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

[boxy]

Just heard Carolyn Seepersad Bachan just destroy the entire morning panchayat panel

#newrespect

details

[UML]

ESC: Debate runoff bill after election

By SEAN DOUGLAS Tuesday, August 12 2014

THE Emancipation Support Committee (ECS) has urged Government to withdraw the controversial Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2014 and delay any debate on changing the electoral system until after the next general election.

In a statement signed by leader Khafra Kambon, the ESC yesterday called on Government to heed the many voices raising fundamental objections to the bill.

“Provisions in the bill have far reaching implications for the future of governance in our society,” the ESC warned.

“The most controversial ‘runoff’ clause poses risks for the society, both from its possible outcomes in an electoral contest and from the atmosphere it has already generated which will only get worse in an election environment.”

The ESC said elections can exacerbate social divisions and heighten racial tensions, and all political stakeholders must act responsibly so as not to compromise the country’s relative harmony.

“Many of the justifiably passionate commentaries so far on this section of the bill should alert us to the dangers in an environment where each major party’s core support is ethnically based,” advised the ESC.

“The danger lies not only in the possibility of an outcome that postpones the final result of an election but in the additional fuel the controversial clause will add to the heat of the election campaign.”

The ESC said the current Government has had the opportunity to recognise that there is a “no win” situation for the people of Trinidad and Tobago if this bill is rushed through Parliament before the election, and must immediately withdraw it.

The committee urged that after next year’s general election if any MP elected in the new Parliament then think that the bill’s runoff clause, and or other new major provisions, are good for the country those proposals must be publicly aired and debated before such a bill is introduced into the Lower House.
http://www.newsday.co.tt/politics/0,198973.html

..everybody singing for the PNM supper.


even meh girl merle

Timeline of runoff provision
Published:
Monday, August 11, 2014


March 2, 2013- Cabinet appoints a National Commission on Constitutional Reform to engage in public consultation on constitutional reform. 12 June 2013 - Legal Affairs Minister Prakash Ramadhar says $4 million is spent on consultations.

27 December 2013 - The Report of the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) is submitted to the Prime Minister.
30 April - A meeting is held and the CRC agrees to some proposals selected from the report, to be taken to Parliament. The runoff is not discussed.
9 July - Another meeting is held to discuss recommendations. Commissioner Merle Hodge says she was absent from this meeting in which the runoff ballot is discussed.
4 August - Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar reveals that second ballot runoff voting, right of recall, fixed election dates and two term limits for Prime Ministers will be part of the new constitutional reform.
6 August - Opposition leader Dr Keith Rowley describes the proposed legislation as “dangerous” saying it had the potential for a defeated party to hold on to power while secondary elections are held.
7 August - Constitutional Reform Commission Member, Dr Merle Hodge says the contentious runoff proposal was not in the People’s Partnership manifesto, the main consultations around the country or in the commission’s final report. She calls for the parliamentary debate to be postponed.
8 August - Attorney General Anand Ramlogan says commissioners were “handsomely paid” and attacks Hodge saying she was upset by the defeat of the Winston Dookeran faction by the Ramadhar faction in the Congress of the People’s (COP) internal election.
8 August - Former attorney general Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj says the bill will trigger political instability in T&T if it becomes law. He vows to mount a legal fight to stop the bill.
9 August - Former Senator Subhas Panday also predicts dire consequences for T&T if the bill is passed, saying it is an attack on democracy.
9 August - Non-governmental organisation Fixin T&T mounts a protest outside the Prime Minister’s Philippine residence. They are chased off by government supporters led by chairman of the Penal/Debe Regional Corporation Premchand Sookoo.
10 August - Movement for Social Justice also calls for the postponement of the debate and issues a call for COP and TOP parliamentarians to withdraw their support.
10 August - Congress of the People calls for a delay in the vote of the legislation to allow for wider analysis.
http://www.guardian.co.tt/news/2014-08- ... -provision

SO SHE WAS ABSENT but quick to jump up and cause bachannal to say it wasnt part of the discussion. I am not surprised!

What I find strange was that she missed the meeting but didn't bother to find out after what was discussed.

She's trying to tell the nation that she signed off on it and didn't know about the addendum.....dereliction of duty perhaps.

...look like she like to sign ting and say "me na no"

check out stargirl Dr. Merle "i doh kno nuttin" Hodge on Monday outside Parliament.



but i tort she was ah COP???????


..........ONE is ONE

[K74T]

Nobody wants to be affiliated with that shitsquad anymore.

