N Touch

One side of the coin

THE EDITOR: “Love in the face of Racism” — Newsday 16/03/03. Oh what a lovely story — Boy meets girl and after overcoming daunting obstacles,  the couple marry and ride off into the sunset and live happily ever after — they should make a movie of this story.

However I find the advice offered by this lucky couple “that parents should not interfere in their children’s choices” to be one sided, ill advised and irrational. For every couple finding eternal love and happiness there are thousands of couples who ride off into the sunset get a bad case of sunburn and do not live happily ever after. Relationships are like the lottery — thousands put out their money but few win the first prize. If the lucky couple in the Newsday story had had a sad ending their advice would most likely have been “Listen to your parents, with their experienced eye they would see what you cannot see and trust them, they have your best welfare at heart.” I fear the advice of the lucky couple is going to mislead a lot of impressionable teenagers labouring under the counterfeit currency of adolescent infatuation.

JACK LEARMOND-CRIQUI
Diego Martin

Nastiest captial?

THE EDITOR: I am not surprised by the Mayor of Port-of-Spain being unperturbed by the state of the streets of the city. After all, he and his fellow dignitaries do not have to walk the city streets like ordinary folks. However, for the record, Port-of-Spain must be the nastiest capital in the Caribbean.


JOAN EDWARDS
Belmont

Introduce ‘maxi taxi stops’

THE EDITOR: I have little doubt that most drivers agree that maxi taxis are the biggest nuisances on the roads of this country.

These vehicles do as they please on the roads — stop where and when they like to pick up passengers or drop them off, and weave in and out of traffic like oversized worms hunting for food. If a max taxi driver has twelve passengers to collect or drop off at ten-foot intervals, we can be sure he will stop twelve times for the next 120 feet — an absolutely ridiculous state of affairs. The normal ‘government’ bus, on account of its size, is not permitted to just stop anywhere to handle passengers — think of what would happen if they were allowed to do that: the confusion would be unbearable. Thank the good Lord that some wise gentleman invented the bus stop. Yet the complete opposite is happening with these maxi taxis, they are, after all, nothing but smaller buses run by private individuals over which the authorities exercise little control.

There was a time in Trinidad when bus companies were privately run, and I suppose that to overcome the problems of efficiency and reliability and other general considerations, the government chose to do away with that system and bring what we call the PTSC into being. But the fact of the matter is that the privately owned and operated bus returned to the streets with the advent of the maxi-taxi, and many of the rules which govern the regular buses should be applied to the maxis-taxis. Whoever is in charge of maxi-taxis can attend to details, but one straightforward change should be made immediately: the introduction of a system of bus-stops similar to those used by PTSC buses; possibly the same bus-stops used by buses with additions or subtractions as necessary, according to area and other passenger/traffic requirements. These ‘maxi-taxi stops’ should be the only legal place for maxi-taxis to stop, and the Police should be encouraged to enforce the law rigidly.

JEREMY BOYD
Gulf View

Warning to young WOMEN

THE EDITOR: Ladies have you ever realised when a guy is interested in you they would say anything and everything that appeals to our ear like, “I am different from other guys.”

If a guy tells you that lame lyric, you should carefully evaluate his motives or shut him down one time. In a study conducted by my best friend, it has been shown that 81 percent of males, from the wildest to the most quiet one, who were interveiwed has confessed using that lyric on many ladies just to get with them and ultimately lead to sex. What a tragedy ladies face having to figure out who is genuine and who is a player. I cannot understand how a guy can meet a lady for the first time or after three weeks and confess to love her, when he does not know her good enough to make such a statement. That line “I love you” is one of the oldest tricks used conveniently by guys to get a lady. They play with our emotions. Ladies you know a lot of us are very emotional, so be careful. Do not let your guard down so easily. I am not a male hater, I have a boyfriend who is dedicated to me but I have to protect my sisters from those players. D Frank should read this.

KADEEN MARK (19 yrs)
San Fernando

Use our West Indian talent

THE EDITOR: Please publish the following which I consider to be of great interest to the West Indies as a whole.

