19930312, House Debates - Friday March 12, 1993 · is to be hoped that we shall be able to achieve national consensus on an issue ... Friday, March 12, 1993 317 NUCOR ... NUCOR Corporation

Leave of Absence Friday, March 12, 1993

311

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

Friday, March 12, 1993

The House met at 1.40 p.m.

PRAYERS

[MADAM SPEAKER in the Chair]

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Madam Speaker: Hon. Members, I have granted leave of absence from today's sitting to the Member for Caroni East (Mr. Shamshuddin Mohammed), the Member for Princes Town (Mr. Mohammed Haniff) and the Member for Oropouche (Mr. Trevor Sudama).

SWAHA (INC'N) BILL

Bill for the incorporation of SWAHA and matters incidental thereto; brought from the Senate [Mr. Cyril Rajaram]; read the first time.

PAPERS LAID

1. Report of the Auditor General on the Accounts of National Helicopter Services Limited for the year ended September 30, l991. [The Minister of Finance (Hon. Wendell Mottley)]

To be referred to the Public Accounts (Enterprises) Committee.

2. Report of the Auditor General on the Accounts of the National Lotteries Control Board for the year ended December 31, l990. [Hon. W. Mottley]

3. Report of the Auditor General on the Accounts of the Tobago House of Assembly for the year ended December 31, l981. [Hon. W. Mottley]



6. Report of the Auditor General on the Accounts and Financial Statements for the year ended December 31, l991 in respect of the Global Pre-Investment Programme—Loan Contract 550/OC—T. T. and the Non-Reimbursable Technical Co-operation Agreement ATN/SF - 3159 - T. T. between the

Papers Laid Friday, March 12, 1993

312

Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and the Inter-American Development Bank. [Hon. W. Mottley]

Papers 2 to 6 to be referred to the Public Accounts Committee.

Task Force On Education (Green Paper)

The Minister of Education (Hon. Augustus Ramrekersingh): Madam Speaker, I beg to lay on the Table the following paper:

7. Report of the Task Force on Education, Draft Policy Framework, l993 to 2003, a Green Paper.

Permit me just to make a few remarks on this report. Consistent with our commitment on page 31 of our general election manifesto to carry out a comprehensive revision of the education system, in May last year the Cabinet decided—and I announced in Parliament—on the establishment of a task force, whose terms of reference, briefly, were to do a comprehensive analysis of the education system and to prepare a draft plan for a 10-year period.

In laying this report, I want, first of all, to thank publicly the members of the task force who worked to produce the report. All of them have their own jobs, but they devoted a considerable amount of time, long days and nights, in producing this report. I should like this House to record its thanks to Mr. Carol Keller, the Dean of the Faculty of Education, who chaired the task force and all the members of the task force, and others who assisted them.

We, as a people, must be proud of what we have achieved in education. Nevertheless, we must also be cognizant of the fact that some of the objectives of education plans in the past have not been achieved. We must also be cognizant of the fact that the world is going through a period of tremendous change. Putting those things together, there was need to revise the system of education in Trinidad and Tobago to ensure that our education is relevant, not only to the needs of the society, as a whole, but also to the individual children of our nation.

This report envisages some very fundamental departures in the system of education and, in particular, also the school system. The report is published as it is, in order to be the basis for widespread consultation. Education is everybody's business. Education is critical to the development and the future of this nation. It is, therefore, important that the national community be engaged in widespread discussion on a report as comprehensive and as far-reaching as this one. It is, therefore, published as a Green Paper. Over the next three to four months,

Task Force On Education (Green Paper) Friday, March 12, 1993

313

intensive national discussion will take place on this report. The consultation and discussion will take several forms.

It is our intention that the discussion and consultation on this report would be an example in participatory democracy. It is a rather large document, Madam Speaker. Copies will be available to the general public by the end of the month. The document will be sent to the Government Printer this afternoon. I did not want to send it before laying it in this House. So that copies will be available by the end of the month at a very minimal cost, so that the discussions can proceed.

1.50 p.m. I want to conclude, Madam Speaker, by stating that this report does not

represent the final policy of the Government. This is an analysis done, and recommendations made, in accord with a particular mandate. It is the hope of the Government that after consultation—after listening to what people in the country have to say—we can then finalize this document as our 10-year education plan. It is to be hoped that we shall be able to achieve national consensus on an issue as important as this.

To my hon. friends opposite, I want to give the assurance that every opportunity will be given to them to make their inputs, and to take part in the discussions. Arrangements will be made for them to put forward their comments and ideas to members of the task force as we seek agreement of the national community.

Very soon, the Ministry of Education will be inviting memoranda on the document. Before the document was prepared, memoranda were received from more than 100 persons or organizations, but now that the document is here, we feel we should invite again.

Madam Speaker, I wish to commend to this House, the Report of the Task Force on Education Draft Policy Framework 1993 to 2003.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Solomon Hochoy Highway (Street Lighting)

The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Subhas Panday (Naparima): 112. (a) Could the Minister of Public Utilities state which agent and/or

authority is responsible for the street lighting of highways in Trinidad and Tobago and, in particular, the Solomon Hochoy Highway?

Oral Answers To Questions Friday, March 12, 1993

314

(b) Is the Minister aware that many street lights on the Solomon Hochoy Highway are malfunctioning?

(c) What steps, if any, are being taken to rectify the situation?

Question, by leave, deferred.

Warren Road (Disrepair of)

The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Miss Hulsie Bhaggan (Chaguanas):

131. (a) Would the Minister of Works and Transport indicate whether he is aware that Warren Road in the Chaguanas constituency is in a state of disrepair?

(b) If the answer is in the affirmative, would the Minister indicate whether his Ministry intends to undertake improvement works on Warren Road?

The Minister of Works and Transport (Hon. Colm Imbert): Madam Speaker, I have spoken to the hon. Member and I request a deferment of this question for one week.

Question, by leave, deferred. WRITTEN ANSWER TO QUESTION

The following question was asked by Mr. Sahid Hosein (Siparia):

LIDP (Projects for 1992)

132. (a) Would the Minister of Works and Transport provide a listing of all LIDP projects for the year 1992 with the following details:-

(i) Project name/location?

(ii) Actual cost and total number of persons employed per project?

(iii) Actual date of commencement and closure of each project?

(iv) A listing of the names and addresses of persons who worked each fortnight in Region 6?

(b) Would the Minister provide the total number of women employed in and the cost of the school cleaning segment of the LIDP?

Written Answer To Question Friday, March 12, 1993

315

(c) Would the Minister provide a listing of the names and addresses of women who worked in the school cleaning segment of the LIDP in Region 6?

Vide end of sitting for written answer. ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Students Revolving Loan Fund The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Dr. Carl

Singh (Tabaquite): 133. Could the Minister in the Office of the Prime Minister responsible for Public

Administration state to this honourable House:

(a) The total sum of money which was available at the inception of the Students Revolving Loan Fund?

(b) From what source was the fund made available?

(c) To whom, i.e. names of students and areas of study and also sums which were made available to each student?

(d) The conditions under which these loans were granted?

(e) What measures are in place to recover outstanding debts?

(f) How many of these students completed their areas of indicated studies and are employed by the national community?

