.::The Official General Election 2015 Thread::.

[EmilioA]

no im talking about ppl vote based on candidate completely ignoring party. but judging candidate based on their track record and their speeches. splitting the vote enough to force dual and tri-party coalition governments. where no one party holds all the power of either ruling government or opposition. that way theyll all keep eachother on their toes trying to knock eachother out. squealing every time some hint of corruption take place.
.

Exactly in which country is that the norm ?

this question has no relevance. this is not something ive seen another country do. im just saying, it would be a wise move imo if the populace could figure it out.
l

Of course its relevant .
You never think there might a reason that situation isnt the norm ?

[fallen_angel]

I still want to stamp d ballot, behind d goalpost

[bluesclues]

no im talking about ppl vote based on candidate completely ignoring party. but judging candidate based on their track record and their speeches. splitting the vote enough to force dual and tri-party coalition governments. where no one party holds all the power of either ruling government or opposition. that way theyll all keep eachother on their toes trying to knock eachother out. squealing every time some hint of corruption take place.
.

Exactly in which country is that the norm ?

this question has no relevance. this is not something ive seen another country do. im just saying, it would be a wise move imo if the populace could figure it out.
l

Of course its relevant .
You never think there might a reason that situation isnt the norm ?

yes i know its not a norm and i know that historically coalition governments dont work out well. the reason y its not a norm is for one.. hardly anyone thinks the way i do.

but heres what i think the super main reason is. because psychopath organisations seeking power wont want to allow coalition government idea to spread through the population so they will spend alot of money and marketing to pay experts to demonize the idea in the media. using false consensus figures to make everyone think "hey well everyone agrees so i will agree too". because they know that people are sheep.

thats on the international front. we already see the great leps and bounds kamla also went into preventing coalition by changing over the entire voting system to "last man standing".

but take a guy like me. i really dont care what party you from. if i was pm and i have 30% pnm and 30% unc and 30% cop members under my steed it wont bother me. i wont be biased to my party members constituencies. i wont be biased towards who is chinee negro or indian because i am all. i wont judge them based on their party leader. it going to be down to performance, teamwork and work ethic. at the individual level

i tell my best friend, if i ran for pm and won and gave him a ministerial office, if he fukk up i will fire him. how many leaders of principle does our country have or had recently?

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

Well bluesclues what are you going to do to promote your ideas besides posting on trinituner? Enter politics yourself maybe?

[bluesclues]

Well bluesclues what are you going to do to promote your ideas besides posting on trinituner? Enter politics yourself maybe?

what ive been doing from day 1.

spread ideas
wait for a change in mindset that align naturally towards those ideas
demonstrate visionary ability
run for office and offer the people the choice to make me chief decision maker.


fact of the matter is.. just where i am performing is where im ready to be. im not ready to take office because other preparations are still being made. que sera sera, whatever will be will be. at the end of the day. ive been doing all the groundwork. all the field study and all the intellectual study that would bring me to meet the requirements all my life. so it's either those stars align during my lifetime or they dont. but i wont be unprepared when they do.

[EmilioA]

but take a guy like me. i really dont care what party you from. if i was pm and i have 30% pnm and 30% unc and 30% cop members under my steed it wont bother me. i wont be biased to my party members constituencies. i wont be biased towards who is chinee negro or indian because i am all. i wont judge them based on their party leader. it going to be down to performance, teamwork and work ethic. at the individual level

i tell my best friend, if i ran for pm and won and gave him a ministerial office, if he fukk up i will fire him.

What about the people who donated to your campaign ? What if they threaten to have you removed ? Or the ones that ran a smear campaign accusing you of being a drug user or pedophile ? The ones that called you racist names ?

What about the MPs that disagree with your budget ? The ones that vote against your pet projects ?

When you fire your friend for non performance and then he comes back and gets reelected, and he has a third of the MPs backing him , what do you do ?


These are not rhetorical questions, I'm really asking what will you do when you are dealing with people who do not agree with you.

