THE LOST OPPOSITION OF TRINIDAD & TOBAGO

 Keith Rowley's government has been a complete failure almost from the word 'go'. But the opposition UNC hasn't offered a convincing alternative. While it can be argued with justification that Rowley's PNM government has had a lot of bad luck come its way (the fall in oil prices, the COVID 19 pandemic, etc.), the truth is that their handling of the various crises that hit them have been so badly botched that most ugly and what should be most unnecessary suspicions have arisen. Take for example, the A&V oil scandal. The truth is that most people believe that this was or is a cover up of mammoth proportions and that somebody somewhere took a huge bribe. Is this true? Certainly, there is no clear cut evidence showing that it is, but a lot of people will say 'hey, if it walks like a duck, quacks like a duck and looks like a duck you are going to have to prove to me that it is really just a pussy cat'. And Dr. Rowley has admitted that the head of that company is a good friend. Curry duck anyone?

Then there has been the Government's handling of the pandemic. Certainly (according to the Government) they have been reporting recently the number of COVID cases and deaths, but was this so from the beginning? We didn't cancel Carnival 2020 and then we had a general election in August 2020. Only later the general election did we start to get reports about so many people being sick with the virus and then so many people having to go to hospital and that the hospitals were being overwhelmed and so on. But why does a right thinking person get the impression th we weren't told the truth from the beginning and why is the Minister of Health surprised to discover that a lot of people simply don't believe a thing that he says? Because, if you check back between February and August of last year you will find that this virus was certainly not on the Government's front burner - or it didn't appear to be. And Mr. Deyalsingh cannot be surprised if people believe him to be incompetent.

Then you have the terrible imbroglio with the Police Service Commission (PSC) which is still going on. Apparently some high up person went to see the President about this problem. But nobody seems to know who that person was nor what was discussed. And all the while you have Gary Griffith sitting on the side lines like a leopard waiting to pounce. And there are many, many other questions coming out of this.  But it is the latest scandal and it is still occupying the front pages, so there is probably a lot more to come.

There is really only space to highlight these three matters. Each one could take a whole book to discuss thoroughly and to present possible solutions and/or theories. Certainly, these are not the only scandals that we should be concerned about. 

But the point here is that by all that is normal the Opposition UNC should be riding high in the polls and they are not. Why? Maybe it is because they do not attack the Government with anything remotely resembling credibility nor do they deal frontally with issues (such as the radical foreign exchange shortage) with anything that offers hope to a beleaguered and battered population as to how they might fix things. It is almost as if they are saying 'vote for us. We can do better than these characters. Certainly, we can't do worse!'

They say that a country gets the government that it deserves. But I really feel that we've been hit with a double whammy:  a completely awful Government and a hopeless Opposition.  We don't deserve the two together.

TO VACCINATE OR NOT TO VACCINATE (that is the question -with apologies to Shakespeare)

 Full disclosure: I was one of those who had vaccine hesitancy. Frankly, I felt that we weren't being told the truth by ANYBODY - including those who are in authority abroad. And, my basic question -why- simply was not being answered.  Or, not answered in a way that to me made sense. So, I sat on my decision to vaccinate or not and waited until I could be satisfied one way or another. After all, the best advice always is 'when in doubt, don't'! And I wasn't about to put anything in my body that I wasn't sure about. 

So? What changed? The truth is absolutely nothing. But after reviewing time and again all the arguments both for and against, I came to the conclusion that perhaps the safer way to go was indeed to vaccinate. I had spoken to a lot of doctors - all of whom said yes, vaccinate. I had also read all the arguments both for and against vaccinating and had noticed that every argument that I could find against vaccination was based either on anecdotal evidence or on so-called 'reports' that I could not find anywhere else other than from the persons who had sent them to me but the arguments in favour were almost always backed up by science.

Put another way, the evidence that the vaccines were/are safe greatly outweighed the evidence that they were/are not. Now, I am fully aware that an argument that I find compelling is not one that you might consider in that regard. In other words, for an argument to convince the other person, it must be presented in such a manner that he/she finds compelling, not what the proponent of the argument believes to be the truth. I am also aware that if you cannot say something in one sentence then you cannot say it at all. You may need a paragraph, a chapter or even a whole book to explain your sentence, butif you cannot make your point in one sentence then you cannot say it at all.

