VOTERS DON'T CARE
PM to senators: Why so much fuss over Local Govt postponement?
The postponement of the local government election for the fourth consecutive year is not a violation of democracy, since it is being done with the approval of the Parliament, Prime Minister Patrick Manning said yesterday.
"If we (had) sought to do it without the Parliament, then that would have been a different story," he said. Government had exposed itself to public scrutiny and public debate, giving "honourable members opposite and Independent Senators their chance to say what they feel and what is on their mind", Manning noted.
Manning further argued that the electorate was more concerned with the quality of service it was getting, rather than the postponement of elections. He based public sentiment on the result of one television (CMNG) programme on which Local Government Minister Hazel Manning appeared yesterday.
"The way honourable members speak, here and outside of the Parliament, you get the impression that the population is very concerned about the postponement of local government elections, much more than they are concerned about the services they get.
"The distinguished Minister of Local Government was on television this morning and the public called in. How many calls came from people who said they were concerned about the postponement of elections? There was one call. One, Mr President. The bulk of the comments were 'I can't get this road fixed.'"
"I have been in the vineyard for too long not to know that ... I am in a position to say to you that that is where the concern lies," the PM stated, adding that that was why the Government was taking the view that "you fix that first and then go to the polls".
Manning also justified Government's actions by stating that after a review of the local government system, there would be a reduction in the councils from 14 to 12.
"A number of people are likely to become redundant. What do you expect is likely to happen? In those circumstances you are likely to get resistance and it is more likely to come from within your own camp. That is the reality of politics," he said.
Manning said Government was proposing a course of action "that is exactly what was done in 1976 when the country was moving from one system of governance to the next". He said then that the Republican Constitution was passed in August and the country went to the polls in September.
But Independent Senator Dana Seetahal intervened, saying: "My recollection was that there was no suspension of the elections ... There was no postponement, so the analogy is not a correct one, is it?"
Manning replied: "There was no postponement (then) because there is no need for it. And the only reason that there is a postponement now is because there is a need for it."
Stressing that local government reform was part of Vision 2020, he said: "It is not being done because we are afraid of the Opposition. We have three members of Parliament in another place (House of Representatives) going hither, thither and yon and saying all kinds of things and describing their leader in all kinds of terms ... That political party is losing more and more support as that issue goes on.
"I have great doubts as to whether they are really unhappy that the local government election is being postponed ...They really would prefer if no election is called because they would not be held to public scrutiny." (See Page 4).
He said the other Opposition party, the COP, had not yet been able to make a breakthrough at the grassroots level and therefore constituted no threat.
Manning said what delayed the reform process was after the first Green Paper and White Paper were presented, Government realised there was no agreement on the responsibilities of the local government system. It therefore had to go back out and consult the population again on the roles and functions of the local government body.
"This caused us to lose time," he said, adding: "So when we gave a commitment last year to the Parliament that we wanted a postponement for one year to complete the process, we were confidence at the time ... that we would have been able to call the local government elections on time."
Manning's contribution to the debate on the Municipal Amendment bill in the Senate, however, was unprecedented and, in the view of the Opposition, an unconstitutional one.
Wade Mark wanted to know under what Standing Order the Prime Minister was allowed to speak, since under Section 62 (3) of the Constitution, only the Attorney General, not the Prime Minister, had the right to speak to any debate in both houses of Parliament. The Section says ministers can only speak on matters relating to their portfolio in either House.
Senate President Danny Montano said he granted leave to the Prime Minister because Prime Ministers were held accountable for every portfolio that exists.
"If that were not so there would be no point in criticising Prime Ministers for crime or unemployment or whatever," he stated, adding that the Prime Ministers appoint Ministers and therefore held responsibility for every ministry. Montano later told the media that the Constitution was silent on whether the President Officer could grant leave and the Standing Orders did not debar him from doing so.
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/index.pl ... =161502164
is surprised that tuners caped crusader hero has not showed up as yet to defend his govt!..
