I won’t back down
Kublalsingh: PM must speak to me...
By \\\\\ Kim Boodram
Story Created: Sep 19, 2014 at 11:29 PM ECT
Story Updated: Sep 19, 2014 at 11:29 PM ECT
MOMENTS after delivering a letter in response to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s letter to him, activist Dr Wayne Kublalsingh said yesterday he felt the PM had “become a metaphor for the highway” in her fixed approach to the concerns of the people.
Kublalsingh’s letter is a response to one written by Persad-Bissessar to him, made public on Wednesday and hand-delivered to him on Thursday morning, where she stated that her Government will not “be held to ransom” by his choice to endanger his life with another hunger strike.
Persad-Bissessar called on Kublalsingh to wait on the decision of the court, where the Highway Re-Route Movement (HRM) has charged the State with breaching the constitutional rights of its members.
In his reply, Kublalsingh thanked Persad-Bissessar for her letter and said: “The only victory possible in this matter is for you to agree to put on hold the questioned segment of highway, and agree to review it.”
The former University of the West Indies (UWI) lecturer yesterday carried out day three of his second hunger strike outside the Office of the Prime Minister (OPM) in St Clair, the first having been staged in November 2012 for 21 days at the same site, to protest the Debe to Mon Desir segment of the Solomon Hochoy Highway extension to Point Fortin Highway.
Just before noon, he left the make-shift camp that he and members of the HRM have occupied off and on for the past two years, to be ushered into the OPM where he delivered his own letter to the PM via the Engagements Adviser to the Prime Minister, Lisa Ghany.
Speaking to the media afterwards, he emphasised previous statements that he will not desist until the Prime Minister agrees to dialogue with the HRM and other concerned parties and the appropriate scientific pundits.
He drew again on the report of the Highway Review Committee (HRC), commissioned by Persad-Bissessar and headed by Dr James Armstrong, which recommended that Government halt the contentious part of the highway to conduct much-needed social, economic and ecological reviews.
He said Persad-Bissessar’s inflexible response was inappropriate in dealing with a complicated social and ecological situation and he was still hoping that she agrees to dialogue.
Aside from speaking with him or the HRM, Kublalsingh said the Prime Minister should at this time speak for the sake of the nation.
Kublalsingh still bears the ill effects of his first hunger strike, which saw him emaciated and unable to stand on his own at its end.
He said while he hopes to emerge from this round with his health at least intact, he will not go back on his plan to abstain from food and water, and all fluids, until the Prime Minister gives her word that meaningful dialogue can take place.
The first hunger strike ended when Persad-Bissessar pulled together the HRC, following pleas from various quarters for her intervention as Kublalsingh’s health faded.
The activist, accompanied yesterday by a contingent of HRM members and his mother Vilma Kublalsingh,
said the camp will not be set up outside the OPM this weekend as previously planned and he will spend the time resting.
“I plan to take many baths and if possible, visit the sea,” Kublalsingh said.Asked how he planned to resist taking a sip of water as he bathed, Kublalsingh said:
“Once you have made up your mind, food and water don’t mean anything.”
kublalsingh’s response to pm’s letter
Text of the letter sent to Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar yestersay by environmental activist Dr Wayne Kublalsingh:
September 19, 2014
Honourable Mrs Kamla Persad-Bissessar MP
Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago
Office of the Prime Minister
13-15 St Clair Avenue
St Clair
Dear Mrs Kamla Persad-Bissessar,
Thanks for your letter to me on September 18, 2014 which was released into the public domain; and then a copy handed to me by Mr Francis Joseph yesterday at the site of our 200-day vigil outside the Office of the Prime Minister. I thank you for your prayers and good wishes.
Please feel assured that the following facts are accurate.
1. On the matter of the Highway Re-Route Movement’s invocation of court proceedings and the matter being currently before the court:—
When you, Honourable Prime Minister, agreed to stop the Debe to Mon Desir highway and do a review, the matter was not yet before the court. This promise was given on March 16, 2012. It was only after this promise was breached and the Government undertook to demolish our camp at Debe that legal actions began on August 3, 2012, four months after waiting for you to abide by your promise, and one month after the destruction of our camp.
Our advocacy camp was erected legally, as I and members of the HRM were granted permission by the chief officer at NAMDEVCO, Debe, to construct the camp. The matter was invoked in courts only after you breached your promise and our camp was illegally destroyed.
When the Armstrong process ensued during a hunger strike in November and December 2012—a process in which your Government signed a document agreeing to the process, fully participating in it, submitting volumes of data and records, sending witnesses, paying close to one million dollars for it—the matter was before the courts. The Government’s hands were not then tied by the courts.
You and your Government have ignored the findings of the independent Armstrong Committee which reiterates your statement to put on hold and review the Debe to Mon Desir highway.
The above facts suggest that, whether the matter is in court or out of court, you are prepared to act illegally, breach promise, and ignore the findings of science.
2. On the matter of consensus on the need for the Debe to Mon Desir highway: —
There is no scientific finding on how many persons desire the Debe to Mon Desir Highway. The scientific finding is that in view of the considerable risks involved and a flawed CEC process, work on this highway ought not to proceed until a review is done; this review should comprise, among other studies, a cost benefit analysis, a social impact analysis and a hydrological study.
The view of the HRM is the majority desires connectivity which may or may not involve a highway, and should certainly involve a deep consideration of the superiority of connector roads, by-passes, auxiliary roads, feeder roads for densely populated areas and a richly endowed social, economic and ecological district.
3. On the claim of superiority of authority on the highway issue:—
(“You claim to lead a Highway Re-Route Movement, I lead Trinidad and Tobago”.)
We are no doubt astounded at your political victories of 2010, when a majority of our citizens brought you into political office. Your victory was resounding and beautiful to behold. But, with deep respect, authority derives from the voicing of truth, and not alone from political office.
We scarcely believe that the revered Mahatma Mohandas Gandhi held less authority than the Viceroy over India or indeed the first Prime Minister of India in the first half of the 20th century. Authority also derives from science and rationality. The voice of Dr James Armstrong and nineteen scientists and experts are not inferior to those of political office holders on this matter. I recommend you to the autobiography of Gandhi, My Experiments With Truth, and the Armstrong Report, as guiding voices on this matter.
Finally, Madame Prime Minister, we implore you to not shut the doors of diplomacy and rationality. The only victory possible in this matter is for you to agree to put on hold the questioned segment of highway, and agree to review it.
There are experts of eminence willing to sit with your Government to decide on the terms of this review.
Sincerely
Wayne Kublalsingh
The Highway Re-Route Movement
http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/I-w ... 58241.htmlThis man suffering from delusions of grandeur or something yes.