Question, by leave, deferred. The following questions stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Subhas

Panday (Naparima):

Board of Caroni (1975) Ltd. (Non-acceptance of Nominee)

139. Could the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources state the reasons for the non-acceptance by the Government of the Trinidad Islandwide Cane Farmers Association's nominee to the Board of Caroni (1975) Ltd.?

Sale of Natural Gas (NUCOR) 140. (a) Could the Minister of Energy and Energy Industries state the price per

cubic meter the National Gas Company will be selling natural gas to


316

NUCOR up and until it embarks upon commercial production of the product "steel carbide"?

(b) The amount of natural gas the National Gas Company expects to supply to NUCOR during research and development of the product mentioned in paragraph (a)?

(c) Will the "steel carbide" product developed be patented?

(d) If the answer to (c) is in the affirmative, could the Minister state who will be the holder of such a patent?

(e) What returns, if any, does the National Gas Company expect to receive from the proceeds of the sale of the "steel carbide" by NUCOR for the period of one year after it embarks upon commercial production?

Questions, by leave, deferred.

Unemployment (Reduction of)

The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Krish Jurai (Nariva):

153. With respect to a statement made by the Prime Minister in Parliament that "he would take steps to reduce unemployment in Trinidad and Tobago", would the Prime Minister state: (a) What specific projects will come on stream to relieve the chronic

unemployment plaguing the Sangre Grande, Biche and Rio Claro areas?

(b) What is the anticipated number of persons to benefit from such programmes?

(c) How soon will these programmes come on stream? Mr. Jurai: Madam Speaker, this question was addressed to the Prime

Minister with respect to a speech he had made in Parliament. I was hoping the Prime Minister would have replied, but since he is not here, I would like to have the question deferred.

The Minister of Labour and Co-operatives (Hon. Kenneth Collis): Madam Speaker, I am supposed to answer that question. However, I request that the question be deferred for one week.



317

NUCOR Corporation (Investment Contract)

The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Trevor Sudama (Oropouche): 156. Could the Minister of Energy and Energy Industries state:

(a) The duration of the contract for the delivery of natural gas to the NUCOR Corporation of the USA?

(b) The tax benefits which would accrue to this company by allowing it to operate in the export processing zone?

(c) The number of permanent jobs that would be created by this investment?


Trintoc's Pointe-a-Pierre Stores (Investigation)

162. Mr. Sahid Hosein (Siparia) asked the Minister of Energy and Energy Industries:

Can the Minister indicate to this House what is the status of the investigation into fraud at Trintoc's Pointe-a-Pierre stores?

The Minister of Energy and Energy Industries (Sen. The Hon. Barry Barnes): Madam Speaker, during the second quarter of 1992 an audit of the Materials Department of Trintoc, Pointe-a-Pierre identified discrepancies between purchase orders and materials receipts which were subsequently determined to total TT $9.27 million, over the period 1989 to 1992.

The audit trail also pointed to the possible involvement of outside suppliers. The matter was reported to the police for further investigation.

Trintoc's investigation committee has pursued its internal investigations and has recommended and instituted corrective procedures. The committee has also recommended certain disciplinary action which is being implemented at this time

Additionally, Trintoc has instituted civil action against two companies for the recovery of those funds. Trintoc has been co-operating fully with the police to assist their investigations and have been advised that these investigations are not yet completed.

Thank you, Madam Speaker.


318

Municipal and Regional Corporations (Designated Employer)

163. Mr. Sahid Hosein (Siparia) asked the Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of Finance:

Can the Minister indicate to the House the following:

(a) Who is the designated employer of the monthly-paid employees of the municipal and regional corporations?

(b) Who is the designated employer of the weekly-paid employees of the municipal and regional corporations?

The Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of Finance (Hon. Kenneth Valley): Madam Speaker, with respect to the cities of Port-of-Spain and San Fernando and the boroughs of Arima and Point Fortin, the respective four enactments establishing these corporations provided that monthly-paid employees were officers in the employ of the said corporations. These four pieces of legislation have been repealed by section 274 of the Municipal Corporations Act, No. 21 of 1990 which does not identify the employer of these persons. As a result, this is one of the areas of the Act which are at present under review by the Ministry of Local Government.

The monthly-paid staff of Chaguanas Borough Corporation and the nine regional corporations are civil servants and, therefore, in the employ of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago.

There are no weekly-paid employees in the corporations. There are daily-rated workers who are paid wages fortnightly. The Industrial Relations Act, Chap. 88:01 deems the Chief Personnel Officer to be the employer of these workers.

Local Government (Private Sector's Involvement)

164. Mr. Sahid Hosein (Siparia) asked the Minister of Local Government: Can the Minister explain in detail to this House what he means when he uses the expression,"the private sector must get involved in local government"?

The Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of Finance (Hon. Kenneth Valley): Madam Speaker, the private sector is already involved in local government activities in several areas, including, scavenging of refuse and debris; provision of truck-borne water; beautification programmes; the supply of construction materials.


319

In the present economic situation where corporations are confronted with reduced financial allocations, it is suggested that the further planned private sector involvement can supplement this shortfall. It is envisaged that the local bodies could co-opt the expertise of the corporate citizens in the various regional co-ordinating committees which could contribute to the optimal utilization of resources.

In addition, local bodies could enter joint venture arrangements with the private sector in areas such as management and maintenance of recreational facilities, assisting in community projects such as renovation of markets and abattoirs, sponsoring of materials for road building and maintenance programmes.

Mr. Hosein: Madam Speaker, a supplementary question, please. Can the Minister indicate to this House whether the recent spate of retrenchment at the local government body is designed to bring about this expanded private sector involvement?

2.00 p.m. Hon. K. Valley: Madam Speaker, the basic premise is wrong. There has been

no recent spate of retrenchment in the local government system. Mr. Hosein: Based on the response of the Minister, is he saying that workers

were not retrenched at various local government bodies? Hon. K. Valley: I said that. What has happened in the local government

bodies, quite simply, is that no longer are our local government bodies able to provide casual employees with work. There has been no retrenchment with respect to the permanent or regular staff in local government bodies.

Mr. Hosein: Given the fact that those persons who were casual workers were performing certain services, can the Minister indicate how the corporations are now going to avail themselves of those services? Would it be through the private sector involvement he speaks of?

Hon. K. Valley: No, Madam Speaker.

National Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Programme (Expenditure)

166. Miss Hulsie Bhaggan (Chaguanas) asked the Minister of Consumer Affairs and Social Services:

(a) Would the Minister indicate what allocations were made to the National Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Programme for 1992 and 1993?

Oral Answers To Questions Friday, March 12, 1993 [MISS BHAGGAN]

320

(b) Would the Minister provide details of actual expenditure for 1992 for rental of office space, salaries, other administration expenses and prevention programmes?

(c) Would the Minister provide details of the planned expenditure for 1993 under the same headings as (b) above?

The Minister of Consumer Affairs and Social Services (Dr. The Hon. Linda Baboolal): Madam Speaker, in 1992 the National Alcohol and Drug Abuse Prevention Programme was re-assigned to the Ministry of Consumer Affairs and Social Services from the Office of the Prime Minister. The allocations to this agency in respect of 1992 and 1993 are as follows:

Year Source Allocation

1992 Office of the Prime Minister $432,334.00

1993 Ministry of Consumer Affairs and Social Services $512,821.00

The details of the actual expenditure in 1992 are as follows:

Item Expenditure Rental of Office Space $134,309.89

Salaries $154,832.24

Other Administration Expenses $ 80,273.33

__________

Total Expenditure: $369,415.46

Prevention Programmes: The prevention programmes embarked upon by NADAPP have included such components as individual training for its officers, group training for community leaders and public education programmes which have all been funded by the United Nations Drug Control Programme (UNDCP) to the extent of $797,948.97.