[Habit7]

Just heard Carolyn Seepersad Bachan just destroy the entire morning panchayat panel

#newrespect

details

It basically was Bachan eloquently articulating her position on the bill but Cuffy-Dowlat ended up just shouting "you voting with PNM!"
She then had to school the panel on the fact that an MP represents the people, not a coalition objective. Dowlat was silent.

[UML]

Just heard Carolyn Seepersad Bachan just destroy the entire morning panchayat panel

#newrespect

details

It basically was Bachan eloquently articulating her position on the bill but Cuffy-Dowlat ended up just shouting "you voting with PNM!"
She then had to school the panel on the fact that an MP represents the people, not a coalition objective. Dowlat was silent.

so did she get the permission of the people in her constituency to vote in that manner?

you really fall for hot air, noise and pies in the sky...typical pnm

All this set ah beat up from PNM tuners and bill still pass, well its off to the senate now.

I guess those who highfiving eachother over the passing of the bill missing the point. The fact that such a fundamental bill of our democracy passed without widespread popular support is condemning the gov't. Even more so that there were 2-3 dissenting voices on the gov't side is also showing a wide rift in the gov't. This doesn't bode we'll for them in 2015.

Plus although all the gov't needs is one independent vote in the senate, these are the same senators who voted against the solider/police bill. The writing is on the wall for the PP.

SO SHE WAS ABSENT but quick to jump up and cause bachannal to say it wasnt part of the discussion. I am not surprised!

It still wasn't part of the public consultation.

but didnt she say she never hear bout it and it was never discussed?

how could it be part of the consultations when the CRC recommended that something be done whe they SUBMITTED their report?!!!

details please





btw you on a roll bro

[desifemlove]

OK PNMs...

what wrong wit term limits?

Dr. Rowley fraid cos he wanna be like he predecessor and have 19 years as PM?

And right of recall. Imbert or McDonald or whoever fraid dey lose dey seats?

PNM clutching at straws....

Can any PNM say and reason out why term limits are bad, for one? If the USA does have term limits (different system, but same concept), how come few wanna repeal dey Amendment?

[Habit7]

so did she get the permission of the people in her constituency to vote in that manner?

you really fall for hot air, noise and pies in the sky...typical pnm

Let's say she didn't, and she is wrong for not doing so...

How much more wrong is the PM that after a year of public consultation and $14 million, a confidential addendum is added to the report last month and with the interpretation of select inner circle UNC members, we get a bill with a clause proposing run off?

Did the PM consult with ppl about run offs?

If I fell for hot air, what do you think about the ppl I posted in the video?

[j.o.e]

Stop talking sense in this thread Habit7... you're looking very PNM.

[pete]

What is the big fear for runoffs in the first place? If a valid third party emerges and gets enough "neither of the above" support for the two traditional parties and can then win seats by maybe pulling the people who voted for the third place party wouldn't it be better?

[Slartibartfast]

Habit if you start talking sense you know that UML wouldn't understand you right? If you want to get through to UML just tell him you giving him a free UNC t-shirt. No arguments needed.

[UML]

so did she get the permission of the people in her constituency to vote in that manner?

you really fall for hot air, noise and pies in the sky...typical pnm

Let's say she didn't, and she is wrong for not doing so...

How much more wrong is the PM that after a year of public consultation and $14 million, a confidential addendum is added to the report last month and with the interpretation of select inner circle UNC members, we get a bill with a clause proposing run off?

Did the PM consult with ppl about run offs?

If I fell for hot air, what do you think about the ppl I posted in the video?

runoff was discussed with the Constitution panel in July (9th). Did the public have input in the "PNM" Constitution before?

Didnt watch the video but im sure their are PNMites in the same situation

[UML]

jump high jump low...the PNM has always been the party ppl vote against and they always benefit from a third party getting into power without the approval of the "people"

[Habit7]

so did she get the permission of the people in her constituency to vote in that manner?

you really fall for hot air, noise and pies in the sky...typical pnm

Let's say she didn't, and she is wrong for not doing so...

How much more wrong is the PM that after a year of public consultation and $14 million, a confidential addendum is added to the report last month and with the interpretation of select inner circle UNC members, we get a bill with a clause proposing run off?

Did the PM consult with ppl about run offs?

If I fell for hot air, what do you think about the ppl I posted in the video?

runoff was discussed with the Constitution panel in July (9th). Did the public have input in the "PNM" Constitution before?

Didnt watch the video but im sure their are PNMites in the same situation

Was the public privy to the discussion on July 9th?

