But why do we call it 'Easter' and why does it move every year? Again, we have the pagans to thank for this. It seems that on the Friday in the week which the third full moon of the year was always celebrated by the pagans to commemorate the goddess of Spring, Oestre,  (It is from her name that we get the name 'Easter'). In any case, Spring has always symbolized rebirth and reproduction (represented by eggs and rabbit). Constantine argued that it didn't matter when exactly the relevant dates were (birth and death). What was important was the fact of the actual celebration, so he got his way after a lot of argument and  he converted to Christianity. Remember that in those days everybody had to have the same religion as the Emperor. So in one fell swoop Europe (the Roman Empire) became Christian.

And so, it seems that the pagan festivals have lived on although today they represent very different things.

THE COMING ELECTION

 Well, at the time of writing this post there are less than two weeks before the general election. The UNC continues to pull large crowds - bigger than the PNM's. If crowds or crowd size are an indication of poll strength then (unsurprisingly) the UNC will win hands down. But while there are  a lot of people who are completely fed up with the PNM those people are not being persuaded to vote for the UNC - at least not yet! And this election will be based on the total number of seats won and not votes cast.

Part of the reluctance to vote for the UNC can be attributed to race. But this is only a small part of the whole picture - the biggest part can be laid squarely at the feet of the UNC leader. Many rabid UNC supporters will take umbrage at what is being said here. And it is true that a week is a long time in politics - a lot can change. But present performance on both sides of the political divide suggest (a) that there will be a low poll; (b) that the crowd size in the UNC meetings are from UNC supporters who are from 'safe' seats; and (c) that in a low poll in crucial 'swing' seats the PNM will win - even though the UNC will probably win the popular vote in the country.

My guess is that the PNM has probably given up at least one seat in Tobago, but that their polls are showing them with a small majority of the 39 seats in Trinidad. Win, lose or draw expect Tobago to play a large part in the next Government. Certainly, if the two Tobago seats are lost by the PNM, Tobago's importance will only increase as far as governance is concerned.

But what is noticeably missing, especially from the PNM, is what are they going to do to make our lives better. Unfortunately, while the UNC is making promises, nobody knows how they are going to pay for them - and that is a problem. The political and economic policies from both sides are essentially the same except that both sides are saying that " we (whoever 'we' are) can do it better!

And the truth is that by all that is normal the UNC should win  a whopping majority. But things are not ever normal, are they?