[UML]

no im talking about ppl vote based on candidate completely ignoring party. but judging candidate based on their track record and their speeches. splitting the vote enough to force dual and tri-party coalition governments. where no one party holds all the power of either ruling government or opposition. that way theyll all keep eachother on their toes trying to knock eachother out. squealing every time some hint of corruption take place.
.

Exactly in which country is that the norm ?

this question has no relevance. this is not something ive seen another country do. im just saying, it would be a wise move imo if the populace could figure it out.

it is precisely this kamla wanted to prevent with the new voting system. that voting system was specifically designed to destroy any chance of a coalition government forming by having 'knockout rounds'. and the COP support it like some pusses not realizing it was a move designed to get rid of them as co-pilot so that the unc cabal could make full mass in government. but kamla head was so high in the clouds she didnt consider that she might lose the election. lol

What that would lead to is a totally fractured parliament that would be unable to arrive at consensus...and therefore pass no law.

only if our representatives are truly unprofessional and unable to focus on the respective jobs at hand. which is also good.. because they will get kicked out of the political sphere when their unprofessionalism to teamwork as a patriot shows up.

boy is ban i lookin to ban all unsuitable politicians based on very high moral standards. to evict all the bad eggs through the type of population opinion processes that happen to ppl like ramlogan and room 201 etc. make they sh!t show up. kick them out so they could never return to politics again. and replace them. eventually.. we will remain only with meaningful and deserving members of parliament. and even to make the no confidence process a bit stronger and have more teeth and general consensus opinion strong enough to evict a prime minister of a party and have them replaced any time during their term.

e.g.. after the reshmi incident. kamla should have been evicted as leader of the unc. but since she would never evict herself. and since they held more seats in parliament a no confidence vote could never pass.

and remember also.. in light of the topic u brought up. giving one party too much seats is always recipe for trouble in a democracy. because they can always paint the picture that the majority supported each bill they wanted to pass and rejected each bill they wanted to reject. and 75% of the time, that so-called majority never heard of the bill, have no idea what it entails, could not even think far enough to fathom the ramifications of the passing of the bill. etc.

so the plan and strategy is to create coalition governments that force oversight of eachother during the 5 year period thereby reducing the success of corrupt practices. and to ensure that no one party gets to do what it wnts in parliament unobstructed by the vote because they already have a majority.

is called skills, education. and understanding the democratic system. my people.. they need these.

Nice words


...when you voted for a party that return to power a wig and fertility credit card thief, a Calabar and missing community centre thief, a HDC building teacher yet complain about R&R Auto doing WASA work, Landate thief, etc.

[bluefete]

[bluesclues]

but take a guy like me. i really dont care what party you from. if i was pm and i have 30% pnm and 30% unc and 30% cop members under my steed it wont bother me. i wont be biased to my party members constituencies. i wont be biased towards who is chinee negro or indian because i am all. i wont judge them based on their party leader. it going to be down to performance, teamwork and work ethic. at the individual level

i tell my best friend, if i ran for pm and won and gave him a ministerial office, if he fukk up i will fire him.

What about the people who donated to your campaign ? What if they threaten to have you removed ? Or the ones that ran a smear campaign accusing you of being a drug user or pedophile ? The ones that called you racist names ?

What about the MPs that disagree with your budget ? The ones that vote against your pet projects ?

When you fire your friend for non performance and then he comes back and gets reelected, and he has a third of the MPs backing him , what do you do ?


These are not rhetorical questions, I'm really asking what will you do when you are dealing with people who do not agree with you.

why would they have me removed? if im not performing? then i deserve to be removed.

politics is politics and when that time come ill show you how ill deal with it. i expect smear campaigns to have little to no negative or positive effect on my politicking. im a mix of all races. im impervious to racism or racist remarks.

pet projects arent a thing with me. successful problem solving projects however are. thus if a direction i had intended on taking is disputed and found to be inadequate or not feasible id have no problem shelving or reworking it to suit the environment. as i understand the intention of democracy, there will always be ppl who disagree with you. but before a project is even taken up is has to pass the 'feasibility discussion'. where the specialists in the relevant field will be able to shine light on aspects that i may be unaware of as an overseer. but the decision whether to go ahead with a project or not would be discussed and the opposition would have to prove their concerns as would i aim to prove the vision of success based on my study and point of view. but at the end, what must come out is a well ironed project, or none atall until it is properly reworked.