Details of the planned expenditure by NADAPP in 1993 are as follows:


321

Item Planned Expenditure Rental of Office Space $146,520.00

Salaries $158,328.00

Other Administration Expenses $207,973.00

__________

Total Expenditure: $512,821.00 __________

NADAPP is currently developing a comprehensive proposal for a demand reduction programme which it expects to bring on stream in 1993 with funding from UNDCP. The cost of this programme is currently being determined.

Thank you.

The following questions stood on the order Paper in the name of Mr. Trevor Sudama (Oropouche):

Airports Authority Calculation (Pegasus Offer)

171. Could the Minister of Works and Transport state the basis and details of the calculation by the Airports Authority on the Pegasus offer which appeared in the Trinidad Guardian of January 28, 1993, with respect to:

(a) Potential return in terms of net present value being best by US $95.46 million?

(b) A saving in the buyout of shares of US $21.00 million?

(c) The capital cost is lowest by US $6.5 million?

NHA (Phase I) (Wellington Road, Debe)

172. With respect to Phase I of the NHA lot site development at Wellington Road, Debe, could the Minister of Housing and Settlement state:

(a) When was this phase commenced and when was it completed?

(b) How many lots have been distributed to applicants to date?

(c) Whether there is any restriction by the NHA to the construction of homes on these lots so distributed?


322

Madam Speaker: The answers to these two questions are deferred for a period of one week.

Constituency Offices (Furniture)

The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj (Couva South): 175. (a) Would the Minister of Works and Transport state whether Members of

Parliament have been provided with the necessary furniture which was required to be supplied by the Government to them for the discharge of their parliamentary duties pursuant to the decision made by Government on April, 14, 1992?

(b) If such furniture has been provided, would the Minister state the names of Members of Parliament who have received such furniture and the respective dates they were so provided with the furniture?

Mr. Maharaj: Madam Speaker, the Minister of Works has spoken to me and we have agreed, subject to the convenience of the House, to seek deferment of the question for one week.


Agricultural Development Bank (Loans)

176. Mr. Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj (Couva South) asked the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources: (a) Would the Minister inform this honourable House whether the

Agricultural Development Bank gave loans to persons between the period March, 1992 to December, 1992?

(b) If loans were granted during the period referred to at (a), would the Minister state:

(i) The number of applications received; (ii) The reasons the unsuccessful applicants were turned down; (iii) The number and names of the successful applicants (individual

or companies); and (iv) The total amount of the loan granted to each successful

applicant?


323

(c) Would the Minister please state whether all the loans granted were for the purpose of promoting agriculture and/or farming?

The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Marine Resources (Dr. The Hon. Keith Rowley): Madam Speaker, yes, the Agricultural Development Bank approved loans during the period March, 1992 to December, 1992. A total of 2,062 loan applications were received.

There were seventy-three (73) unsuccessful applicants. These applications were turned down for the following reasons:

Reasons for rejection No. of loans rejected Low level of contribution 13 Unfavourable credit rating 3 Incomplete status 1 Tenuous Security Offer 22 Unavailability of Labour 1 Inconsistent with ADB's policy 5 Not technically feasible 2 Poor Management arrangements 3 Land Speculation/Dishonesty 2 Incorrect information given 2 Not economically viable 8 Poor credit rating with ADB 10 ADB funding not justified 1

____

TOTAL: 73 ____

Madam Speaker, there were 2,041 successful applicants during the period March to December, 1992. The Minister will not indicate the names of persons as this would be breaching the clients’ relationship with the bank. The loans, however, ranged as follows:

Range No. of loans Value 0— $5,000 924 $ 4,735,71

Oral Answers To Questions Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. K. ROWLEY]

324

Range No. of loans Value $5,001—$10,000 512 $ 5,951,223

$10,001—$25,000 366 $ 7,647,719

$25,001—$50,000 158 $ 4,771,387

$50,001—$100,000 45 $ 2,943,510

$100,001—$250,000 26 $ 2,632,762

Over $250,000 10 $14,427,823

Madam Speaker, all these loans granted were for the purpose of promoting agriculture, farming, fishing and industries connected therewith.

Mr. Maharaj: Madam Speaker, could the hon. Minister state in the category over $250,000 what was the highest amount loaned?

Hon. K. Rowley: Madam Speaker, as you would appreciate that is a separate question which I am not in a position to answer at present since I do not have that information, but I can make it available to the Member.

URP Projects (Region 7)

The following question stood on the Order Paper in the name of Mr. Mohammed Haniff (Princes Town): 179. (1) Would the Minister of Works and Transport state:

(a) How many URP projects have commenced in Region 7? (b) Where are these projects taking place? (c) What type of work is being undertaken? (d) Whether these projects have been decided upon based on

consultation with or on the recommendation of the Members of Parliament representing the areas?

(e) Whether more projects are likely to commence?

(2) If the answer to (e) is in the affirmative, would the Minister state: (i) How many projects are likely to commence; (ii) Where will these projects take place; and, (iii) When will these projects commence?


325

Madam Speaker: The answer to question No.179 is deferred for a period of one week.


2.10 p.m. HAITIAN CRISIS

The Minister of Foreign Affairs (Hon. Ralph Maraj): Madam Speaker, I welcome the opportunity to make a statement on Trinidad and Tobago's involvement in efforts to resolve the Haitian crisis as well as to make an announcement in respect of Foreign Officer Mr. Colin Granderson, who is at present co-ordinator of the Joint UN/OAS Initiative to restore democracy in Haiti.

Trinidad and Tobago has been involved in the international effort to resolve the political crisis in Haiti virtually from its inception. Indeed, even before President Aristide assumed office, electoral personnel from this country, acting under the aegis of the Organization of American States, assisted with the registration of voters, and preparations for the 1990 elections which brought President Aristide into office.

Following the coup d'état of September 30, 1991, Trinidad and Tobago was one of eight member states of the OAS which sought to achieve a swift solution to the problem. When those initiatives did not succeed, we made a significant contribution to the longstanding OAS effort through Ambassador Edwin Carrington, who represented Trinidad and Tobago on several missions to Haiti, before he assumed the Secretary-Generalship of the Caricom Secretariat.

It was against that background of commitment, involvement and contribution, that when the Secretary-General of the OAS launched a renewed initiative on the Haitian crisis, an approach was made again to Trinidad and Tobago to participate in the OAS team, headed by the Secretary-General himself, that visited Haiti from 18—21 August, 1992. The OAS mission of August 1992 was intended to clear the way for the stationing in Haiti of a more long-term OAS presence, on the ground, to keep track of the situation, to distribute such humanitarian aid as was received, to continue talks with the de facto regime in Haiti with a view to improving the human rights situation in the country, and to pave the way for the eventual restoration of democracy.

After consultation with the hon. Prime Minister, Mr. Colin Granderson, Director of the Political Affairs Division of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, was

Haitian Crisis Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. R. MARAJ]

326

one of two nationals of Trinidad and Tobago who accompanied the Secretary-General of the OAS on that August mission. The other Trinidad and Tobago national is Mr. Jerome Jones, another foreign service officer of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. During that visit, agreement was indeed reached with the de facto regime for the OAS to station a civilian mission in Haiti and for the early appointment of a special representative of the Secretary-General to continue the initiative.