So in one sentence, my point is that all the scientific evidence (to me) points to the fact that it appears safer to get the vaccine than not to get it and that the stories (like those of Nicki Minaj about swollen testicles, etc.) ought to be discarded unless and until scientific evidence is produced that proves the point. You have every right to disagree with me on this. After all, it is your body! And for the record, this does not mean that I agree with the T&T Government's response and how it has handled this crisis. But that's another story.

AN OPEN LETTER TO THE MINISTER OF ENERGY

Dear Mr. Young,

 In recent times a story started on social media which (rather surprisingly because it was potentially very critical of the Government) found its way into the main stream media. Basically the report was that NGC (the National Gas Company) had lost or was about to lose more than $400 million and that the company's board of directors had asked for, and received, a full indemnification of this loss/potential loss from The Government (GORTT).

You will not be surprised therefore when I tell you that this report stirred up a heck of a lot of questions - none of which have been answered to date except for a very bland statement that talks were on-going and the matter was at a very sensitive stage. Translation: 'we ain't sayin' nothing at the moment for reasons that we are not prepared to give other than confidentiality'.

Somebody has forwarded to me  today a press release of yesterday's date supposedly made by you, our erstwhile Minister of Energy, Stuart R. Young (we mustn't forget the 'R' - it makes you seem more important - and yes, I do know that it is an initial probably for your middle name - but it does seem more than a little pretentious.). In this press release you say that any troubles the NGC is having was caused by the Kamla regime (why am I so surprised?) and  that there has been a 'mis-characterization (sic) of information that  was leaked in a surreptitious manner[and] was not surprising and was expected.' You, Mr. Minister, go on to say that 'at the appropriate time we will provide the accurate information ...' But, you say, 'due to the current stage of discussions and the sensitive negotiations that time is not now.' Of course, there is no hint of when 'the appropriate time' will be.

You then take a not unexpected swipe at the opposition (after all the best defence is always offence) and re-affirm your faith in the NGC board and the President of NGC.

To which I say, 'okay. Let's take the honourable gentleman (you) at his word, for he would never lie to us, would he?' But a whole set of questions arise: The first is, Mr. Minister, do you have any idea when the issues may be resolved and we can learn the whole truth? A week? A month? A year? Indefinitely? If the last, then when would be a good time to raise this matter again? a week? A month? A year? Because, I'm sure that you will agree that the possible loss of $400 million plus is much to serious to be left alone indefinitely and we (the general public) deserve to know what in the name of heaven is going on. Put another way, if tomorrow the shoe is on the other foot and you and your party form the Opposition would you be prepared to accept such an answer? (Forgive me if I say that I'm sure that you wouldn't.)

Then I think that  while you can confirm or deny (as the case may be) those parts of the report that are true and those that are not, the real question is will you? You see, Mr. Minister, most people believe that there has been/will be a huge loss. and most people are looking for answers - which (for the sake of argument - I am prepared to concede may not be available right now. But 'right now' cannot mean never and there has to be some sort of reporting/accounting in the reasonably foreseeable future.

Put another way, has the NGC lost a bucket load of money or is it in danger of losing it?

We can't operate on the old 'trust me. I will never do anything wrong' line. All of the voters in this country are legal adults. We deserve to be treated as such. And the deflecting of arguments by attacking those that dare to question you just ain't working any more. We need the truth! Now!

Yours faithfully,

Robin A.G. Montano

(As I have two middle names and on the off chance that it is not pretentious - I think it is - I have signed off like you but with my two middle initials.)

THE S.O.E EXTENSION

 For most people, their lives don't change when a new government takes power. Let me put that another way: their lives don't change noticeably. They still have to go to work, their day-to-day problems still exist and the only noticeable changes are the faces of the new ministers on television. When the government doesn't change then even this small change in the faces of the ministers (X is moved to Y Ministry and Z is brought in to replace him/her) is hardly noticeable.

I guess what I'm trying to say is that except for a very, very small minority, life goes on much as it did before.

