Election Primer A - Z: 'N' is for No-Confidence

With the recent aborted no-confidence motion and his subsequent decision to put his mandate to a national vote, Prime Minister Manning has created more questions than answers. Why would anyone with an eleven vote advantage in the lower house seek to pre-empt any such attempt by risking that advantage still has political pundits scratching their heads. But then again there is little that PM Manning does that can be considered conventional, rational or intentional. Perhaps it is that Mr Manning has a better view of the 'end-game' than anyone else - and if so it would be testimony to his near four decade career in the lower house. Or is Mr Manning the beneficiary of some divine ordination or advice.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dCF1DiqJaj8&feature=PlayList&p=16F564287B9E50B4&playnext_from=PL&index=4

Is it that Patos got wind of a possible palace coup that would have led to his removal as PM? This assertion is not as far fetched as it may seem. From where I sit, the PMs chess game failed when he decided to start the screening process before the motion had had its day in Parliament. And in so doing, had telegraphed his intention to remove as many as six MPs from his roster in an upcoming election. (a swing of six would have resulted in the motion being passed). A defeat in parliament in April would have hypothetically saved the nation the expense and hassle of an election, and his party the ignominy of a mid-term loss at the polls. (Question: Would the PNM be facing such a serious threat were Dr Rowley in charge at this time?)

And of course there are the questions of the timing of his decision to call an election. The PM maintains that he had a date in mind since last October and wished to benefit from the element of surprise. Coincidentally, news of a probe into the Hart Issue has a similar date of origin. As for the element of surprise - why wait for ten days after the dissolution of parliament? And more importantly, will the gift those additional ten days prove to be the difference in the end for the People's Partnership should they hold on to win come May 24?

Election Primer A - Z: 'M' is for Manning

Truth be told this issue is quite possibly the biggest reason as to why the PNM loses this election should they in fact lose come May 24.

The Prime Minister has gone from poster-boy to greatest liability in eight years and is the subject of the hate and derision of more than half of the population due in large part to his perceived arrogance, but more pointedly due to his almost blind support for the blunders of his government and of individuals such as Messrs Rao and Hart - who have enjoyed the confidence of the PM in amounts greater than many of the members of his own party.

Mr Manning has surrounded himself with ineffectual yes-men who have helped him to dig himself into an even deeper hole. It amazes me that his political advisors have not themselves seen this - and should they have, how is it that they continue to make Mr Manning the central figure of their campaign?

Battle cries such as 'Patrick goin back' may appeal to the 150,000 or so dyed-in-the-wool PNM supporters who will chant PNM until I die until they quite literally live up to that promise. But it does nothing to help court the large pool of swing and undecided voters who will readily agree that the Prime Minister's cocky air of superiority - his arrogance - is their biggest turn off in this election. Without a command of the majority of these voters, the PNM cannot and will not win.

It is therefore against the best advice, that they continue to erect larger than life billboards featuring full-length images of the PM. They continue to write jingles that make him out to be some sort of Orwellian demi-god. And they continue to push Mr Manning to the forefront in this campaign.

Even long standing supporters of the ruling party such as Selwyn Ryan has gone as far as to endorse the People's Partnership in next week's election. And perhaps his article in today's Express best sums up the national sentiment on Mr Manning and the creeping desire for change:

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl/nart?id=161664125&weba=NWSOpinion

Were it not for Manning the PNM would not be in the mess that they currently find themselves. There would be no need for a 'mid-term' election. And they would not be facing down another defeat at the polls. This could well be the third time (1995, 2000 and now) that Mr Manning leads his party to a loss. Lets hope that in the post-election period that the PNM will follow the UNC and jettison Mr Manning from the party and begins the process of rebuilding sans the baggage of arrogance and allegations of corruption that has plagued it over the past 8 years.

Election Primer A - Z: 'L' is for Legislative Agenda

If one positive could be spared for the PNM's legislative agenda this past decade, it would be that if they exhibited the legislative zeal that they did for the things that mattered to them (the TTRA Bill, Property Tax Ammendment, legislation to allow the PM to fly the coat of arms on his official vehicle) on the issues that truly mattered to the public at large, then this country would be well on its way to being a First World Nation.

