Political debate would have given opposition unfair advantage: PNM

The People's National Movement (PNM) has explained why it turned down a request for a national debate between Prime Minister Patrick Manning and UNC leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar, saying it was was rushed and would have given the UNC an unfair advantage.

In a letter to the organisers, PNM chairman Conrad Enill has said it "wishes to express concern to what seems to be a rushed approach to the staging of these debates contrary to the practice and procedure normally employed in staging these matters."

Angella Persad, the chairperson of Trinidad and Tobago Debates Commission, had asked Manning and Persad-Bissessar to debate national issues.

Persad-Bissessar accepted but Manning refused saying he had nothing to gain by a debate.

Enill told Persad, "While debates are the norm in certain societies with fixed election dates and established election cycles, this is not the case in Trinidad and Tobago or in the Westminster tradition to which we belong.
"Indeed, a debate was held among the Prime Ministerial candidates in the United Kingdom for the first time ever, this year."
Canada, which has the same political system, has debates among its leaders in all its general elections. These encounters are usually defining moments in the election campaigns aand have often caused major shifts in public opinion.
Enill complained that the PNM was not represented on the commission or given an opportunity "to fashion either the format or approach to these debates."

He said, "What has in fact happened is a rushed approach where, as per your letter, dates and venues have been selected and we have been given a deadline by which to respond.
"There has been no opportunity to negotiate venue, moderators, format or any of the logistical issues which normally attend such an exercise."

Enill complained that the commission had advertised the event without the "courtesy of ensuring the availability of our key personnel on those dates or our planned election schedule."

He explained that the issue was too important to be "rushed" and assured the Commission that the PNM is "committed to ensuring a free and fair election by a well informed electorate.

"However he stressed that "to ensure that a leadership debate contributes to this and does not merely provide entertainment value, there must be adequate consultation and preparation by all parties. This has not been the case."

He noted that his party well documented has policies and programmes "while the UNC has not yet put out a manifesto, making any intelligent policy debate well nigh possible."

He said, "We believe there should at least be discussion and negotiation of these issues before any establishment of dates, times and venues. To do less would not only be a gross disrespect to the country’s most established political party but would give an unfair advantage to our opponents."