However, (you knew a 'but' was coming, didn't you?) all this changes when some sort of crisis hits (a war,  a crash of the economy, a pandemic, etc.). Then people start to look more carefully at who they voted for and to think about whether or not the 'other side' might have managed the crisis better. The longer the crisis goes on and the more people that are adversely affected by it the more unpopular the regime will become.

Sometimes the government makes the wrong decisions, either through inadvertence or because of incompetence, but whatever the reason you will never get a politician admitting that he/she made a mistake. Instead they will jump through hoops to try and prove that it (whatever 'it' is) was the fault of others, especially their political enemies whom they had defeated at the polls.

It has always been a source of great wonder for me as to why, when things have not gone according to plan, that we as an electorate do not hold the government's feet to the proverbial fire and insist on getting answers to the hard questions that are not asked - much less answered. Instead, if you have voted for X party and they are in power, you usually accept blindly whatever stories they might tell. And, of course, if you voted for Y party you will believe even the most outrageous things and call the X party dishonest and corrupt. But you ain't gonna get answers to those pressing questions that need to be answered.

Don't believe me? Check out the political news over the last 10 years. Except for the names and a few other changes the stories are the same. For example, a young lady called Reshmi Ramnarine gets appointed to a high level post for which she obviously had no experience for. And a few days ago another very young lady got appointed as this country's ambassador to China. I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that she has absolutely no diplomatic experience, but she is now our country's ambassador to China - a VERY important diplomatic post. It is interesting that the Opposition hasn't made s similar fuss as was made over Ms. Ramnarine's appointment. But that is another story again.

But (and you knew that there had to be another 'but') we are now in the middle of a huge health crisis with this COVID-19 pandemic. Apart from the dangers to the personal health of persons the present Government's response has effectively decimated the economy. There was a debate in Parliament a few days ago on whether a State of Emergency (SOE) (first introduced at the beginning of May) should be extended to the end of November. As a concerned citizen I had hoped that both the Government AND the Opposition would have used the opportunity to educate the population as to the actual science and whether or not it is still necessary to have an SOE,  for example, whether or not it is still necessary to keep in person dining banned in restaurants, and so on. I had hoped that whatever their political leanings BOTH sides would realize that the population is reeling under the threat of this virus and people have lost/ are losing their jobs as a result. On top of that more than a thousand people are reported to have died. So to talk about it being serious is more than mere hyperbole.

Put another way, what I saw in Parliament was a lot of 'grandstanding' on both sides with nobody seemingly concerned about the citizens who are catching hell. The Government's attitude seemed to be 'this is what we are doing and if you don't like it get to hell out of here'. And the Opposition's stance was 'we don't like it, you haven't convinced us, but we are going to play it safe and abstain so if by chance what you are doing actually works then we can say that we didn't vote for the extension because you didn't answer our questions. And if it doesn't work then we can say that we told you that it wouldn't but you didn't listen.'

And you wonder why we are in the state that we are in?

ARE WE APPROACHING FAILED STATE STATUS - OR HAVE WE ALREADY REACHED THERE?

This is a serious question. In thinking about it I took note of the following:

- We have been relegated effectively to just above junk bond status by the world renowned body, Standard & Poors. Oh, the erstwhile Minister of Finance tried to put a spin on the S&P report but a plethora of respected economists basically told him that he was talking through his  ..., well, not his mouth! So he shut up!

- Unemployment is rising uncontrollably. People are literally out of work and have absolutely no hope of getting a job anytime soon. It is most interesting that reliable figures are not being published on this (or indeed, on anything else!). I simply can't imagine how people at the bottom of the economic pile are surviving.

- One gets an impression that the Prime Minister simply doesn't have a clue as to how to deal with the economic situation. This may very well not be so, but in politics image is everything and the image is one of a leader and his team of ministers floundering hopelessly and helplessly getting fat on their generous salaries and 'perks' while the people are catching hell.

- Prices are rising - not so slowly, but inexorably. We don't know when this will end, or indeed if it ever will! But the reality is that prices are rising - especially at the grocery - and rising faster rather than slower.

- Foreign exchange is scarce and hard to come by. If a person is lucky enough to have a few US dollars in his bank account he simply can't get it out. First of all, he has to "order' it and then he will probably be told he can only get a portion of it in cash.