Directly following the conclusion of this visit in August 1992, the Secretary-General of the OAS contacted the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, with a specific request for Mr. Colin Granderson to co-ordinate an OAS Civilian Mission to follow up the work of the Secretary General's mission. The task of the civilian mission was defined as follows:

(i) to contribute to a decrease in violence and to foster respect for the human rights of all Haitians;

(ii) to co-operate in the rendering and distribution of humanitarian assistance to the Haitian people;

(iii) to evaluate the progress made toward reaching a political solution to the crisis and consequently the possibility of modifying the terms of the embargo.

Cabinet, on the recommendation of the Minister of Foreign Affairs, agreed to the Secretary-General's request for Mr. Granderson to co-ordinate the OAS civilian mission. Mr. Granderson assumed this task on October 1, 1992.

In his role as co-ordinator, Mr. Granderson is responsible for the broad achievement of the objectives as I have outlined before. Specifically, he ensures the smooth functioning of the OAS team in Haiti; carries out all administrative functions; makes logistical arrangements; trains new personnel upon their arrival before deployment in the field; liaises with the de facto government, the military, the police and other interest groups on matters pertaining to the operation of the civilian mission and is also responsible for resolution of any local political problems which may arise therefrom. Therefore, he has very onerous and important responsibilities.

While he is not responsible for negotiations on the substantive issues, his observations and recommendations from his vantage point form an integral input into the process of negotiations carried out by those to whom such duties are allocated. In addition to the tasks as I have outlined before, the co-ordinator of the

Haitian Crisis Friday, March 12, 1993

327

mission was also required to work closely with the first "special representative designate" of the Secretary General, His Excellency Michael Manley, former Prime Minister of Jamaica, and to keep the Secretary-General informed of developments in Haiti itself, which could contribute to a solution to the crisis.

This role continues even today, with the appointment a few months ago of a special envoy of the Secretary-General of the OAS and Secretary-General of the UN to Haiti, Mr. Dante Caputo, who was a former Minister of Foreign Affairs of Argentina, and former President of the General Assembly of the UN. Therefore, Mr. Granderson continues in his role. As I said before, he is at present the co-ordinator of this joint mission. At the beginning of the exercise the OAS civilian mission consisted of 18 persons. At present, the group numbers 76 and continues to grow.

From all accounts, Mr. Granderson has carried out his duties with singular efficiency and success. His performance has won praise from all quarters, so much so, that on the completion of his initial period of participation in the OAS exercise, Secretary-General Baena Soares requested that Mr. Granderson's service in the capacity of co-ordinator of the mission, be extended for a further period of three months. Cabinet subsequently agreed to the extension of Mr. Granderson's participation in the OAS Civilian Mission, for the further period of three months. Therefore, Mr. Granderson has been in Haiti working towards a solution to the problem for close to six months.

The international effort to resolve the Haitian crisis has entered into a new phase with the participation of the United Nations. Of course, Trinidad and Tobago welcomes the participation of the United Nation because our county has been in the forefront of efforts to have the Haitian crisis considered at the United Nations, both at the level of the General Assembly and the Security Council. Trinidad and Tobago's permanent representative to the United Nations is a member of a Committee of Caricom Ambassadors who have spearheaded the effort to bring the issue under the aegis of the UN. Other members of the committee are the Ambassadors of Bahamas, Barbados, Grenada and Jamaica.

Our efforts to galvanize the international community have borne fruit at the General Assembly, which on November 24, 1992 adopted, without a vote, Resolution 47/20 entitled "The Situation of Democracy and Human Rights in Haiti". That resolution inter alia requested the Secretary-General of the United Nations to take necessary measures in co-operation with the OAS to assist in the solution of the Haitian crisis and urged the international community to support the measures agreed upon by the OAS including the commercial embargo.

Haitian Crisis Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. R. MARAJ]

328

The Committee of Caricom Permanent Representatives has held several meetings with the Secretary-General of the United Nations to discuss the matter of UN involvement in Haiti. Depending on developments in the Haitian crisis, it is expected that Trinidad and Tobago and other Caricom countries will reiterate the need for the issue to be brought before the Security Council of the United Nations.

At present, Mr. Dante Caputo is working feverishly to resolve the Haitian crisis. Among the recent decisions adopted is an increase in the civilian mission, now an OAS/UN Mission, to approximately 500 persons, as the pace towards an acceptable solution quickens.

2.20 p.m. Mr. Granderson's contribution to these efforts continues to be of the utmost

importance and sensitivity and I am proud to say that he has brought great credit and heightened recognition to Trinidad and Tobago through his performance in this most difficult, dangerous and important task. Even though his work was of extreme importance both to the process and to Trinidad and Tobago's participation therein, the hon. Prime Minister decided that Mr. Granderson ought not to be denied the opportunity to qualify for higher office within the diplomatic service of Trinidad and Tobago.

In keeping with the policy of this administration to recognize the wealth of talent which exists within the ranks of the Foreign Service, Mr. Granderson, whose career has been marked by excellence, has been given the recognition which he so richly deserves.

A word about his career as a Foreign Service Officer: This commenced in April 1977, after having served as a primary school teacher in Trinidad and as a French and English master in colleges in France, Ivory Coast, Ghana and Nigeria. His graduate work was done at the University of Bordeaux in France, while post-graduate studies were completed at the University of Ghana and at the University of the West Indies, St. Augustine, where he obtained a Diploma in International Relations. Mr. Granderson is also fluent in French and Spanish.

At the request of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, the Government of Jamaica has agreed to accept Mr. Granderson as Trinidad and Tobago's High Commissioner to Jamaica to replace His Excellency, Mr. Maurice St. John, who is due to retire shortly, and whom I would like to take the opportunity to publicly thank for his long and meritorious service to Trinidad and Tobago.


Haitian Crisis Friday, March 12, 1993

329

Mr. B. Panday: Madam Speaker, on a point of clarification, I seem to have got lost in that long and tedious speech about Haiti. Would the Minister clarify for me exactly what the Government of Trinidad and Tobago is doing with respect to the problem in Haiti? I got lost somehow.

Hon. R. Maraj: Madam Speaker, I am surprised at the question. I have made it clear that there are specific things that we have done. I outlined the initiatives that we took at the beginning; I outlined the new initiatives that we took during the course of this administration; I outlined the agreement of the Cabinet to contribute the services of Mr. Granderson and another Foreign Service Officer to the OAS Mission; I outlined the efforts of Trinidad and Tobago, at the level of Caricom, where we were one of the first countries to call for United Nations involvement in the crisis. We participated and lobbied at the United Nations to ensure that it was brought before the General Assembly. We have also been calling for the matter to be taken up at the level of the Security Council.

PERSONAL EXPLANATION

Mr. Basdeo Panday (Couva North): Madam Speaker, earlier today I sent you a note saying that under Standing Order No. 20 I will seek your leave and the indulgence of this House to make a personal explanation about a certain matter.