and well, if i fire an mp it would have to be for a good solid reason that few can disagree with. thus the chance of reelection of that individual would be next to nill. and if such a scenario were to happen i would say that either im an inefficient leader or possibly have elements wishing to undermine the efforts of the team. if they in our discussions and debates are unable to properly demonstrate their concern in opposition to my leadership style or projects, yet still carry on with opposition well. that is simple isnt it, they are a disruptive element. but noone would be able to say i didnt listen or i didnt judge them fairly. because i will surely be listening.

for example.

if i sanctioned a highway project to point fortin. and an mp jump up and say, 'bad idea that could cost 10bn dollars we dont have to build. i or supporting mps will discuss and if preliminary research determines that we can get it done with 2bn and we can afford it, then thered be no reason for continued opposition. as that concern wouldve been dealt with.

[desifemlove]

OK....many people does tek weed. why ent they losers? i bet some on this forum does, ent? Many is bi..well not many, but you'll be surprised who is what or who does who? Why was ex-PM Kams bad for tings de many does do? and horning? hahahahaha..wow.. double standards galore...

[EmilioA]

why would they have me removed? if im not performing? then i deserve to be removed.

They want you removed becuase you not giving them billion dollar contracts. How will you react ? See Patrick Manning

politics is politics and when that time come ill show you how ill deal with it. i expect smear campaigns to have little to no negative or positive effect on my politicking. im a mix of all races. im impervious to racism or racist remarks.

But what accusations that you are gay, a pedophile, a drug user , your wife taking man ? That wont affect you ? You will give contracts to the man that take out ads saying that ?;

pet projects arent a thing with me. successful problem solving projects however are. thus if a direction i had intended on taking is disputed and found to be inadequate or not feasible id have no problem shelving or reworking it to suit the environment. as i understand the intention of democracy, there will always be ppl who disagree with you. but before a project is even taken up is has to pass the 'feasibility discussion'. where the specialists in the relevant field will be able to shine light on aspects that i may be unaware of as an overseer. but the decision whether to go ahead with a project or not would be discussed and the opposition would have to prove their concerns as would i aim to prove the vision of success based on my study and point of view. but at the end, what must come out is a well ironed project, or none atall until it is properly reworked.


20 MPs want a rapid rail. 20 MPs dont. None of them care about studies and will oppose you if you dont side with them. What do you do ?

and well, if i fire an mp it would have to be for a good solid reason that few can disagree with. thus the chance of reelection of that individual would be next to nill.

See Jack Warner

and if such a scenario were to happen i would say that either im an inefficient leader or possibly have elements wishing to undermine the efforts of the team. if they in our discussions and debates are unable to properly demonstrate their concern in opposition to my leadership style or projects, yet still carry on with opposition well. that is simple isnt it, they are a disruptive element. but noone would be able to say i didnt listen or i didnt judge them fairly. because i will surely be listening.

for example.

if i sanctioned a highway project to point fortin. and an mp jump up and say, 'bad idea that could cost 10bn dollars we dont have to build. i or supporting mps will discuss and if preliminary research determines that we can get it done with 2bn and we can afford it, then thered be no reason for continued opposition. as that concern wouldve been dealt with.

uh huh. Lets say you have 3 billion to play with . and 2 competing projects. South Highway costing 2 billion and East West Corridor water pipe refurbishment also costing 2 billion. Which one you going to choose ?

Mps will have thier own competing interests and you dont have unlimited resources .At some point you will make several MPs unhappy. They will become the Opposition party. Your supporters will become the Govt Party. and presto party politics reborn.

Please dont forget time is also a limited resource. Too many discussions and you will end up not doing anything.
.

[j.o.e]

Some real fairytale thinkers in here

[UML]

Making out ur hypocrisy touch a nerve?

[bluefete]

Making out ur hypocrisy touch a nerve?

What hypocrisy?

I agree that we have to closely watch Camille, Colm, Faris, Marlene. So I don't see the hypocrisy there.