- There is now open speculation that there will be marches and/or riots when the existing State of Emergency (SOE) comes to an end on the 30th August.  If the Government manages to get the Opposition to support an extension of the SOE then there is open speculation that there will be serious social unrest. Either way, trouble with a capital "T" is coming - and soon!

- Crime is rising. Need I say more?

I could go on, but surely you get the point. People are hurting and there is little trust that we are being told the truth - about anything Certainly, I am one of those who believes that we have been lied to for the longest while. There is too much that simply didn't or doesn't make sense. And the fact is that when somebody is telling you something that you don't understand, 98 percent of the time it is because he doesn't WANT you to understand; two percent of the time it is because HE doesn't understand what he is talking about.

No. I can't say that we are yet a failed state, but if we continue on the path that we are currently on, we most certainly will become one very soon.

WHAT WOULD YOU DO?

Let's say that you have a prosperous business that is making you a million dollars a year. But you discover/believe that the manger is stealing a hundred thousand dollars from it so you fire him. Then you hire another manager, but this one is so totally incompetent that instead of making a profit he actually is losing a million dollars a year. Then, although you have no justiciable evidence you have good reason to believe that your new manager is also stealing a hundred thousand a year from you. In other words you are way in the hole by more than a million dollars! Now, what do you do?

Obviously you get rid of the second manager. But the problem here is that the only other available manager is the first one whom you fired because you thought he was stealing from you. So? What do you do? Here are the stark choices facing you: (1) you keep the first manager because you believe that he is at least more honest than the first; (2) you fire the second manager, hold your nose and rehire the the first manager knowing full well that he will steal from you again - but at least (you reason) he will put you back in profit; (3) you say to hell with both of them and look for a third manager who you believe/hope will not steal - although at the moment there is no one on the horizon in whom you can place your trust. But time is working against you. You can't take too long to take a decision.

And that, my dear friends, except for the names and a few other changes, is the conundrum that we find ourselves in. So? I ask you: given the choices available, quite seriously, what would you do? Let's not argue about it. Let's answer this hypothetical question.

"WHEN IT COMES TO PINNING BLAME - PIN THE TAIL ON THE DONKEYS"

 The tile of this post is a quote from the American Senator Mitt Romney. When you think about it, you will realize that this piece of advice is followed to the letter by our local politicians. We have on the one hand, the erstwhile Leader of the Opposition criticizing, for example, the Prime Minister's COVID advisers and on the other hand the Prime Minister dissembling to the point where it is almost impossible to ascertain exactly where the truth with him ends and the lies begin. Often one is left with the impression that he didn't say something earlier that was in direct contradiction to what he might be saying now, when in fact that is exactly what he is doing. And yet, he not only gets away with it, but continues to get away with it. Unbelievable!

I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm in a state of despair over the state of affairs in Trinidad & Tobago. On the one hand it is absolutely clear that we haven't been told the truth about this virus from the beginning (and I'm talking about from February last year). On the other side of the coin the Opposition really seems to be totally incompetent and completely incapable of doing anything other than talking to its supporters who will vote for them no matter what. Then on the third side of the coin (and, yes, I know that a coin only has two sides) we find ourselves with persons who are supposed to be independent but clearly aren't - like the Speaker of the House who really is an absolute disgrace and doesn't even seem to try to be even handed any more. (I guess that she has decided that it really doesn't matter and that nobody gives a damn what she says or does so long as she pleases her boss, the Prime Minister. The problem, of course, is that her boss is really the people of T&T, but then they appoint her in a very indirect way and she has decided to pay more attention to the real decision maker - the Prime Minister - and what he wants.) And the sad truth is that she just happens to be one of the more visible examples of the wrong person in the wrong job.

Perhaps in about fifty or so years from now we will break out of this racial voting. Apart from the fact that I can barely hold by breath for fifty seconds let alone fifty years, I certainly don't expect this pattern to break any time soon. Instead I see it continuing for a very, very long time.

But we have a habit of blaming the 'other' side (whoever the 'other' one may be) and completely ignoring the faults on 'our' side. If you support either the PNM or the UNC your answer will usually be something like "well, they (the 'other' side) are worse. They 'tief' more, they don't do what is necessary and we are (or would be) better off with 'our' people in charge." And there you have it, folks! How do you argue with that? My father used to say "a man convinced against his will, is of the same opinion still".

