Ridiculous and malicious statement over Sudama

THE EDITOR: I am writing in response to a letter by one Martin Maharaj in your newspaper of February 16. Indeed he is entitled to his opinion about the dual role of Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj in the politics of the country. However, some of the statements in his letter are quite misinformed and misconceived. He asks the question where are Trevor Sudama and Ralph Maraj. It is common knowledge that Ralph, the prodigal son, has gone back home to the PNM. If Martin Maharaj is so knowledgable about the politics of the UNC, he should enquire as to who brought Ralph Maraj into the UNC in 1995, handed him a safe seat (Naparima) on a platter and gave him a high profile Ministry. If we are in the blame game, we must go further and prior to the events of 2001.

With regard to Trevor Sudama, it seems that Martin Maharaj harbours a deep antagonism against this gentleman. His comment that it was “Sudama who let the PNM loose on the population in 2001” is ridiculous and malicious. His only sin is speaking to the PNM, never collaborating with them. He is one representative who has efficiently and conscientiously served not only the people of Oropouche but the whole of Trinidad and Tobago and stood firm in his integrity since he entered politics in 1966 with the Workers and Farmers party together with Basdeo Panday. Martin Maharaj states that “Sudama was once the vocal critic of PNM racial discrimination”. If he reads the Sunday Newsday he should know that Sudama continues to attack the PNM for racial discrimination among other things. He has raised and has continued to raise his voice against discrimination against whoever it is directed. He has been a person who has always championed the cause of the less fortunate and marginalised. He will always be a man of principle who opposes what is wrong.  Furthermore in his Sunday Newsday column he presents insights, ideas and recommendations for promoting good governance, equity and balanced development.

I humbly submit that the UNC lost its way and was operating in a self-destruct mode. Sudama, as a founding member, was forced to raise his voice against what was happening to the Party. No middle way could be found and the confrontation within the party led to his dismissal. There was no need for an election to be called in 2001. The vote which the UNC Government lost in the House of Representatives was on a minor issue. There was no attempt at reconciliation either before or after the dismissals of Ramesh, Ralph and Trevor. There was always the risk of PNM getting into power if elections were hastily called. But Mr. Panday was badly advised by the more opportunistic elements of the parasitic oligarchy and the brainless sycophants who surrounded him.

Even after the 18-18 tie result, there was no need for Mr. Panday to hug up Manning and ask Robinson to choose the Prime Minister. Panday was the incumbent, did not lose the election and the UNC secured more votes than the PNM. Who really then was responsible for letting the PNM loose on the population? It is truly unfortunate that persons of Martin Maharaj’s ilk and other UNC party fanatics still persist in the “blame game” as to who and what caused the UNC to be out of office. The challenge at the moment is for the UNC and all other anti-PNM elements to achieve total solidarity and to mobilise in such a way as to present a credible and powerful force capable of defeating the PNM and rescuing the country from the course of disaster which the PNM is hell bent on pursuing.

SHAM KANHAI
Diamond Village
San Fernando