But what you have to worry about is what Kamla and co. do not want to come out into the light.

[bluesclues]

why would they have me removed? if im not performing? then i deserve to be removed.

They want you removed becuase you not giving them billion dollar contracts. How will you react ? See Patrick Manning

politics is politics and when that time come ill show you how ill deal with it. i expect smear campaigns to have little to no negative or positive effect on my politicking. im a mix of all races. im impervious to racism or racist remarks.

But what accusations that you are gay, a pedophile, a drug user , your wife taking man ? That wont affect you ? You will give contracts to the man that take out ads saying that ?;

pet projects arent a thing with me. successful problem solving projects however are. thus if a direction i had intended on taking is disputed and found to be inadequate or not feasible id have no problem shelving or reworking it to suit the environment. as i understand the intention of democracy, there will always be ppl who disagree with you. but before a project is even taken up is has to pass the 'feasibility discussion'. where the specialists in the relevant field will be able to shine light on aspects that i may be unaware of as an overseer. but the decision whether to go ahead with a project or not would be discussed and the opposition would have to prove their concerns as would i aim to prove the vision of success based on my study and point of view. but at the end, what must come out is a well ironed project, or none atall until it is properly reworked.


20 MPs want a rapid rail. 20 MPs dont. None of them care about studies and will oppose you if you dont side with them. What do you do ?

and well, if i fire an mp it would have to be for a good solid reason that few can disagree with. thus the chance of reelection of that individual would be next to nill.

See Jack Warner

and if such a scenario were to happen i would say that either im an inefficient leader or possibly have elements wishing to undermine the efforts of the team. if they in our discussions and debates are unable to properly demonstrate their concern in opposition to my leadership style or projects, yet still carry on with opposition well. that is simple isnt it, they are a disruptive element. but noone would be able to say i didnt listen or i didnt judge them fairly. because i will surely be listening.

for example.

if i sanctioned a highway project to point fortin. and an mp jump up and say, 'bad idea that could cost 10bn dollars we dont have to build. i or supporting mps will discuss and if preliminary research determines that we can get it done with 2bn and we can afford it, then thered be no reason for continued opposition. as that concern wouldve been dealt with.

uh huh. Lets say you have 3 billion to play with . and 2 competing projects. South Highway costing 2 billion and East West Corridor water pipe refurbishment also costing 2 billion. Which one you going to choose ?

Mps will have thier own competing interests and you dont have unlimited resources .At some point you will make several MPs unhappy. They will become the Opposition party. Your supporters will become the Govt Party. and presto party politics reborn.

Please dont forget time is also a limited resource. Too many discussions and you will end up not doing anything.
.

already dealt with. if u want a leader of principle then campaign financing and everything leading up throuh the election process must run on principle. publicly visible principle in action. they have plenty problems.

1. i have no wife. which means i can be focussed on the business at hand nearly 24/7
2. they could call me what they want but it wont stick and yes, wont matter to me. ill just get extra money for my campaign from the court for attempting to deffame my character. at the end of the day, im not like the others where they have thing they could bribe me with to get me to do things that would immorally affect the lives of many.

but as ive said before. mainly.. party financiers will also have to fund my campaign on principle and not to expect any special favours. contracts will be awarded to the winners who can provide the highest efficiency and lowest cost to tax payers. if they won the contract legitimately i would not have any reason to interfere. when you work a role as a 'representative', you should not take anything personal. and biases are a big nono when you are responsible for making the decision that affect the lives of many.

in a scenario with multiple contracts competing for an insufficient pot of cash, the project which brings the most benefit will be pushed to the fore. and the problem solving for acquiring the funds for the remaining project will then be addressed. though some communities may be unpleased about their regional upgrades being delayed. i believe that through high government transparency and public reporting, people will understand just why they may need to hold out for a little while longer. but be comforted by the track record i will set of delivering all that i promised and know that i am working as best as i can to further their interests and not home drinkin rum. because im not a drinker who has to take a shot every day. stress doesnt lead me to drink either. i dont know what stress is. i only know a problem exists to be solved.