But one thing is certain, you will very, very, very rarely get a supporter of one side saying that he/she thinks that the country would be better off with a third party. Instead, he/she will point out the two rather spectacular failures of the two attempts at a third force and will argue that there is all the evidence that you need as to why it won't work. And you know what? They may well be right! Isn't that sad, if they are? In the meantime, at least we have plenty of donkeys to pin tails on!

ON THE REAL JOB OF AN OPPOSTION

 

I will readily confess that I have paid little or no attention to what I will call in this post 'the Tobago fracas', so much so that when a good friend asked me whether a special majority was needed I wrongly told him 'no' that it could be passed by an ordinary or simple majority.

I have no intention of going into the 'whys and wherefores' of the proposed legislation. But (like a lot of other people) I am interested in the politics. It seems to me that Dr. Rowley has once again outmaneuvered the erstwhile leader of the Opposition and that he really couldn't care less if the legislation fails or not. If he had been really interested in passing this legislation there would and should have been a lot more consultation. The fact that there wasn't speaks volumes for the game being played.

 If I had been asked (which happens as often as snow falls in Trinidad) I would have had my first speaker make a very short speech in the parliament. He/she would have said  that the Opposition intended to give the Government enough votes to pass the legislation but was requesting that the Government go on the record as to exactly what benefits the COUNTRY would get. In other words, was the legislation narrow in that only Tobago would benefit or was it broad enough so that the entire country would benefit? Then if or when things go wrong we will know who to blame. 

Then my speaker would have sat down and I would have asked no one else on my side to speak.

You see, we suffer a problem in this little country of ours when we refer to the Opposition as 'the opposition'. Everybody assumes that the real job of the Opposition is to oppose anything and everything that the Government of the day brings to the Parliament. That's not the job of the Opposition at all! In fact a better (though more cumbersome) title for the Opposition might be 'the Alternative Government'.  Then we might more clearly understand that their job is to provide another alternative - a better or different way from doing whatever is being proposed. Because at the end of the day "the Opposition will have its ay, and the Government will have its way" (to quote former Speaker Hector Maclean).

Look: it is either we all want a better country for EVERYBODY or we just want a better country for a select few. But I must confess that I have a very sad feeling in the pit of my stomach that there are very few of our present Parliamentarians who I believe are there genuinely to make life better for the people. I would give anything to be wrong on this and if thereis anybody out there who can name  a current Parliamentarian that he/she feels or believes is genuinely thereto make life better for the people then I invite you genuinely to name that person or persons. As for me, well dreamer that I am, I genuinely want a better country for everybody. Doesn't look that we'll get it any time soon though. 

HOW TO CREATE A DICTATORSHIP

 For some time now I have had the most uncomfortable feeling that:

(a) We aren't being told the truth about anything;

(b) The mainstream media is in cahoots with the Government and that it/they will do almost anything to protect the Government;

(c) The Government simply doesn't have a clue how to solve our problems.

Let's start with the second one first: there are most unnecessary and disturbing rumours that certain journalists, namely Urvashi Tewarie-Roopnarine and Adesh Samaroo have beens suspended/ fired/ sidelined from their jobs because they had the temerity to ask the Health Minister certain uncomfortable questions. Also, that the host of TV-6's 'Morning Edition', Fazeer Mohammed, has also been sidelined basically because he was/is too critical of the Government. Is any of  this true? Because if any of it is true this will be of great concern. Essentially it will mean that there are some very dark forces at play and that the so-called "independent" press is deep inside the pockets of the Government. You don't have to be a genius to understand that.

What also is of concern is that all of the journalists allegedly sidelined are Indian. If it is true that they have been sidelined then the very ugly suspicion of racism will come to the fore.

Unfortunately, the longer this goes on the more difficult it will be to deny and the more the perception of race will raise its ugly head. We simply cannot afford things like this to happen. If the journalists have been suspended then this is legitimate news and we ought to be told why. If they haven't, then equally, there has to be some sort of explanation that can put to bed these ugly and unnecessary rumours. We simply cannot afford for rumours like this to take hold. 