Are all the members of the public members of the political party the PNM in which they should expect input into the PNM internal party constitution?

What situation, I thought you didn't watch the video?

[eliteauto]

With all respect to All non-believers, I think Dr Rowley has a great opportunity before him, if only he is bold and brave enough to grasp it. He should produce his and his Party's draft document for constitutional reform and launch his own national consultation.
He can then produce a draft that will get resounding popular support; on that basis he can then mobilise a national campaign to force the Government to comply or face dire consequences. In such circumstances I a prepared to put on my marching shoes..

https://www.facebook.com/basdeo.panday1 ... 1778391138

[UML]

so did she get the permission of the people in her constituency to vote in that manner?

you really fall for hot air, noise and pies in the sky...typical pnm

Let's say she didn't, and she is wrong for not doing so...

How much more wrong is the PM that after a year of public consultation and $14 million, a confidential addendum is added to the report last month and with the interpretation of select inner circle UNC members, we get a bill with a clause proposing run off?

Did the PM consult with ppl about run offs?

If I fell for hot air, what do you think about the ppl I posted in the video?

runoff was discussed with the Constitution panel in July (9th). Did the public have input in the "PNM" Constitution before?

Didnt watch the video but im sure their are PNMites in the same situation

Was the public privy to the discussion on July 9th?

Are all the members of the public members of the political party the PNM in which they should expect input into the PNM internal party constitution?

What situation, I thought you didn't watch the video?

WIN!

[The_Honourable]

What i want to know is since when the PNM advocating and championing the cause of the "3rd force"? They did not support Proportional Representation last year which would have given 3rd parties some power but all on of a sudden...

Obviously the PNM is supporting the 3rd parties since they have a history of splitting UNC votes which means a win for the PNM. PNM voters are loyal so they will stay PNM (even though the ILP was a legitimate threat to the PNM last year but that party got too big too fast and fall down hard for LGE.)

The runoff elections has its pros and cons which has been voiced here. I am willing to see how it goes but i did not like how that section off the bill was presented to the public. There should have been more public consultation. You can't just "ups" and bring it into parliament juss so, you making yourself and your government look suspicious.

If the MSJ, ILP, COP and others keep seeing themselves as 3rd parties, they will always loose the election. They should be fighting to get majority support so they can form the government. Yes the run off would put you out of the race if the majority of the votes went to the UNC & the PNM but if you were a stronger party having lots of support, you can contend as #1 or #2 in the runoff elections meaning you kicked out one of the popular parties... the UNC or the PNM. Even better, strive to get the 51% so you would not have to have runoff elections period.

[Habit7]

"The enemy of my enemy is my friend"

[desifemlove]

So a third party didn't help Panday....got it..

[rspann]

Ramesh want to bring back the real UNC. He says that the UNC now has been hijacked, so he wants to call all original UNC members back home.

[desifemlove]

Ramesh? ent he 70? ent UNC got no new/young blood? when all de Cabinet is over 50? And PNM ent much better.

[Habit7]

I have been for the term limits provision but recently I heard a scenario that has me weary. Let's say a PM serves for 3yrs, election is called and voted out, comes back and serves a full 5yrs.

If he gets a third term, and now accumulates 10.5yrs in office, do we stop the govt and elect a new govt or do we just appoint a PM that didn't face the polls?

[Crackpot]

^^ The entire legislation is bad law

[pioneer]

Can pnm please post their draft constitution?

[zoom rader]

I have been for the term limits provision but recently I heard a scenario that has me weary. Let's say a PM serves for 3yrs, election is called and voted out, comes back and serves a full 5yrs.

If he gets a third term, and now accumulates 10.5yrs in office, do we stop the govt and elect a new govt or do we just appoint a PM that didn't face the polls?

Any PM losing an election should step down, there is no coming back.

[pete]

Can pnm please post their draft constitution?

All they have to do is look for the one they threw in the rubbish bin. They seen to be readily able to find documents that end up in the labasse.

[Slartibartfast]

I have been for the term limits provision but recently I heard a scenario that has me weary. Let's say a PM serves for 3yrs, election is called and voted out, comes back and serves a full 5yrs.

If he gets a third term, and now accumulates 10.5yrs in office, do we stop the govt and elect a new govt or do we just appoint a PM that didn't face the polls?

As far as I see it, it should be a maximum for two terms equal to no more than 10 years. Therefore, serving for 3 years or 3 months still counts as serving for a term. Politicians need to get some restrictions. All of them, from all parties. Because the person in power is normally at an advantage to stay in power so there should be guarantees in place to limit the amount of time someone stays in power IMO.