of course, the problem of over discussion is one im very very aware of. it can be a significant inefficiency in the democratic process. one way i know of to aid in increased efficiency in this area is to always ensure the discussion remains on topic, the questions are on topic and the answers are on topic. in other words. work! not kixing around in a suit in air condition trying to kill time to clock your card.

worthy to note, that the way i understand and believe in the democratic process. i would not see the opposition as the enemy. but as an aid and assistant to the ruling government. their job is to shine light on possibilities. sometimes those possibilities are spawned out of paranoia, and sometimes they are spawned out of a legitimate concern with good reasoning. basically, they are there to ensure that the bills crafted, are rigid and beneficial to all in a non-selective way. and i will utilize their insights where deemed valuable to re-work or improve upon the original vision set forward. again, nothing personal as a representative.

[UML]

The UNC has been granted leave to challenge the September 7th elections in 6 marginal constituencies. The United National Congress officially filed their "Election Petition" tonight at the High Courth before Judge Mira Dean Armorer. The UNC is challenging election results in the marginals of: St Joseph, Tunapuna, La Horquetta/Talparo, Toco/Sangre Grande, Moruga/Tableland and San Fernando West.

all this firing of Gladiator and Paray is a diversionary tactic from the real issues!!

UNC LEADS IN LEGAL BATTLE OVER 6 DISPUTED CONSITITUENCIES

The United National Congress (UNC) has crossed the first hurdle in its challenge of the Elections and Boundaries Commission’s decision to extend last Monday’s general election voting by one hour due to rainy weather. Lawyers representing the UNC, which lost the election to the PNM 23-18, last night received leave to pursue their petitions from High Court Judge Mira Dean-Armour after an emergency hearing in the Port-of-Spain High Court which ended after 7 pm.

Media personnel were not allowed in the court for the hearing, which was attended by unsuccessful UNC candidate for Toco/Manzanilla Brent Sancho and EBC chairman Dr Norbert Masson. In a brief interview after the case, attorney Wayne Sturge claimed the result vindicated former prime minister and UNC political leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar, who first took issue with the EBC’s decision after her party’s election defeat.

“This is a slap in the face of those who believed that it was frivolous and vexatious. This shows that the rule of law prevails and in due course we will get our justice,” Sturge said. Given Dean-Armour’s ruling, the lawyers will now have to file the petitions and will then have to wait for a date for the case to be heard.

“We feel that given past experience this is something that is dealt with expeditiously. We think it should be dealt with in the space of nine months,” Sturge said, adding that the eventual decision on the petitions could only be appealed to the Court of Appeal and not to this country’s final court, the United Kingdom-based Privy Council. The UNC was also represented by Gerald Ramdeen. The EBC was not represented by any attorneys during the hearing, which was held ex-parte.

The UNC is claiming that the EBC’s rules and the Constitution give the EBC only the power to adjourn an election in instances of public violence and not the power to extend the traditional election timeframe of 6 am to 6 pm. The party is seeking to have the court declare the results in six marginal constituencies null and void. The disputed constituencies are San Fernando West, La Horquetta/Talparo, Toco/Sangre Grande, Tunapuna, St Joseph and Moruga/Tableland.

In the event the party is successful the court may order that by-elections be held or may possibly rule that a declaration that the EBC breached its powers be granted. Responding to the UNC’s initial threat of the petitions last week, the EBC defended its position and said that section 71 of the Constitution gave it autonomy to manage the registration of voters and the conduct of the election in an unfettered manner.

Election results in disputed constituencies

Constituency UNC PNM

San Fernando West 6,802 10,112

La Horquetta/Talparo 7,606 10,428

Tunapuna 7,613 11,228

St Joseph 8,903 10,536

Moruga/Tableland 10,275 10,808

Toco/Sangre Grande 8,101 12,005

THE UNITED NATIONAL CONGRESS PRESS RELEASE

"The United National Congress was today granted leave to file 6 election petitions to challenge the validity of the election process in 6 critical constituencies namely:

· La Horquetta/Talparo
· Tunapuna
· St. Joseph
· Toco/Sangre Grande
· San Fernando West
· Moruga/Tableland

Senior High Court Judge Madam Justice Mira Dean- Amourer made the order granting leave in all 6 matters at around 7pm in a special late night sitting of the High Court at the Hall of Justice in Port of Spain. The order granting leave certifies there is merit in the petitions and that there is a serious issue to be tried. If the case is without merit, leave will be refused.