As for the first and third points, well I have already written what feels like a million words on the two issues. Readers will know where I stand on them.

JOURNALISM 101

 To be a good journalist you have not only to ask the questions that politicians (and others) would prefer to ignore, but you also have to show when the person being questioned is dissembling (i.e., lying) and put forward reasonable theories for the lies. You also have to leave your political allegiances at the door and report everything as honestly as you possibly can  As C.P. Scott said in the Manchester Guardian in 1926 "comment is free but facts are sacred".

So here are some questions that either haven't been asked or to which there has been no clear reporting of the answers:

1. When exactly were the candlelight vigils held? Were they at least 14 days before the spike in Covid-19 cases began? Put another way, when was the last candlelight vigil?

2. How long does it take to be tested positive after being exposed to the virus?

3.How many days after the Easter weekend did the current spike begin?

4. How much exactly are we paying China for the Sinopharm vaccines?

5. Countries like Canada are NOT accepting vaccinations from the Sinopharm vaccine. What exactly will this mean for a person who has got the Sinopharm vaccine but needs to go to, e.g., Canada? Will he/she have to get re-vaccinated with a vaccine approved by the other country? What happens if a person is vaccinated by different vaccines?

6.Why does the death rate seem to be still climbing although we have been in lockdown for what feels like forever?

7. Why are citizens still being locked out from their own country? What exactly is the criteria to be allowed to come home? (This question could also be asked another way: what is the criteria used for some people, e.g., the Prime Minister's and Attorney General's children, to be allowed to come home?)

8. Why are public utilities (e.g., T&TEC) still sending out bills and threatening disconnection? 

9.Why exactly has the Prime Minister failed to show up in Parliament to answer questions? Why was he given permission to skip the sitting of Parliament on Wednesday 16th June? 

10. Why was it considered necessary to have an extended curfew for the weekend of 19th and 20th June?

11. Who or what were the Farmers Associations that the Government said that it approached to discuss the extended curfew for 19th/20th June? There are several who are reported as saying that they were never approached.

12. How many people -exactly- are now out of work and have no income coming in?

 There are many other questions. Indeed, they can go on for a lllooonnnnggg time. But hopefully, the point is made. We are simply NOT being served by the mainstream media. And the question is why? Is there a political agenda? If so, shouldn't they say that they are biased?

DISTRIBUTING THE WEALTH

Although the big news this week is the royal screw up with the distribution of vacinnes to the elderly, I think that it can best be summed up by saying that the Minister of Health should either resign or be fired. He can't say that 'it wasn't my fault'. If it had gone well wouldn't he be claiming credit? He can't have it both ways  and it is time that we in this little country of ours start to call a spade a spade and to hold people accountable. It's either we do that or we continue to accept third and fourth world standards  and give up all hopes of a better, fairer society.

But this latest screw-up by the Minister of Health is simply another distraction from the real issue, which in one word is economics.

Labour's share of the nation's income has been falling for a long time now. We see it and we feel it and we see wealth slowly (and not so slowly) increasingly falling into the outstretched hands of a few as opposed to the many. When we talk about economic prosperity, when that prosperity is accruing to -everyone or just an elite few - that should increasingly become a big part of the debate.

What is taking place now is simply a continuation of the Thatcher/Reagan trickle down theory from the eighties, i.e., that if you let rich people get richer some of that wealth will trickle down to the masses.

I disagreed then with that theory and I am sorry to say that subsequent events have events have justified my skepticism. We need to start thinking very seriously about how we want to distribute the wealth that our country generates and exactly how we are going to do it. Because it is clear that the wealth of our country is NOT being distributed in anything approaching an equitable manner.

THE JOB OF A PRESIDING OFFICER IN PARLIAMENT

 Recently, the Speaker of the House of Representatives has been thrust back into the limelight with her latest ruling  that effectively protected the Attorney General and prevented the country from learning where, to whom and how much money was paid by the State to lawyers hired by the Government  to deal with the myriad legal matters that need to be dealt with every day. In essence, the Attorney General's argument was that some of the information being requested ought not to be divulged because of privacy and other issues.