Madam Speaker: Permission is granted. Mr. B. Panday: The personal explanation has to do with a report which

appeared on page 36 of the Express of Thursday, March 4, 1993, under the caption, "A close look at URP", an article written by Mr. Anthony Milne in which it is reported that the Parliamentary Secretary in the Ministry of Works, who is responsible for URP has stated, among other things, that the Leader of the Opposition, Mr. Basdeo Panday, recently sent a list of names.

I did not raise this matter on the last occasion because I was waiting for a retraction of that statement, which is a lie, untrue, false, pernicious, misleading and intended to involve this side in the corruption that is taking place in URP on the other side. I read:

"According to Jarrette Narine, Parliamentary Secretary in the Ministry of Works, whose principal responsibility is the URP, the 1993 programme began three weeks before..."

with people getting 10-days before Carnival. It goes on to say that:

"To register for the URP, Narine explained, a person must show an ID card and give his address and the number of his dependants. There is no way of

Personal Explanation Friday, March 12, 1993 [MR. B. PANDAY]

330

telling if a person registering is already employed, Narine acknowledged, but information to help assess who were most in need of assistance—an applicant’s employment status comes from village and community councils, social groups, churches and political parties. Opposition Leader, Basdeo Panday recently sent in a list of names, Narine said."

I should like to ask him where I met him because I do not meet him. Where did I speak to him? Because I do not speak to him either. I want a copy of the letter which I sent to him with names. I think that this matter is absolutely important for me and for Members on this side because we have made it absolutely clear that the URP programme is corrupt and we do not want to be involved in that corruption, and we believe that the insistence that we on this side sent names is an attempt to involve us in that corruption so that we cannot attack the programme.

Someone from Prizgar Lands came today to my office—very fortuitous—and said that the programme is now controlled by gangsters whom the politicians are encouraging so that they can terrorize people who do not belong to the gang. I want the gentleman to get up and say that this is an error. He made a mistake. He received no such letter from me. I have submitted no names.

Mr. Narine: Madam Speaker, the 1991 Programme included names coming from the other side. The Leader of the Opposition, the Member for Couva North, had his clients bringing names to the regional office.

Mr. B. Panday: Madam Speaker, on a point of order. I have no clients who sent names to him. The Parliamentary Secretary is compounding a wrong that he has done. He says here, "Opposition Leader, Basdeo Panday, recently sent a list of names." I want him to tell this House that this is untrue. I did not send him names, neither recently nor at any other time. I never sent him any. I appointed no agents. I never indicated to him that I appointed agents. Do not involve me in your corruption.

2.30 p.m.

Mr. Narine: Madam Speaker, some time last year, Mr. Seechan Mulchan was given the authority to liaise with the office at Couva.

Mr. B. Panday: Point of order, again. Madam Speaker, could he produce the authority, whose authority, who gave him the authority? How does he know that I gave anybody authority? Will he produce the documents?

Personal Explanation Friday, March 12, 1993

331

Dr. Rowley: Madam Speaker, I rise under Standing Order No. 20, and I wish to quote for you. Under “Personal Explanations”, it states:

“…although there is no question before the House; but no controversial matter may be brought forward nor may debate arise upon the explanation.”

Madam Speaker, it is my view that this is turning into a debate and it is outside Standing Order No. 20. I ask you to rule.

Madam Speaker: I do not think it is a debate. I think the hon. Member was asking for an explanation. If the Member for Arouca North cannot provide the explanation at this point, then he should indicate to the Member when he can provide it, if he does not have it at hand.

Mr. Narine: Madam Speaker, I was offering an explanation. I was not aware of the question. I would make a reply, after further investigation.

Thank you very much. CUSTOMS (AMDT.) (NO. 2) BILL

Bill to amend the Customs Act, Chap. 78:01 [The Minister of Finance]; read the first time.

ORDER OF BUSINESS

The Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of Finance (Hon. Kenneth Valley): Madam Speaker, I beg to move, that this House consider under “ Bills Second Reading”, Bill No. 1 on the Order Paper at this time.

FINANCE BILL

Order for second reading read. The Minister of Finance (Hon. Wendell Mottley): Madam Speaker, I beg

to move, That a Bill to provide for the imposition or variation of certain taxes and

duties, for the incorporation of the amendments made by the Provisional Collection of Taxes (No. 22) Order, 1992, and for related matters, be now read a second time.

On November 20, 1992, I presented the annual budget statement to this honourable House. The fiscal measures announced at that time were published in the Provisional Collection of Taxes (No. 2) Order, 1992, as amended by the Provisional Collection of Taxes (No. 2) (Amdt.) Order.

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. W. MOTTLEY]

332

This Order was subsequently debated in this House on December 10, 1992 and confirmed by a resolution subject to certain modifications. The Provisional Collection of Taxes Act provides that any tax which is imposed by an Order made under this Act has effect for a period which expires at the end of four months after the commencement of the Order. Therefore, before the expiration of the four-month period, it is necessary for an Act to be passed imposing the taxes which were covered by the Order, either with or without modifications.

It has become the practice over the years to include in this Act variations of existing taxes which have been previously confirmed by resolution in order that all the fiscal measures may be contained in a single Act.

Since, as I have indicated, the majority of measures included in this Bill have already been the subject of considerable debate in this honourable House, I will, therefore, deal mainly with those areas in which modifications have been made to the provisions of the Order which was confirmed previously.

Parts I to XVII of the Bill do not contain any significant modifications to the Order. Any changes made are merely refinements in drafting style. The first modification is to be found in Part XIX of the Bill, in clause 21(2)(a), which revokes regulation 28(1) of the Animal (Importation) Control Regulations, and substitutes a new regulation to empower fees to be payable to persons other than the Comptroller of Customs and Excise or the Inspector.

This amendment is necessary to enable the import permit fees to be paid to the Permanent Secretary in the Ministry with responsibility for Agriculture for crediting into the general revenue. The imposition of an import permit fee of $10 is the second modification in the provisions of the Order. This fee is payable on the importation of live animals, carcasses and animal products into the country.

The next change is to be found in Part XX of the Bill, which deals with income tax. In clause 22(3) we propose an amendment to clarify the provision dealing with the wear and tear allowance for private motor cars purchased for over $100,000 and to make provision for the calculation of a balancing allowance for change on the disposal of such a car. You remember, Madam Speaker, this was an attempt to curtail abuse in this field.

Madam Speaker, you will recall that the Order provides that where the purchase price of a private motor car exceeds $100,000, the price is deemed to be $100,000 for purposes of calculating the wear and tear allowance, and where a car

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993

333

was purchased before January 1, 1993, the value of which, after depreciation, exceeds $100,000, the value shall be deemed to be $100,000 as at that date.

So that we are restricting the number of claims, since it is felt that extremely expensive motor cars—the value of all of those things should not be borne by the taxpayer.

Clause 22(c) of the Bill now includes a modification to the effect that in computing the balancing allowance or the amount on which a balancing charge is made upon the disposal of such a motor vehicle, the amount of the sale, insurance, salvage or compensation moneys shall be deemed for those purposes only to be the figure arrived at by using the formula: Proceeds from disposal times $100,000.00 divided by the actual value or cost.

The exclusion clause, which previously referred to car rental companies has been modified to refer to rental cars, for clarity. The intention is that car rental companies may claim wear and tear allowances in respect of rented cars on the basis of the actual cost of the car, even when such exceeds $100,000.