In your daily news of March 11 on page 57, there was this article that stated ‘Woolmer wants advisory job’. To me that is the biggest joke of this “World Cup” year, apart from us not qualifying for the top six. Why the hell do we need a foreign advisory or coach, to end up at the bottom of the table in the next four years? At age eighty (80), I might be forgetful, which I doubt, but in the days of Headly, Roach, Stollmeyer, Gomez, Weekes, Worrel, Walcott, Lloyd, Richards, Haynes, Greenidge, Hall and Griffith, just to name a few, did we have any coach or advisor? If I am wrong, please call me at my telephone number and give me a piece of your mind. If the WICB collected too many yankee dollars from the present tour and need to throw it away, why not choose from the above mentioned names? I almost forgot to mention Phil Simmons in my anger. All our players possess a “God-given” gift which no one can teach us.


E THOMAS
Barataria
674-9717

BIG BULLY USA

The United States of America, not content to wage horrific war on Iraq, even without the authority of the United Nations Security Council, is now playing the role of big bully in virtually ordering  States as to whether they should or should not support any UN resolution denouncing the unauthorised war.

It is a threat to the sovereignty of nations, no less than the unsanctioned invasion of Iraq. We ask the question: Did the US coerce its ‘allies’, in what the Government of this country has denounced as an unjust and unjustified war, to go along with it in flouting the current United Nations position on Iraq, and in clear violation of the United Nations Charter? If this is so, then the power brokers on Capitol Hill are not much better than that repository of evil, Saddam Hussein, whose dictatorship of Iraq and his cynical invasion of and hostilities against his neighbours have stamped him as one of the most ruthless men of this age. And while Hussein sought to take away the sovereignty of Iran and Iraq by force of arms, implied in the clearly unwise US move may be a withdrawal of most favoured status to some States; the possible imposition of countervailing duties on critical exports to the US, the withdrawal of aid and/or the threat of refusal of aid. The United States may have determined that for many nations, large and small, which are short on cash and marketing opportunities as well as the moral strength and guts the above may represent their collective Achilles heel.

Only a few days ago, in the runup to military action against Iraq, the United States called on the Governments of 60 nations to expel (some of the) Iraqi diplomats accredited to them.  Several countries complied, some shamefacedly. What the US did in effect was to violate the right of free and independent States to freedom of action, and relegated them to the status of colonies and/or protectorates, whose foreign policy was that of the Imperial State. Today, the US is using the big stick to effect just that. The US has never been comfortable with the situation in which it has found itself since the late 1960s, when the admission of certain new Member States to the United Nations saw it losing its tacit control in the UN, via compliant “sure” majorities when there were votes on issues it deemed as critical. The wholly immoral demand by the US that non-aligned countries refrain from voting in favour of any motion denouncing its attack on Iraq, which was and is being done outside of a UN mandate, is not the first time that the US had bucked the United Nations. In 1971 it had defied an economic boycott of the then Rhodesia, imposed by the UN on the racist State.

Big bullies wherever they are found, must be condemned. We do this even though we recognise that Saddam Hussein is an evil dictator. But even though we are of the view that he should go, the weapons inspectors assigned by the UN should have been allowed the opportunity to complete their job, and the UN should have been the one to decide on any action to be taken.

A look at the political life of former President Robinson

A N R Robinson has been able to manoeuvre his political life on to centre stage in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

He entered politics in 1948 and was defeated in Tobago in the Federal Elections in that same year. He stood as a candidate for the People’s National Movement (PNM) for Tobago. Notwithstanding this unfavourable result he persevered with the PNM and the PNM then under the leadership of Dr Eric Williams, he stood as a candidate for Tobago East and won in 1961. He became the Minister of Finance and soon found himself with the additional portfolio of Deputy Prime Minister.

What are his achievements as a Minister of Finance? The then Prime Minister, Dr Eric Williams was giving primacy to the management of the economy. Mr A N R Robinson was the chosen Minister for fiscal and monetary policy and the management of these two fields in Trinidad and Tobago. With respect to fiscal policy based upon revenue collected and expected to be collected as well as the expenditure thereof, according to Mr Robinson’s book called: The Mechanics of Independence” at Chapter 9, Mr Robinson saw the need for fiscal discipline which he decomposed into three categories:


1. “… A fiscal structure designed to raise adequate revenues to enable the Government to discharge its functions …”


2. “… The collection of those revenues …”


3. “… The rigid control of expenditure …”


In themselves, they are the key components of fiscal policy. However, to achieve fiscal discipline which Mr Robinson negated to treat in his book The Mechanics of Independence was the focusing of his Budget to maximise the return on the resources in Trinidad and Tobago, then an oil rather than a gas based economy, to ensure an equitable distribution of those resources by adequate Housing Programme and at the same time, to stabilise the economy where there was a trajectory of economic growth as part of the macro-economic horizon.