Unfortunately, the old adage applies: show me your legislative agenda and I can tell who your friends are. This government has been notoriously weak both in terms of enactment and enforcement. I mean, can they really lay claim to having a legislative agenda?

When we look back at the pieces of legislation that have been laid in parliament, their almost ad-hoc introduction and the lack of entusiasm shown to the OHSA bill, the Child Rights Act and even the delay on the Breathalyser Bill isnt it patently obvious that they dont give a f#$% about the average man on the street.

Do they even really have a plan if they can point to no draft legislation that backs it up? Case in point: the IFC. We've been hearing about the IFC for five years now and the legislation that would facilitate its creation as well as provide for the organizations that are supposedly being targeted by it still does not exist. WTF, You say? Well get in line.

Election Primer A - Z: 'K' is for Kamla

As has become common-place in democracies around the world, election contests have become less about finding Mr or Ms Right and more about finding Mr or Ms Right Now. I would not say that Kamla is the best possible choice for leader of this country but given the crop of individuals given to a public life, she is by far the best choice.

Many of the criticisms leveled against Kamla so far, are similar to the ones made of a certain one term senator from Illinois who opted to take that first step on his personal journey to world change. What she does have going for her is the fact that she is a bright, accomplished woman, who is not the present incumbent, and of course that the people simply want change.

There are no guarantees that Kamla's brand of change will be sustainable or will in the long term prove to be to our benefit. In the end, her participation in our Government will be determined by FAITH.

We really arent ever 100% sure what it is we are getting when we walk out of that polling station on election day. Conservatives who voted for Bush in 2000 had no idea that the world would have changed so dramatically inside of 18 months. Similarly, many of us feel betrayed by the Manning administration not only because its been soft on crime and long winded in execution but because we invested a certain degree of faith in confirming his selection in 2001 in the GE of 2002.

We believed thenthat a change was required to put an end to the spectre of corruption that haunted the then administration and unfortunately he was not the best knight for the job of slaying the dragon - he was the only choice available to us.

And now again in 2010, the tables have turned. Corruption has once again become the rallying cry of the day and we must place our faith in the only option that is available to us at this time. Its the democratic way.

Why reward for non-performance, empty-promises and lies? And should the tides once again shift in the future, then my advice to everyone would be to exercise your franchise once again in the HOPE and in FAITH that all things wrong could be set right.

Election Primer A - Z: 'J' is for Judiciary

http://library2.nalis.gov.tt/infofiles/collect/news3/index/assoc/HASH016c/e5765c7b.dir/6005.jpg

The copy of the op-ed piece above provides a perspective into just one of the ways that the PM and the President may or may not have acted wrongly in the handling of the entire Justice Sharma matter. No matter how you look at it, the PM successfully outfoxed, stone-walled and hounded the Chief Justice out of office over (his) allegations of bias.

Allegations which involved some level of collusion (?) with the Chief Magistrate who himself should at some point be made to respond to accusations of using undue influence in one matter in exchange for political suasion in a financial matter involving him and a land deal valued at $2M.

Even beyond this, the dispensation of justice has been severely hamstrung under a PNM government: court dates are still being made years in advance and the Judiciary as an institution is being routinely starved of funding for the items that it requires to improve and evolve. So convinced is the PM of the inability of the Judiciary to remain independent and unbiased (against the PNM of course) that he has taken to advocating for a Ministry of Justice as part of his Manning Constitution that will all but surely eliminate any semblance of the separation of powers that we have at our disposal or rather to best protect us against the effects of an unchecked executive. Volney matter aside the storm has been long brewing.

So frustrating is the matter in fact that the Chief Justice himself has been given cause to complain about the interference of the Executive:

http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,107527.html

Wake up people, an independent Judiciary is an important pillar of the rights and freedoms that you enjoy. And this Government is trying its hardest to debase its value and importance on the first part and to rob you of it in the next. BEWARE. Vote DEM out!

