Maybe, indeed hopefully, the Reshmi Ramnarine affair will have been a bit of a turning point for the government in its relationship with the people.
Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar held out the olive branch to the media and the country when she acknowledged that Miss Ramnarine’s appointment was a mistake.
She offered an apology for the obvious errors—from their commission through the appalling attempts to justify, then explain, then cover up the matter—in a friendly setting. I hope that by the time this column is published an explanation of what happened there would also have been given.
Because in the recent enlightenment, where the government seeks to return to the ideals to which they were earlier committed: “serve the people, serve the people, serve the people”; “transparency and openness”, and a reversal of government arrogance in their dealings with us, an explanation is required.
One begins to feel that a sudden awareness has fallen upon members of cabinet: That even though they might have felt that they had the right to do want they thought was right and acceptable, we the people obviously did not agree with them.
This awareness never fell upon the PNM—not in eight years of nepotism, mismanagement and corruption. Not in the appointment of Manning’s wife to the cabinet. Not after trying to give more land to the Muslimeen; not in all the “concessionary deals” made with the criminal gang leaders; not in their protection of Calder Hart, or in their acquiescence of the church being built in Guanapo, but being billed as the Prime Minister’s residence.
When I hear the utter hypocrisy of PNM former ministers self-righteously attacking the government, I wonder at how quickly we forget.
Now I am not defending the PP on the grounds that the PNM was worse. I am just bemused that it is that same PNM who leads the attacks. I believe that and indeed encourage, the rest of us to criticize the government, hopefully in a constructive manner.
But for the PNM parliamentarians and sycophant supporters, who silently at best, and cheeringly at worst, supported the outrages of the Manning regime, to now hysterically attack the government for confusion and loose talk, is utterly astonishing.
And the media reports it all as though they were accepting that there is no comparison to be made.
When I watch Colm Imbert as he speaks in parliament, describing in feigned horror, the “demands” he claims the contractor is now “adding” to the Point Fortin Highway project, I applaud him.
I applaud him for his fraudulence, and for his style. Because, as an Engineer, and as a former Minister of Works, Imbert knows full well that those are all standard clauses in any major infrastructure contract.
It is a good thing the government does not seek to waste parliament’s time, and therefore bypassed the opportunity to bring Imbert to the Privileges Committee for deliberately misleading the House with regard to who had “awarded” the contract.
It was Colm and the PNM who awarded it, and then sought to blame PP for invented shortcomings. Anyway, let me leave Imbert, yes. I see he has other worries these days.
And to the claimed “neutrals” out there; those who claim they supported the PP, but are now writing obscenities on my Facebook postings: Do you really feel that the PP is worse, or at best “exchange instead of change” than the PNM whom you claim you voted out of office?
Have you forgotten already? And did you object when Manning made his wife a minister? Or when Manning held his meetings with the gang leaders, or shut down parliament to go and incite an illegally assembled crowd in Woodford square? Did you? Are you being encouraged (incited?) to become an activist now?
And we rail against the lack of cohesion in ministers’ statements, as they appear to contradict each other. And I am included in this, for I am concerned about it, and have raised this before. But as one writer has suggested, is this not a healthy reaction to the submissive collective guilt which rests upon those who cowardly acquiesced to every Manning action?
And say what you want about current cabinet disagreements in the public domain. If these bother you, what must you have thought when Manning hijacked “extra time” in Parliament to abuse Keith Rowley and accuse him of corruption, and then Keith spent weeks shouting at Manning that the UDECOTT corruption was “ten times worse than Piarco..”.
Were you all complaining then as you are now? I think you owe it to yourselves, people, to become a little more rational and objective in your criticisms of the people for whom you claim you voted.
Maybe you were not as stupid as you are claiming you were.
No comments:
Post a Comment