The only problem here with the arguments raised by the Attorney General and endorsed by the Speaker was that in October 2016 the same Attorney General with the same Speaker in the chair gleefully went to town with details of how much his (UNC) predecessor had spent on lawyers and even went so far as to give complete details of the amount of fees paid to each lawyer. Now that the shoe is on the other foot it seems that the exact same type of information being requested is not to be allowed and the Speaker (who has the final say in these matters) appears to be only too happy to side with the Government.

The other problem is that everybody remembers when at the end of January 2020 a UNC Parliamentarian (Dr. Tim Gopeesingh) tried and failed to have a motion to discuss the looming COVID pandemic heard as a definite matter of urgent public importance. The Speaker said that in her opinion the matter did not qualify; in other words, there was nothing urgent for the Parliament to discuss. Of course, subsequent events have proven how tragically wrong she was! 

Traditionally a Speaker is supposed to be above partisan politics and  is there to guide the deliberations of the House in a fair and equitable manner, She/he is NOT there to protect a Government from any thing that the Government may or may not want to do. But one gets the most unfortunate impression that that is exactly how Mrs. Annisette-George (the current Speaker) sees her role. Certainly, her performance as Speaker has given rise to multiple impressions and accusations of bias.

As the presiding officer the Speaker is the interpreter of the rules and procedures of the House, and has the authority to control and regulate the course of debate and to maintain order.  But when the general population gets the overwhelming impression that the Speaker is a mere puppet and will do anything that the Government wants, our democracy is in trouble. Because when the PNM loses (and it will one of these days) and the UNC put in an obviously biased presiding officer it will not be good enough nor will it be acceptable for them to say to the PNM "well all yuh did it". And that is exactly what they will say.

No. This nonsense must stop, and stop now. Mrs. Annisette-George has debased her position as Speaker and for the sake of our little democracy she ought to be replaced immediately with a more neutral Speaker. Don't do it and see what happens with this little democracy of ours. And this has nothing to do with PNM/UNC politics but everything to do with OUR country. There are many ways to arrive at the door of a dictatorship. One of the ways is to have a biased presiding officer in the House of Representatives - and we simply cannot afford that.

                                                      

TROUBLE IS COMING

 Are we heading for social unrest?  All the signs seem to suggest that we are. People are losing their jobs left, right and centre, and there are (admittedly rather muted) reports that people are going hungry. I have already said that I don't think that we have been told the truth about anything. Certainly, we have been misled about the COVID pandemic and there is a lot that doesn't make sense. For example, why was it such a big deal if somebody had imported some Pfizer vaccines into the country? Was it because the only organization that can give permission to import a vaccine is the Government and it had given no such permission to anybody? Okay. One can see the sense in such an injunction, but assuming that the report was true (it turned out to be fake news) was there any real reason for the rather obvious anger from the authorities about this? Surely, any action that helps defeat this virus ought to be welcomed? Or was there another reason why the authorities were so obviously upset? If so, what is/was the reason?

Put another way, shouldn't any action that can help defeat the virus be welcomed?

And back to social unrest. There is an almost surreal calm in the country right now. Everything seems to be quiet and people are going about their business as best they can. But things are tough. Restaurants are closed and people are out of work. So? Will there be rioting? If so, when? Will there be some sort of trigger that just lights the proverbial match to a very tense situation? If not, then do you expect that things will just gradually deteriorate until the people can't take it any more? But, things are quiet and by and large (except for the gangs) the population is dealing with the current adversities with a rather admirable stoicism. 

But life is not static and the population will not accept many more platitudes. It has been my experience that people will generally accept hard times IF (a) they are given some credible form of hope that their leaders can and will get them out of the trouble that they are in AND (b) the people are told the truth.

I am very, very concerned that we are not being told the truth and that no hope of a better tomorrow is being offered by our leaders. In the circumstances, my advice to you is to watch out. Trouble is coming.

IS IT UNREASONABLE TO ASK FOR COGENT EXPLANATIONS THAT ARE BACKED UP BY PROVABLE FACTS?

 

Perhaps the most hyperbolic narratives we've seen over the last year are the endless portrayals that the Government is doing a good job in handling the COVID crisis. It started with some little known company in England trading on the fact that it was out of Oxford, home to one of the most prestigious and well respected universities in the world, although research showed that it had absolutely no connection whatsoever with the university, saying that we were number one in the world in our handling of the then rapidly burgeoning pandemic. We don't hear anything about this now, do we? Interesting, don't you think? Was this all a publicity stunt?