I turn now, Madam Speaker, to clause 22(g) of the Bill. This clause deals with a provision which was introduced by the Income Tax (Amdt.) Act, 1992 and which was assented to on December 29, 1992. That Act inserted a new section 45A into the Income Tax Act to exempt from income and corporation tax, income arising from the rental or initial sale of certain buildings constructed during the period from January 1993, through December 1994.

This, you will remember, was a stimulus we put in to get action going in the construction industry. However, no provision was made when we did so for the expenses incurred in the production of this exempt income. Therefore, clause 22(g) of the Bill inserts a new subsection (7) in section 45A which is intended to allow these expenses to be deducted, although the income is exempt.

Clause 22(i) also seeks to amend a provision which was included in the Income Tax (Amdt.) Act of 1992. This provision was intended to prevent abuses of the income tax provisions under which employees were being granted non-repayable interest-free loans prior to retirement from insurance policies entered into by employers to provide for their employees upon retirement.

It has now been drawn to our attention that in spite of the amendment, employers and employees could still avoid tax on benefits intended for the provision of retirement benefits by using these policies as security for loans, either by the employer or the employee. Accordingly, clause 22(i) seeks a further


334

amendment of the provision to provide that they cannot be used as security for a loan, nor can they be capable, in whole or in part, of surrender, commutation or assignment.

Madam Speaker, it is not our intention that these provisions should apply to group life insurance policies and clause 22(i), therefore, includes an exemption for group life insurance policies.

Part XXI of the Bill, in clause 23, amends the Corporation Tax Act to impose the business levy. These provisions have been modified slightly in respect of the exemptions to the business levy. The first modification is intended to specify more clearly the period during which new companies are exempt from tax, so that the provision now exempts companies during the first 12 months following their registration, whereas previously the reference was to companies in the first year following their registration.

Similarly, the exemption for companies owning or engaged in the operation of hotels has been modified to refer to the gross sales or receipts of a company which give rise to profits exempt from corporation tax under any Act. The intention is to exempt the profits arising from hotels, but not any other business carried on by such companies.

Additionally, certain other income tax streams may be exempt from corporation tax. The provision proposed would also exempt those income streams.

The exemption for public utilities owned by the state has also been reformulated to refer to public utilities under the jurisdiction of the PUC and, as a consequence of this change, I intend at a later stage to propose an amendment which would exempt the Public Transport Service Corporation from the business levy as a separate Act.

The next provision which I wish to point out is contained at clause 25 of the bill. We propose an amendment to the Customs Act in order to implement a recommendation of the Caricom Council of Ministers that member states adopt a common bottling strength of 40 per cent alcohol by volume as the standard for marketing rum and other spirituous beverages in the region.

The proposed amendment reduces the required strength of brandy for importation from 42.9 per cent alcohol by volume to 40 per cent alcohol by volume. A similar amendment has been proposed in clause 32 to the Liquor Licences Act.

In clause 25(1)(d) of the Bill, the Second Schedule to the Customs Act is being replaced. This change, together with the proposed amendment to Part B of


335

the Third Schedule to the Customs Act, which is in clause 25(1)(e), has been made in order to complete the implementation of the revised common external tariff as agreed by the Conference of Heads of Government of Caricom member states at a special meeting held in October 1992.

Part A of the Third Schedule has not been amended. Madam Speaker, in fact, although the bill before us is quite lengthy, most of

the changes are related to these Customs matters and are not controversial. If you go through it, you will see types of tanks, pattern samples, marine paints—it is really, although voluminous, just the reciting of all the different Caricom amendments.

The First Schedule to the Customs Act, which contains the rates of duty applicable to all classes of goods, has already been amended in keeping with this agreement by Legal Notice 189 of 1992, with effect from January 1, 1993.

The Second and Third Schedules contain a list of those items which are exempt from duty and the purposes for which they may be granted such exemption. Certain goods which are listed in the broad headings in the Second Schedule will, nevertheless, not be allowed exemption if they are also contained in the list in Part B of the Third Schedule, unless they are gifts or goods imported for rehabilitation or relief following a natural disaster.

Class 1 of Part B of the Third Schedule lists items for industry in respect of which the Minister with responsibility for Industry is not permitted to grant Minister’s licences for duty free or reduced duty importation. Exemptions to this list may be granted only with the approval of the Caricom Council of Ministers upon request made by the Minister of Trade.

It should be noted that mosquito nets, netting, tombstones, memorials and other matters of particular interest to the Member for Caroni Central have also been removed for the new Second Schedule. As a result of this removal, certain consequential amendments are proposed in clause 24(b) of the bill dealing with stamp duty and in clause 39, dealing with value added tax.

Next I turn to Part XXXVII of the Bill, which relates to value added tax. In clause 39(b) we propose an exemption from value added tax on goods imported by the Trinidad and Tobago Bureau of Standards for use in the construction, furnishings, upkeep and repair of the buildings belonging to that body or for carrying on the usual purposes for which that body exists.

In clause 39(e), we propose the repeal of the Excise Duty (Edible Oil) Order, 1988, with effect from January 1, 1993. This would have the effect of removing


336

excise duty on edible oil so that it would be on the same footing as deodorized edible oil which became exempt from excise duty when the Value Added Tax Act came into effect.

Finally, I wish to point out the amendment to the Brewery Act contained in clause 44 of the Bill. This amendment is intended to change the definition of “shandy” in that Act. Shandy is presently defined as “a mixture containing not less than 1.2 per cent alcohol by volume, bright beer, shandy concentrate, granulated sugar, carbon dioxide and water.” This has prevented locally manufactured shandy from penetrating the UK market where shandy is required to contain less than 1.2 per cent alcohol by volume. The proposed amendment seeks to enable our locally produced products to qualify for access to this market.

Madam Speaker, Members will also have received a list of amendments to the Bill which I intend to propose at a later stage. I have already made reference to the first one. The second amendment proposed concerns the import surcharge. Local manufacturers have pointed out that with the restriction on the number of Minister’s licences being granted, many goods used as inputs for manufacturing industries must now be brought in under the First Schedule rather than the Third and are, therefore, no longer exempt from import surcharge. The effect of this is that in a few cases the same manufacturers whom the surcharge is intended to protect find themselves having to pay the surcharge.

If I could give an example, Madam Speaker: Coated paper board is imported for the manufacturing or for the printing industry. Because this item now attracts a five per cent Customs duty and is being entered in the First Schedule to the Customs Act, an import surcharge of 15 per cent is also applicable. The item is not locally produced but is, in fact, imported as an input. It is not the intention and was never our intention to impose a surcharge on such inputs and hence the present amendment to remove the surcharge on inputs.

There are other items like that, for instance, in the canning industry. Some items are brought in, agricultural raw material for canning and so forth and they got caught in this unintended fashion with the surcharge. The proposed amendment seeks to correct this by exempting from the surcharge raw material inputs to be used in the local manufacturing industry, provided that the Comptroller of Customs and Excise is satisfied that the inputs are not produced or manufactured locally in the form or quantities required by the importer.

The other proposed amendment is for the purpose of ensuring that the income and corporation tax provisions of the Bill take effect on January 1, 1993. As it


337

now stands, the amendments will take effect only from the date that this Bill is assented to and that would cause problems with income tax which runs from January 1 to December 31.

So it is proposed that all the relevant provisions may have effect for the year of income, 1993, in order that, for example, the allowances and deductions may be claimed for the entire year and not just for the period from which this Bill would be assented.