Election Primer A - Z: 'I' is for International Financial Centre

Perhaps you recall all the grand plans that would have made T&T the Gateway to the Americas? Almost a decade on and we still have neither the capacity (airport, hotel rooms, legislative) nor the demand (are people really knocking down our doors to come here let alone layover on their way to the US or South America?) to make this dream a reality.

What about the desires of our sitting PM that Port of Spain become the home of the Secretariat of the Organization of American States? Remember how the PM stood up publicly and explained that regional suport for this venture was a 'lock' - only for our self same neighbours to turn their backs on us to vote in support of Miami instead?

And then of course for the last five years, Mr Manning has been nuturing a new dream - that of an International Financial Centre in Port of Spain. And to facilitate this his, government has invested Billions of dollars on the Waterfront Centre with a view to situating the IFC there.

A Government owned, Hyatt managed hotel, two towers and a fountain later, this dream has confirmed itself to be just that. To date, there have been no international financial companies that have signalled any intent to expand into T&T let alone become tenants of these buildings. The legislation that has been passed to date has been hodge-podge and inadequate at best. And the towers are with the exception of the Ministry of Energy, empty.

If anything, the IFC presents us with one very important as it relates to the PNM led Government: that although the PM and his advisors are filled to the brim with 'visions' of a developed nation, their ability to execute (especially execute in a timely, economical and beneficial manner) has repeatedly been called in to question.

And other questions to. Why wait until after a decision has been made by the executive to solicit the views of a wider population as has been the case with the smelter, the rapid rail and the new constitution? Why can this Government never account for every dollar that is spent in every one of its projects? Why the routine cost-overruns? Why do project time-lines get thrown out the window? Why all the unused office space in the IFC and the Government Campus yet the Government is not only the largest tenant in Trinidad & Tobago - but the actual sqare footage being let has increased exponentially in spite of this building thrust.

In the end, it would appear that we, the taxayers of this country, have been led down a path and we have been introduced to the briar path. All that remains is for those who govern us to throw us in. It is in our power and in our best interest to voice the above questions and more importantly to demand accountability. And failing a satisfactory response - to make a wontonly wasteful government pay the ultimate price for their failure to execute and execute well.

Election Primer A - Z: 'H' is for Home Mortgage Bank

What do you call it when the sitting Chairman of a state-owned company takes the decision to sell $110M worth of shares in that company to himself? And what do you call it when that individual is also the Treasurer of the ruling party?

And even though it has been reported that neither the Government nor the Central Bank has read much wrong in what Mr Monteil has done, to any impartial bystander this is a clear case of the immoral, self-serving actions that has characterized the present administration.

To recap, while he was the Chairman of HM, the Financial Controller of CL Financial and Onwer of Stonestreet Holdings, he convinced the other board members of the HMB to allow him via Stonestreet to purchase CL's 43.8% shareholding of the HMB for the sum of $110M. Though deemed a legal transfer, Mr Monteil was ultimately made to reverse the transaction.

A partial chronology of the unsavory issue is available here:

http://www.newsday.co.tt/politics/0,63460.html

As a follow up, it was reported a month ago that Mr Monteil was being sued by CLICO Investment Bank (an organization he was also connected to as Financial Director) for several breaches of company law and common-law and fiduciary duties, including:

…breach of his duty under the Companies Act to, as CIB director and chairman, “act honestly and in good faith with a view to the best interest of the company” and “to exercise the care, diligence and skill that a reasonably prudent person would exercise in comparable circumstances”;

…breach of fiduciary duties to avoid conflicts of interest, to act honestly and in good faith and in the CIB’s best interests and to have loyalty to the company;

…breach of a duty not to self-deal.

In brief, he 'borrowed' $78M from CIB to finance the failed deal and this apparently has not been yet repaid.

Should you be unconvinced by the above, there is also the case of the state purchase of land that belonged to Mr Monteil for TT$4M:

http://www.newsday.co.tt/news/0,103384.html

Today, Mr Monteil is the former Financial Controller of CL Financial and former Treasurer of the People's National Movement. But he remains deeply rooted to the party and to its leader, as he is the man who is also responsible for first introducing the PM to the most important Canadian to ever visit our shores: Mr Calder Hart.