These days I am reminded of the early days of the NAR government, back in 1987.We had elected a new government, sweeping aside an incompetent and corrupt PNM regime—just like we did recently.
Today’s new, and slightly shaky coalition government, is discovering that the mess which the PNM left behind is worse—in terms of basic competence in areas like flood control and health care, and financially, as in outstanding bills to pay - than they dared to contemplate.
And this is causing them to spend more time on recriminations than in moving ahead with their own agenda.
The remnants of the PNM now in opposition, are already blaming the Peoples’ Partnership for the state of the country. This is the only effective skill which they possess, and they have retained it through the years since 1987.
I wrote, in September 1987 that the PNM was demonizing the new NAR government for the sins of the PNM: “More benefits were surrendered by workers, and more workers lost their jobs in the first eight months of 1986 (PNM rule) than in the first eight months of 1987 (NAR rule).
"More subsidies were removed in the 1986 Budget than in the 1987 Budget. More hardships, in terms of levies and taxes were imposed by the PNM in ’84, ’85, and ’86 than were imposed in the 1987 Budget.
"The 1986 devaluation was a serious burden to the population...so why are we blaming the new government, and indeed what are we blaming them for? We are blaming them because they are now in charge…we are blaming them because the PNM is telling us to.”
I went on to say that the skill with which the PNM was exploiting the economic situation then was in total contrast to their ineptitude while in government.
So do you not agree that all this—written 23 years ago, could apply today?
The skill with which Dr. Amery Browne debated the pensions issue is in total contrast to his performance as former Minister with that responsibility.
He and his cohorts are now armed to destroy, to sabotage and to demonize the new government in much the same way that the 1987 PNM Opposition demonized the NAR government between 1987 and July 27th 1990.
A word to the wise should suffice—and “the wise” refers to you and I, not only to the Minister of National Security.
Trinidad and Tobago is entering a period of weak leadership, both in government and in opposition. I use the term “weak leadership” in terms of a lack of genuine support from the ranks rather than the lack of leadership tenets by Kamla or Keith.
Nine months ago, each of these persons were virtual outcasts within their own Parties and among the voters supporting those Parties.
Kamla went on to sweep a Party Election and emerge as Political Leader. But she had problems getting support of her peers in Parliament to become Leader of the Opposition.
Keith had been hounded out of Manning’s Cabinet, not a voice being raised in defence, and had zero support among his PNM peers in Parliament.
Then Patrick Manning decided to destroy the PNM to protect his involvement in the church at Guanapo! Actually, he probably really thought he would win the election he called in mid-term, such was the extent of the delusion he had developed about his divine right to rule!
Caught by surprise, Kamla and the UNC had to rise to the challenge of the PNM’s “We Ready Now” slogan, and sought, and achieved, alliances with COP, TOP, NJAC and Labour.
But she rose, and the partnership rose, and they won! The PNM campaigned that the Partnership was weak and would break up if elected. Keith campaigned for the PNM, but not for Manning, and the two were clearly not speaking.
Outgoing PNM Parliamentarians were clearly shunning Keith—as they had done for the past eighteen months. But Keith was one of the few to win his seat, as was Manning.
And although Manning tried to retain the party leadership, he was denied. Keith became Party Leader, and following some dissent among his peers, was finally named Leader of the Opposition—same road having been travelled by Kamla a few months earlier.
So, we enter a period of reduced financial expectations with political leaders on both side apparently enjoying “lip service” support from their peers, but hardly genuine committed support.
The PNM will seek to drive wedges into the perceived cracks in the Partnership. The role of the Partnership, if it can rise to this, is to govern effectively, with the cards they hold, and resist responding to the PNM in kind.
The potential for turbulence in our lives must be seriously considered.
Peter's columns also appear in NEWSDAY
No comments:
Post a Comment