Madam Speaker, this, therefore, is the comprehensive list of amendments which we have circulated that would, therefore, attach to the Bill before you. With these few words of introduction, I beg to move.

Question proposed. Mr. Basdeo Panday (Couva North): Madam Speaker, this House is in a very

fortunate position in that it is now able to deal with a Bill of this kind at this stage in the life of this Government.

Basically, as the Minister of Finance rightly said, the purpose of the bill is to enact into law the fiscal and economic measures which have been in place since November 1992, and, that being the case, this House would now have an opportunity to evaluate the efficacy of Government’s policy and its programmes for dealing with the country’s economic problems.

The purpose of this Finance Bill, as it says in its introduction, is to provide for the imposition or variation of taxes in accordance with the Provisional Collection of Taxes Order, 1992, which was published as Legal Notices No. 180 and 181 of 1992 on November 21 and 23, 1992, respectively and was amended by Legal Notice 185, which was dated December 11, 1992.

As a matter of fact, the Provisional Collection of Taxes Order itself was the result of a budget speech which was delivered in this House on Friday, November 20, 1992. So it is from the budget speech that the Provisional Collection of Taxes Order flowed and from that Provisional Collection of Taxes Order that this Bill before the House is flowing.

This House and country will recall, however, that when the Government introduced this budget and its Provisional Collection of Taxes Order, the main measures which it introduced and which have been in force for the past four months were as follows:

— increases in the fees for the acceptance of commission of affidavits;

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [MR. B. PANDAY]

338

— increases in various fees for the services of the Forensic Science Centre;

— increase in the fees for the issuance of precepts under the Supplemental Police Act;

— increases in the fees for a Firearms User’s Licence;

— increases in diplomatic consular fees;

— increase in work permit fees;

— increase in fees for the registration of deeds and leases and matters pertaining thereto;

— increases in order to register a newspaper

You had to pay more for even registering births, deaths and applications for marriage licences. There was not a single thing they did not touch. From the cradle to the grave, from the day you were born, christened, married and died, they increased everything in the last budget.

They went on to increase fees under the Motor Vehicles and Road Traffic Act; they decreased the reduction concessions of mortgages; they introduced taxes on agricultural holdings; they introduced a business levy of 0.25 per cent; increased the stamp duty; they increased the fees under the Bill of Sale Act, under the Registration of Businesses Act. Fees were increased to people who were administering the estate of their deceased relatives. Even fees that pawnbrokers and auctioneers had to pay—as a matter of fact, I even read somewhere that they increased the fees in relation to donkeys. Well, having regard to the reception they had at the last Carnival, they should make a lot of money on that one.

These were not simply increases which were inflicted upon the population at that time. In fact, the increases in Firearms Users’ Licences increased by 275 per cent. Users’ Licences of the Rifle Association increased by 33 per cent. Firearm Users’ Licences in respect of shotguns increased by 700 per cent. Firearms Users’ Certificates by 433 per cent. Firearms Users’ Certificate, Shotgun, increased by 400 per cent. Firearms Dealer’s Licence by 400 per cent; gunsmith’s licence by 300 per cent; valuators licence and certificate by 100 per cent; and so it went on.

Under the Immigration Regulations the grant of a work permit was increased by 200 per cent. In respect of persons from Caricom countries for certificate of residence, they increased that by 700 per cent. For the registration of deeds, in some cases, the increase exceeded 300 per cent.


339

That was a budget which inflicted enormous increases on the population, and all these fiscal measures which were introduced in the budget, the Minister of Finance labelled “The passage from Stabilization to Growth”. As I recall, that is what he called his budget. He said that we had already stabilized the society, the economic downslide had been stabilized, and that that budget where he introduced all those increases was a movement from stabilization to growth.

It is interesting, as I said, that this Bill now comes four months after these measures have been introduced, and it would be interesting, therefore, to see how their policies have been working for the first quarter of the financial year, 1993.

I hope that before this debate is over, the Government will indicate to us how the economy has grown; what the benefit has been of all this burden which has been inflicted upon the community. He will tell us, for example, how much revenue has been collected as it differs from revenue collected over the same period last year in respect of the same items. For example, what in the first instance, has been the impact of these increases upon the life of people? Secondly, on the ability of the Government to deal with the economic problems that the country faces? I think they owe it to this country to say how the country has been progressing.

3.00 p.m. Madam Speaker, as far as I am aware, in every respect during the election

campaign that we identified matters as being critical to the development of the society, the Government has gone backwards, it has not gone forward. It has regressed, so that I cannot see how this budget can be described as a movement from stabilization to growth. It is, it seems to me, from stabilization, to backwardness, to regression, if indeed there was stabilization at all.

Madam Speaker, with respect to unemployment, for example, I believe the official figures say that there has been a decline of two per cent from 20 to 18 per cent. I would like the hon. Minister responsible for Labour to indicate to this honourable House where exactly that employment of 2 per cent was created in this society over the first quarter of this month. Is it in URP and LIDP? If it has been in URP and LIDP, then that has not been progress because if you are dealing with the unemployment situation in this country, to employ people in URP, is not to deal with the unemployment problem at all.

We have indicated in this honourable House the fact that the amount for URP was increased, the Special Works as they called them, to $130 million or $140


340

million, is really going to have no effect whatever upon the creation of permanent and well-paid jobs.

Indeed, it is very shortsighted, we said at the time, to think that such a programme would conduce to social stability. In fact, at the end of the year, we had argued before, that after spending $140 million as at December, 1993, on URP and LIDP or whatever you want to call it, one week after, everybody would be unemployed, and they would still be hungry, and they would still be destitute and unable to take care of themselves.

If the two per cent that is registered as a sign of growth, that is, the two per cent fall in unemployment, relates to LIDP, it is really a retrogressive step. That is the point I wish to make. I believe the figures would also indicate, with respect to crime, that there has been an increase in crime for one year in this country; a country of 1.2 million people. There have been more than a hundred murders. That must be a crime rate that ranks among the highest in the world. In that regard, it seems to me that policies introduced four months ago are not working.

Certainly, with respect to larceny, we now hear that instead of being able to keep our windows open, the poor Minister has lost her motor car. Or she has bought another one? I know you can do that quite easily. They are even stealing from Ministers now. That might be, of course, poetic justice, but we lament, nevertheless, even when the stealing is from Ministers and those who are responsible for the spate of criminal activity in the country.

What I want to say, however, is that there has been an increase in crime. For example, in San Fernando—the Member for San Fernando West would know what I am talking about—over the last weekend we had eight motor car thefts. Sure, people have complained to the Minister about that, it is a pity you were not here to know about it. I know you were abroad, you told me you never travelled before you were a Minister, is that correct?

The promised investments of the Government, have not come. In that budget we heard how these measures, introduced four months ago, which are the subject matter of this Bill here today, would result in an attraction of investments. Well the investments have not come, and such investors that had indeed indicated an interest do not promise jobs in any numbers significant enough to have an effect upon the unemployment situation in the country.

Madam Speaker, the Government may want at this stage to look at the first four months of its promises in the 1993 budget. Nothing is happening, instead of


341

going forward, it is going backwards, it may want to take this opportunity to revise its policies.