With respect to monetary policy, there was the establishment of the Central Bank and the independence of Government from the operations and management of the Central Bank. This was laid down in legislation through The Central Bank Act of 1964. With the benefit of hindsight, Trinidad and Tobago devalued its currency in 1968 when the British Pound Sterling was devalued and again in 1971 when the US Dollar devalued. However, on both these occasions, Mr Robinson was no longer in the Ministry of Finance nor can any culpability be assigned to him. The devaluation arose out of owing to our reserve currencies and to maintain parity, the Prime Minister, Dr Eric Williams moved towards devaluation in tandem.

Although an Economic Plan 1964-1968 was formulated by Sir Arthur Lewis, a Nobel Laureate in Economics and that of 1968-1971 by Mr William Demas, Economic Adviser to the Prime Minister, there was no linkage between the Development Plan and the allocation of capital expenditure under these two Development Plans. Budgeting during that period was to achieve a current surplus. Deficit financing was unheard of and was even deprecated. It is tempting to comment adversely on predecessors executing their functions. However, it was becoming apparent that the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, which became such in 1976, with its main exports in oil and sugar needed to focus on how these two principal commodities could have been linked to fiscal and monetary policy, to maximise the growth of the national economy.

This did not happen and subsequent administrations have pursued the same policy since they are unaware of the swift changes that are dependent upon the forcefulness of a country’s politicians to master the capital markets of the world. In other words, the economic management of the economy has always been at the periphery and foreign Corporations have out manoeuvred the politicians in the management of the economy. In 1970 there was the expression of black consciousness in our society. During that period, Mr Robinson resigned his Ministerial portfolio as Minister of External Affairs from the PNM Government. Soon after, he formed the Democratic Action Congress (DAC) which never gained political momentum in both Trinidad and Tobago.

During this period he did not have a seat in Parliament, nor in living memory did any cases before the Court in Trinidad and Tobago where his reputation as a lawyer was greater than average. In contradistinction, his political career he retained. With the benefit of hindsight rather than foresight, after having failed in Trinidad with the DAC, he returned to Tobago. He remained in Tobago and became Chairman of the Tobago House of Assembly in 1981. With the passing on of Dr Eric Williams, Mr Robinson’s political career became on the front burner. After the uneventful period of the PNM from 1981-1986, headed by George Chambers and cynically encapsulated in two calypsoes: “Captain The Ship Is Sinking” and “Chambers Done See”, Robinson rose into prominence with the formation of the National Alliance For Reconstruction (NAR). A landslide election was won by the NAR in 1986 and Robinson became Prime Minister.

With marked conviction, although there was unholy wastage by the PNM, Robinson pursued a programme of leadership by fear, rather than respect. On all his castigations, all his prosecutions failed and most important, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) prescription for Trinidad and Tobago was implemented by Winston Dookeran and Selby Wilson, neither of whom really understood the management of a resource based economy. The 1986-1991 period was characterised by the following:


1. Failure to implement with mechanisms IMF conditionalities.
2. Salaries were abruptly cut without negotiating with the Public Service.
3. No prescriptions on investment, particularly the gas resources in Trinidad and Tobago.


Robinson was very effective in employing his Parliamentary seat in Tobago with that of colleague, Pamela Nicholson, to gain political mileage with two main Political Parties, the United National Congress (UNC) and the PNM. Since these events are very recent and the writer herein has publicly stated his views on many forums, I would resist the temptation because of my moral fibre and leave the religion for Mr Robinson in the preamble to our Constitution, to continue to voice his opinion. Hopefully, I have done my due diligence and cannot define a specific contribution that he has made to the body polity to decrease unemployment, and to reverse the level of rising poverty through the management of our resources, particularly the gas based resources — the life blood of our people and of the two succeeding generations to come.