The issue in this case is whether the EBC acted illegally and in breach of the constitution when it extended the voting time from 6pm- 7pm on Election Day.

The sudden decision of the EBC to extend the voting time caught many by surprise and led to chaos and confusion. Legal letters were written to notify the EBC that candidates were receiving numerous complaints from voters who were turned away from the polls, when they went after 6pmto cast their vote because the EBC officials were themselves unaware of the EBC's decision to extend the voting time.

It was reported in the Trinidad Guardian Newspaper on September 8th 2015 in a story entitled "T&T Starts New Era under the PNM" that the PNM had asked the EBC to extend the voting time. There has been no denial or refutation of this significant statement by the EBC. The UNC was never informed that such a request was made. The UNC was never officially informed by the EBC of its decision to extend its time for voting.

We therefore call upon the EBC to state publicly whether the PNM did in fact make such a request. If such a request was made, we asked that there be full and frank disclosure in the following:

Ø When was the request made?

Ø What time was it made?

Ø Who made the request?

Ø To whom was it made?

Ø How was it made?

Ø Why was no other political party or candidate informed of this request?

Ø When did the EBC meet to consider this request?

Ø Why was it approved?

These are important searching questions which the EBC must answer to the population left our democracy be distorted and thwarted. It was patently unfair to change the rules of the election and shift the goal post so close to the final whistle. It is important that the constitution be protected from any abuse of power and hence we are pleased that the High Court has seen it fit to grant leave so that clarification can be provided on this important issue which strikes at the very heart of our democracy. The UNC was represented by Former Attorney General Anand Ramlogan SC, Wayne Sturge, Gerald Ramdeen and Kent Samlal."

[Habit7]

I guess this was before they realized they lost 11 seats

Lee: Polling stations open late
By Richardson Dhalai Tuesday, September 8 2015

Claiming two polling stations within the Pointe-a-Pierre constituency had not opened at the scheduled 6 am time, UNC Pointe-a-Pierre candidate David Lee wrote the Elections and Boundaries Commission, (EBC), requesting that both stations be granted an extension to allow voters to be able to cast their ballots.

Coincidentally, the EBC did just that not because of Lee’s complaint but because heavy afternoon showers delayed many voters across the country and the commission allowed votes to be cast up until 7 pm.

However, earlier yesterday, Lee, speaking at his Paraiso compound, Claxton Bay offices, said the letter had been drafted by his election agent Nyree Alfonso and sent to EBC chairman Dr Norbert Masson and returning officer, Hubert Ramnarine.

“We had a couple of hiccups this morning about 6 o’clock, two issues, one a polling division didn’t open until 6.30am and then the other one was an issue about a ballot box, and the keys they didn’t bring the keys to open the ballot box, so we wrote a letter to the returning officer about those two issues,” Lee said.

The polling divisions are are the Union Claxton Bay Secondary School and the Pointea- Pierre Government School respectively.

He said another issue which developed was regarding one of their sub agents who was not allowed onto the polling station compound.

“They weren’t allowing our sub agent to enter one of the polling divisions because there was a miscommunication about the rule of a sub agent being allowed to enter a polling divisions. They were assuming it was 10 minutes for the entire day but is 10 minutes at a time, his role is just to go in and collect the information and come out,” Lee explained.

Lee said he had cast his ballot at 6.15 am at Maple Leaf School in Petit Valley saying the process was “normal” expressed confidence that the UNC would recapture the Pointe-a- Pierre constituency.

“We feel very confident, the numbers are very strong at this point in time, the numbers appear to be a very high turnout out so far, we’ll wait and see,” he added.

http://www.newsday.co.tt/politics/0,216740.html

Monday was the second time the EBC extended voting hours. The other occasion was during the December 4, 1961 election due to problems with voting machines. Cabinet met in emergency session then to approve the extension of hours.