[desifemlove]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_po ... erm_limits

Granted, not all have parliamentary/Westminster systems, but yuh see it common. Again, what is the wrong in dis?

[UML]

funny how the saviours Dookheran and Seepersad Bachan plan backfired and people calling for their resignation.

....thats what happens when you play with fire and want to look like a hero

[Allergic2BunnyEars]

funny how the saviours Dookheran and Seepersad Bachan plan backfired and people calling for their resignation.

....thats what happens when you play with fire and want to look like a hero

Ex-corporation chairman quits UNC over reform row

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/Ex- ... lmob=y&c=n



Former chairman of the Couva Tabaquite Talparo Regional Corporation (CTTRC) Dave Persad has resigned from the United National Congress (UNC) stating the Constitution (Amendment) Bill was the proverbial last straw that broke the camel’s back. In a release yesterday, Persad, an attorney, criticised the Government’s run-off proposal in the Bill and knocked the ruling Partnership for what he described as employing an undemocratic process. “An undemocratic process cannot yield a democratic result. It is a contradiction in terms. It simply cannot be denied that at no time during the many national consultations did the run-off issue featured nor were debates centered around it,” stated Persad. He noted that no member of the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) can say otherwise and it does not matter whether two members of the CRC agree with this position or not. “The fact that the commission, as a commission in itself, remains dangerously silent on this issue only confirms this fact. Having been “paid handsomely” by the taxpayers of this country, they must raise their voices or be condemned and run the risk of their entire report losing it’s integrity and being deemed a massive and expensive hoax on the population,” stated Persad. “This is, and remains, the heart of the issue on the run-off proposal. And no amount of propaganda, public relations, gun-talk or rhetoric can and ought to detract from this issue,” he added. Persad said that to delve into the merits or demerits of the run-off proposal at this stage will only serve to detract and trivialise the Government’s “brazen attempt to employ a most undemocratic process on an important constitutional matter”. He pointed out that the elected 22 members of the Lower House have already done it by voting for the bill. “One must wait with bated breath to see what the Independent senators have to say,” stated Persad. He stated that it was for this reason that the President of the Senate advocated further consultation and the COP’s Winston Dookeran and Carolyn Seepersad-Bachan voted against the bill in opposition to their very Government. “Mr Dookeran, sanctimoniously declares, that the issue is ‘extremely fundamental’, goes against all his lifelong political beliefs and declares he feels duty bound to leave a strong future for the next generation. I totally agree. And when something is so ‘fundamental’ that goes to the heart of one’s beliefs and belies from within your very own organisation, one must respond with equal fervour,” stated Persad. “And it is for this precise reason it is my intention to submit my resignation as a member of the UNC. For me, this issue is, but one of several other fundamental issues that I have had to grapple with over the last three years and which contributed significantly to my decision not to seek re-election as chairman of the CTTRC. This issue, however, is the proverbial last straw that broke the camel’s back.”
Persad also sent a message to his colleagues, stating: “For those who parade as flag-bearers of the gospel of ‘new politics’, it continues to remain elusive as to when fundamental becomes so fundamental as to warrant decisive action to meet their utterly idle and empty boast. Perhaps, the most fundamental thing for them is the supreme desire to hold on to office and power, temporary as it might be, at any cost.”

[j.o.e]

More PNM ppl against the bill

http://www.trinidadexpress.com/news/BIL ... lmob=y&c=n

While Government continues to press on with its promise to make sweeping changes to the Constitution, the backlash against the bill continues to grow.

The Law Association has now joined those opposed to passing the Constitution (Amendment) Bill 2014 with its president Seenath Jairam, SC calling for the debate to be stopped and the people to be consulted on the controversial run-off measure. The imbroglio has also provoked former chairman of the Couva Tabaquite Talparo Regional Corporation (CTTRC) attorney Dave Persad to signal his intention to resign as a member of United National Congress (UNC) which is led by the Prime Minister. Persad also took issue with the bill’s run-off provision stating that “no amount of propaganda, public relations, gun-talk or rhetoric can and ought to detract from this issue”. And, to add to the ongoing drama the Elections and Boundaries Commission (EBC) disclosed yesterday it was never consulted on the bill before it was brought to the Parliament. There has been a mountain of arguments against the Bill and in particular the run-off provision since Prime Minister Kamla Persad -Bissessar tabled the Bill in the Parliament on August 4. Member of the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) Dr Merle Hodge added fire against the bill, asserting that the people were never consulted on the run-off provision and the debate should be stopped.