Cool it at Couva

COUVA will be the centre today of political activity by both the PNM and the UNC over the issue of Caroni (1975) restructuring and, because of the passion and emotion this matter has already provoked, we would appeal to supporters of the governing and opposition parties to maintain their cool and allow reason and good sense to prevail. Also, we would urge speakers, particularly those representing constituencies of the sugar belt, to refrain from the use of inflammatory rhetoric in presenting their case against the government’s VSEP offer to sugar workers and its plans for reconstructing the company.

We believe the days for using sugar workers as pawns in a political chess game are over. For decades this has been the strategy of political representatives objecting to every attempt at structural or manpower change to ease the enormous financial burden which the bankrupt and inefficient company has imposed on the national treasury. We feel that in their hearts and minds even sugar workers themselves have come to accept the glaring truth about Caroni (1975) Ltd., that the sugar operation is an industrial dinosaur which must be laid to rest. The company is perhaps the world’s most expensive producer of sugar and is a gross liability not only for its enormous annual losses but also for the embarrassment it presents in the world of free trade and in our relations with international lending agencies.

The necessity then to radically restructure the company should no longer be an issue. Even the previous UNC regime had its plans for dealing with the problem of Caroni. What now appears to be the bone of contention is the Government’s attempt to reduce the company’s manpower through its VSEP offer which, with good-will on boths sides, should have been satisfactorily settled between the Agriculture Ministry and the ATSGWTU. Given the history of opposition politics in the sugar belt, however, it seems that the production of a mutually acceptable severance agreement for Caroni workers is asking for, or expecting, too much.

In our view, this is unfortunate. It presents another sad example of the kind of obscurantism that has long bedevilled the politics of the country, where partisan concerns override the national interest and where reason, logic and the need for mutual cooperation count for little or nothing. For example, Minister Rahael’s offer of a parcel of land to VSEP acceptees who do not own their own homes seems reasonable enough. The union, however, is insisting that all workers accepting the severance package must be given a plot of land whether or not they own their own homes.

Indeed, we are now concerned about the ugly and highly emotional turn this issue has taken. Recently, Minister Raheal had to be escorted out of a meeting with sugar workers when it erupted into a rowdy shouting match. And we had the union leader and central representatives fanning the flames by warning Government ministers not to enter the sugar belt areas because their safety could not be guaranteed. The senseless passion over this issue even reached the nation’s parliament with the Opposition declaring its non-support for major government legislation until a national debate on Caroni is held. We sincerely hope that this emotion will not overflow into the public events organised by both parties for Couva today and that good sense will prevail on both sides.

The UNC decided to hold their sugar workers’ rally and march long after the PNM had announced their public meeting to be held at the Old Southern Main Road at 7.30 pm. Both Prime Minister Manning and Minister Rahael will speak on the Caroni issue. Sugar workers and residents of the sugar belt should want to hear what they have to say.

Abortion: We’ll fight with our prayers and votes



What they “ASPIRE” to do in the sinister game is use their pressure strategies and propaganda machinery to give their like-minded political sympathisers in the House “a reason” to change the laws to give licence to kill the innocent. But Pentecostals will ensure the failure of this plot.”


Empirical data reveal that since the Roe versus Wade showdown, which led to abortion being legalised in the US on January 22, 1973, over 42 million babies have been murdered by this evil that slaughters the innocent. This means that the 1.3 million population of TT would have been wiped out 32 times!

Hitler killed only a relatively small fraction of this number and he is portrayed by all of civilised society as the devil personified. Abortion is most definitely demonic and barbaric.
The Bible is absolutely clear on God’s position on abortion. The Scriptures tell us that its plain, straightforward murder and God “hates” it (Pro 6:17; Exod 20:13). This is why Pentecostals and Evangelicals here in TT and around the world have been constantly sounding our trumpets so loudly against this diabolical act. We know how to fight with our prayers but we know how to fight with our politics too. We know how to fight with our election votes! No Government which supports or passes legislation in support of murder by abortion will remain in power and run this country. This extreme, we are sure, will never be sanctioned by our Lord — and certainly, the vote of Pentecostals/Evangelicals.