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2015-09- ... on-illegal

[EmilioA]

Monday was the second time the EBC extended voting hours. The other occasion was during the December 4, 1961 election due to problems with voting machines. Cabinet met in emergency session then to approve the extension of hours.

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2015-09- ... on-illegal

Note in 1961 we had a different Constitution.

but as ive said before. mainly.. party financiers will also have to fund my campaign on principle and not to expect any special favours.



in a scenario with multiple contracts competing for an insufficient pot of cash, the project which brings the most benefit will be pushed to the fore. and the problem solving for acquiring the funds for the remaining project will then be addressed. though some communities may be unpleased about their regional upgrades being delayed. i believe that through high government transparency and public reporting, people will understand just why they may need to hold out for a little while longer. but be comforted by the track record i will set of delivering all that i promised and know that i am working as best as i can to further their interests

Good luck with that.

But I have one more question--how do you quantify benefit between a new highway and new water pipes ?

[York]

Cabinet met....so govt does have jurisdiction over the EBC, it can be argued....Or that the EBC can't just UPS and extend hours cause there was a lil drizzle in d land.

[EmilioA]

Cabinet met....so govt does have jurisdiction over the EBC, it can be argued....Or that the EBC can't just UPS and extend hours cause there was a lil drizzle in d land.

Note in 1961 we had a different Constitution.

Daranitis spreading.

When year did we become independent again ?

[bluesclues]

Monday was the second time the EBC extended voting hours. The other occasion was during the December 4, 1961 election due to problems with voting machines. Cabinet met in emergency session then to approve the extension of hours.

http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2015-09- ... on-illegal

Note in 1961 we had a different Constitution.

but as ive said before. mainly.. party financiers will also have to fund my campaign on principle and not to expect any special favours.



in a scenario with multiple contracts competing for an insufficient pot of cash, the project which brings the most benefit will be pushed to the fore. and the problem solving for acquiring the funds for the remaining project will then be addressed. though some communities may be unpleased about their regional upgrades being delayed. i believe that through high government transparency and public reporting, people will understand just why they may need to hold out for a little while longer. but be comforted by the track record i will set of delivering all that i promised and know that i am working as best as i can to further their interests

Good luck with that.

But I have one more question--how do you quantify benefit between a new highway and new water pipes ?

there are many factors to consider.

on one side we have

traffic management which brings increased efficiency in traffic flow and thus can lead to an increase in productivity. ie the guy that would reach 5 minutes late will now reach on time. delivery vehicles can make 10 deliveries a day instead of 8 or 6 etc. considerations also have to be made to make rural areas which may be a bit alienated from taking employment opportunities outside their local area. there is also the possibility of pre-planned projects that would require that increase in efficiency or connectedness to go under way. and the benefit of those projects to the overall country and economy have to be weighed

vs

the fact that a clean and regular water supply is crucial for any civilized country wishing to call itself 'Developed'. we would have to measure the extent of the situation as to how dire it is, how many people it affects, whether it can open greater opportunities for agriculture or other business in the area etc. and of course, the cost.

basically a Cost Benefit Analysis.

projects can also be split up into smaller parts using the projects budget and time span in a way that by the time we are almost finished tapping the original budget, the additional funds would have been acquired through other avenues during the time period. which would have required discussion and feasibility planning as to how likely we are to be successful at gaining the additional funding through the proposed and discussed ideas. so if 2 projects needed 4bn but we only had 3bn. we could start both projects and span them out so there is visible, steady progress.

this last method might be the one previous governments have used in large 'pet projects'. problem with this method is that it depends heavily on the success of your resource management plan. and the budget must also include overestimation for project overruns. otherwise u end up with examples such as the tarouba stadium. sending money into a hole that couldve been applied elsewhere.

[Habit7]

Prakash absent as Kamla edits “PP” from speech
Published on Sep 22, 2015, 9:30 am AST
By Joel Julien




NEWLY-APPOINTED Opposition Leader Kamla Persad-Bissessar edited out the words “People’s Partnership” from the speech she delivered after accepting her letter of appointment from President Anthony Carmona.