But the uncritical reporting has continued. Ministerial as well as Prime Ministerial press conferences are held and the hard questions are never asked - or at least, they are never reported on. In a rational world journalists would give at least as much attention to the facts as well as Government pronouncements and not allow seemingly inconvenient facts to just be dropped. For example, why exactly did Delci Rodriguez come here a year ago? Was it really to discuss a joint response to the pandemic? There are very ugly and unsubstantiated rumors that it had to do with sanctions busting. Is there any truth to this?  Would it not be important to put this to bed one way or the other? If it was about a joint response to COVID what was the result? What is the agreed joint response? And why was this not reported?

If the media don't (or won't) report what is going on, should we really be surprised that people resort to flights of alleged fantasy? Is it really unreasonable for people to question how photographs of the unapproved Chinese vaccine SINOVAC being off loaded from a Chinese plane in Toronto were really being transshipped elsewhere when we are not told where? Is it unreasonable to question when there are NO  photographs of the approved Sinopharm vaccines arriving in Trinidad? And if such photos are now made available would it be unreasonable to believe that they were 'photo shopped'? Is it unreasonable to question the Government about this? Is it unreasonable to require an answer to this?

But the media seem unable or unwilling to pick up on this story. Is it unreasonable to ask why? Is there some monstrous conspiracy afoot? No matter how well meaning we fantasize or want the Government and the media to be, what do we really know? I mean REALLY know? Why are seemingly straight forward questions never answered or, if they are, the answers are simply clever (and not so clever) deflections? Is it unreasonable to ask why?

THE BIG LIE

 The Big Lie is everything right now and the mainstream print media seems to be doing its level best to continue to metastasize it and to paper over any criticisms that might legitimately arise over the Government's handling of this Covid crisis.

For example, I haven't met a Trinidadian (or Tobagonian for that matter) who believes that Prime Minister Rowley had tested positive for Covid. The absolute dearth of information was palpable. For example, if he did test positive who was the person that administered the test and why? Was it administered because he was due to get the vaccine the next day or was he feeling ill? If he was not feeling ill then did he feel ill at any time? If so, when?

Dr. Rowley is over 70 and has several comorbidities. It would be most unusual for such a person who was tested positive not to have some symptoms at least or to feel ill. So? Did he? If so, when? And who was the attending physician? After all, Dr. Rowley is no ordinary person, but is the Prime Minister of Trinidad & Tobago. His health and well being is (and ought to be) of vital concern to the country. And yet, we were told nothing more except that he tested positive, was in quarantine and there were 35 other people affected. Who were these 35 other people? Were they all tested and quarantined? If so, when and where?

Then we have the question of the Brazilian variant supposedly brought here by an illegal immigrant. Do we know who this immigrant is/was? If so, when did we find him/her? What did we do about it?

Then we are told that this virus is spiking, but many health professionals are telling their friends that the situation is much worse than is being reported. So/ Why? What are the newspapers doing about it? Instead of simply parroting unquestioningly whatever they are being fed by the authorities, what are they doing to find out the truth? It can't be that hard to find out. And yet, it seems to be. If you want to know what the Government wants you to think or believe simply read the newspapers. If you want to know what is really going on you will have to do a lot of digging.

Look for example at the question of the vaccines coming to the country. Now we are being told that we are getting a huge quantity of the Chinese vaccine which has been approved by the WHO. Well that's great! But is it true that the Chinese vaccine is not as effective as the other vaccines (Astra Zeneca, etc.)? If so, are we buying second or even third best? The question has relevance because one (unfortunately) remembers Dr. Rowley rather angrily dismissing the Indian offer of free vaccines saying that we weren't beggars. (Although nothing stopped him apparently from later asking President Biden for help - but I guess that wasn't begging!)

When the mainstream media so blatantly abdicates its responsibilities to keep the general population properly informed but appears to help the Government in covering up it's missteps then we are in serious trouble. There is more - a lot more! But hopefully the point is made. 

And we should all be aware that history has proven that a country never gets out of trouble when the truth continues to be a victim.