I followed closely the last Presidential Elections in the US and had the opportunity to play a part in influencing a particular direction in the political choice of Pentecostals/Evangelicals. The then incumbent, Bill Clinton, used to be a virtual darling of Pentecostal/Evangelical Americans. This played a major part in the political advantage he held. But one of his sins in particular remained unpardonable with Pentecostals/Evangelicals — Clinton’s and the Democrats’ resolute advocacy of partial birth abortion. Through leading Pentecostal/Evangelical organisations in the US (with which I am associated) namely: Dr James Dobson’s Focus on the Family, Dr James Kennedy’s lobbying forum, Dr Pat Robertson’s 700 Club and Christian Broadcasting Network CBN, Pastor Rod Parsley’s Anti-abortion Petition campaign and the influence of the Trinity Broadcasting Network (TBN) programming, Christians were educated and motivated to pray against the partial birth abortion evil and vote accordingly. Republican’s George W Bush wisely and righteously declared his party’s firm anti-abortion stance, as he adopted the biblical viewpoint and announced his clear intention to ban partial birth abortion if he won the Presidency. He hardly had to say anything further to win the hearts and votes of a wide cross-section of the Pente-costal/Evangelical community. Bush won and as promised, the matter of the abortion was given priority attention.

As if to send a message to the pro-abortion “Democrats” down here in TT, the US Senate last week Thursday (March 13) voted overwhelmingly in support of Bush’s motion to ban partial birth abortion. The vote was 65-32. The vote was sent the legislation to the House which is also controlled by Bush and his Republicans. “Automatic” passage at this level is expected in the coming spring.  It is also expected that Bush will now move to launching a large-scale assault on “abortion rights”. Imagine the rationale of the TT abortion advocates: An increasing number of people are committing murder (of babies) so this is a signal to legalise the killings.  That is as cheaply and casually as the pro-abortion groups view life and murder. What kind of message is this gross disrespect for life sending to the criminals in a nation that had a record number of murders last year? Obviously, in a society such as ours if the murder of babies is legalised, then the loss of respect for life will be greater and the already horrifying murder rate will most likely further escalate.

To claim that a developing baby in a mother’s womb is only “a mass of cells” with no value or rights to life is not only the worst type of insult to the sanctity of life, but it very closely resembles the thinking of Adolf Hitler who cold-bloodedly murdered sick and elderly people because he regarded them as liabilities. The argument that legalising abortion is necessary because many women are now doing it illegally is just plain stupidity.  If we must be guided by this kind of reasoning then the legalising or decriminalising of every other kind of illegal/unlawful killing, drugs, theft, rape, traffic offences and all, would also be justified.

The pro-abortion crowd does not at all “ASPIRE” to seek a means of reducing the rate of abortions in TT by educating the masses on the sanctity of life, health dangers involved in abortion procedures, including long-term or permanent physical and psychological damage, infertility and death. Their prime motive seems to be the thirst for blood — rush to get laws as quickly as possible that give the licence to kill. What they “ASPIRE” to in the whole sinister game is to use their so-called precious strategies and propaganda machinery to give their like-minded political sympathisers in the House “a reason” to act on reforming the laws so as to give licence to kill the innocent. But, as the saying goes, this and a green donkey they will never see! The prayers and votes of Pentecostals will ensure the failure of their plot.

Sittings of Parliament should be rotated

THE EDITOR: The incipient moving debate on moving parliament is moving my bowels! 

The sole purpose of any parliament is to do its best for us, the people of Trinidad and Tobago;  which, translated into reality, means that it does its best for those who voted it into power, the higher you are up the hierarchy the more there is in it for you, the outsiders, too, sharing in the largesse but limited to what remains after the higher echelon party-members’ hunger is appeased — that is unchangeable, regardless where parliament sits. Where should parliament sit? 

Here’s the answer. Members of parliament have a duty to report to their constituents, to those who voted them in, and how better than by parliament sitting in members’ constituencies? Its mechanics.  The sittings of parliament will be rotated between the total number of constituencies.  The member of parliament for the constituency where parliament sits will decide where it will sit.  That’s it. Thus, but a small innovative twist to how we apply our democracy, our native home-grown democracy, could well result in a giant step towards the practical participation in the process of democracy of all the peoples of Trinidad and Tobago.


Bernard Martinez
8 First Avenue
Cascade