The words “People’s Partnership”, which was previously used to described the coalition Government headed by Persad-Bissessar, appeared three times on her speaking notes yesterday.

Persad-Bissessar however never mentioned it once.

Notably absent from the audience present to support Persad-Bissessar during her appointment as Opposition Leader yesterday was Congress of the People (COP) political leader Prakash Ramadhar.

Ramadhar is the only member of the opposition bench not to have been elected under a United National Congress (UNC) banner in the September 7 general election.

Calls to his phone proved futile yesterday.

Persad-Bissessar’s speech appeard to refer to president George Maxwell Richards, former independent senator Helen Drayton and the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC).

What Persad-Bissessar also chose not to say has raised eyebrows.

According to Persad-Bissessar’s speaking notes page six states:

“We remain a strong and united group representing the widest possible coalition of interest through our People’s Partnership and it is my intention to vigorously represent all the people with the same commitment as I did when I was prime minister”

Persad-Bissessar opted to say “partnership” instead of “People’s Partnership”.

On page 7 of Persad-Bissessar’s speaking notes it states:

“As Opposition Leader I intend to be that voice and my colleagues in the PP who occupy seats in our parliament are also committed to that cause”.

Instead she said:

“As Opposition Leader I intend to be that voice and my colleagues in Parliament who occupy seats are also committed to that cause”.

Later on page 7 of Persad-Bissessar’s speaking notes it states:

“I will ensure that as the leader of the Opposition and of the PP coalition I will be as vigilant and diligent as we were in government”.

Instead she said:

“I will ensure that as the leader of the Opposition and our parliamentary caucus I will be as vigilant and diligent as we were in government”.

There was no mention of the People’s Partnership otherwise during her speech.

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/20150922 ... rom-speech

[K74T]

The ship has sunk.

[Sanctifier]

...There was no mention of the People’s Partnership otherwise during her speech...

Understandable, TOP & NJAC lost their deposits...
Tewari (so-called COP) won under the UNC banner... & Ramadhar won in a UNC "safe-seat"...
So what "Partnership" is left?

If you thought he was "missing a pair" before... iz now we'll see Ramadhar really "singing" for his supper!
He might as well buy a few yellow shirts now and stop the charade.
There's no way in hell the UNC will allow him to run for St. Augustine again as a COP.

BTW... looking forward to see which side of the toilet Tewari floats too.

[The_Honourable]

PRESIDENT'S HOUSE ANNOUNCES INDEPENDENT SENATORS

The Nine Senators are:

Jennifer Raffoul
Melissa Vikki Ramkissoon
Taurel Shrikissoon
Sophia Karen Chote SC
Paul Gerard Richards
Stephen Creese
David Small
Ian Roach
Dr Dhanayshar Mahabir

Read More: https://www.facebook.com/CNC3Television ... 5974947996

[Dizzy28]

Didn't realize Paul Richards have so much qualifications!!

[UML]

Never judge ppl


Only God can

[Rory Phoulorie]

Never judge ppl


Only God can

Too bad you don't heed your own words.

[D Diesel Report]

PRESIDENT'S HOUSE ANNOUNCES INDEPENDENT SENATORS

The Nine Senators are:

Jennifer Raffoul
Melissa Vikki Ramkissoon
Taurel Shrikissoon
Sophia Karen Chote SC
Paul Gerard Richards
Stephen Creese
David Small
Ian Roach
Dr Dhanayshar Mahabir

Read More: https://www.facebook.com/CNC3Television ... 5974947996

Oh lord! Ian Roach? Now everything that the Government passes in the lower house gonna pass. No matter how absurd it is.

I weep for T&T.

[desifemlove]

The PNM stated on their political platform they will solve crime, end corruption (first country in the world) and US$ will be flowing in the roads like milk and honey.

Still waiting 50 years now

Dr. R was jus a lil boy in Dr. Williams's time. he's responsible for what Dr. Williams did?

if somebody criticised Kams after 12 days in 2010, yuh'd stand for dat?