With respect to the promised resurgence in the oil sector, that is far from realization. Such semblance of activity that appears to be taking place, has not in any way resulted in any abatement of the serious problem of unemployment, even in the South. Having regard to these policies, the labour movement is today more alienated than it has ever been, as the threat of retrenchment in WASA, the Port Authority, and PTSC, remains a problem that is hanging over the heads of people.

With respect to corruption, as a matter of fact, corruption continues to rear its “Saithian” head between columns of “Imbertian” guile, and “Castagnian” bravado. I told him I was going to come. I hope you understand what that meant. Corruption unabated.

The point I am making is, they are coming to us to confirm something that is failing; when you tell us that the economy has stabilized and is now moving towards growth, I would be most interested to find out where this growth is taking place. As a matter of fact, we seem to have gone backwards, because the Government's vacillation in steps that it purported to take, has shaken the confidence of business people and investors both local and foreign. The Government makes what it considers to be a step forward; there is protest and the Prime Minister, chicken hearted as he is, jumps backwards two steps. Every time he thinks he is going one step forward and somebody protests, he jumps two steps backwards, and that kind of behaviour is not going to make people more confident to invest in this society. Oh, he calls it dialectic? Did you say the dialect or the dialectic? Oh, he means dialectic.

Now he calls that dialectic. You take one step forward and two backward, he interprets that as being dialectic. We certainly went to different universities, but my colleague says diuretic. The point about that though, is that it is clear that the Government has no confidence in its proposals for moving the economy out of the mess it is in.

Madam Speaker, when it takes measures, it does not think these measures out. Had it thought out these matters, there would be no reason to backtrack. Every time you try to make a move forward, you are forced to backtrack, and you have to back-track because you do not think your way through. You know you are at point “A” you want to get to point “B”, but you do not know how to get there, you have not studied the dialect. If you had, you would have known that you must pay attention to the objective situation as it obtains on any given moment. You may


342

know where you want to go, but you certainly do not know how to get there. That is why we have statements that the Minister of Finance says we cannot wait any longer.

3.10 p.m. There is bound to be retrenchment in the Port Authority; in WASA and in—

[Interruption] That is the point I am making. We can wait no longer. There has got to be retrenchment. These workers have to go; that is what he said, these workers have to go.

Mr. Maharaj: Why would he call it retrenchment, otherwise?

Mr. B. Panday: I do not care what you call it—retrenchment. But you are saying that you cannot wait any longer, the workers have to go. But the moment you say that, quite unwisely, of course, because that is not the way to deal with things. If you had one iota of industrial relations savvy, you would know you do not deal with matters in that way. You tell people they have to go, and the moment you do that they put up a psychological wall—well obviously—And when the workers protested he said, "I did not say retrenchment—I said you have to go, but I did not say retrenchment". Workers do not know what that means, you know. "You have to go and, therefore, we are introducing a voluntary severance."

If you had any sense, before you talk about people having to go, you would have introduced the programme and done it in such a way that it was palatable. And there are ways to do that, if you know how to do it, so that you would have had workers voluntarily going towards the scheme before they put up a psychological barrier.

So what you did was threaten them that they would have to go. As a matter of fact, the Government is reported to have made a statement that "we are going to have a voluntary scheme"; and tell me if they did not say that—a voluntary severance scheme—"and if you do not accept it by a certain date"—I think it was February 15, "then we are going to impose it on you". That is what was said. Now if that is not retrenchment, I do not know what is. You tell them there is a voluntary scheme and if they do not accept it, you will fire them—we will send you home. It is because, I am saying, you do not have confidence in the proposals that you have for bringing the economy out of the doldrums into which we have found ourselves.

You are going through this Bill on sheer momentum. You are doing it because you have to do it. You do not believe in it, and you are not sure that it is going to


343

work. That is the only thing that can explain the behaviour of a Prime Minister who, when the oil workers strike, he goes into the strike camp and plays cards with them; but when the sugar workers take a similar action he says "You all are irresponsible—yours was an irresponsible act."

Mr. Maharaj: And after that he attacked the trade unions.

Mr. B. Panday: Now you cannot win the confidence of people when you behave in that kind of way; and people know you are vacillating if, when they are on strike you go and shake their hands and then come back out and in a speech in the Parliament make a severe attack on them—launch an attack on them such as they have never experienced.

It means, of course, that you are not sure of what you are doing. However, you are very lucky. You are very fortunate that this Bill has come before the Parliament at this time. Because now you have an opportunity to tell the working people and us in the Parliament how your programme is working beautifully.

I notice that, as I am on that point, the Prime Minister has come around to our view that there is need for accountability in the society, and I was very happy to see that reported in the press. There is only one problem I have. You are willing to be accountable to the press but not accountable to Parliament. So that your accountability—you must come here and say that, do not just say that outside! Come here and say that you believe in accountability and the accountability starts in Parliament! Say that!

Mr. Maharaj: It is for the Government to be accountable. Mr. B. Panday: So when you come in Parliament and resist accountability

and go outside to the press and talk about accountability, you are damaging your credibility.

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, just for the record, this Government has never resisted accountability inside the Parliament. Never!

Mr. B. Panday: I would not answer that, because the very record will show that you have. However, as you mentioned that, will the hon. Prime Minister join in the debate and tell us in this House what he meant when he spoke of accountability to the press? What, specifically, are the measures he intends to introduce to bring about accountability? No, join the debate, but if you wish to speak, speak.

Mr. Manning: Madam Speaker, I just want to advise my hon. friend, who I am very grateful to for giving way, that in consideration of that particular

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. P. MANNING]

344

question, today I met with the Auditor General and a team from the Auditor General's Department; the Chairman of the Integrity Commission and the Chairman of the Institute of Chartered Accountants of Trinidad and Tobago, and solicited their support in moving some steps forward in making for greater accountability in the conduct of public affairs.

Mr. B. Panday: Oh, I see! He wants to make public servants more accountable to the Government—that is what he is talking about. No, no, I was not talking about that. What he is doing is looking for accountants; he is looking for the Auditor General to look and see whether there are vouchers for expenditure and so on. No, no, no! You want to pounce on the public servants; you are talking about accountability of public servants to himself. I am not talking about that—I am talking about his accountability to us and to the Parliament and people! Those are the measures I am talking about.

Mr. Manning: One of the matters that were discussed, Madam Speaker, was the operation of the Public Accounts Committee and the Public Accounts (Enterprises) Committee and the fact that those Committees have not been meeting, have not been reporting properly, have not been dealing with the matters that normally come before these Committees and the fact that they are chaired by Members of the Opposition. I wonder if the hon. Leader of the Opposition would want to tell us something about that?

Mr. B. Panday: Well you know the ADB has refused to give them information only recently. That is the kind of system you want, one where there will be the facade of accountability, but no accountability at all. Only recently—ask the Public Accounts (Enterprises) Committee—the ADB refused—

Mr. Maharaj: You want another Myers?

Mr. Manning: Are you saying that is the reason the Committee has not been meeting, as it should?

Mr. B. Panday: The Committee has been—

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: Madam Speaker, will the hon. Member for Couva North give way. Madam Speaker, I rise to clear the air on the meeting of the Public Accounts Committee. The Public Accounts Committee, has been meeting regularly—

Miss Bhaggan: Every fortnight.

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: To date we have met eight times; eight meetings.


345

Mr. Manning: Eight times since 1991?

Miss Bhaggan: For this year, 1993.

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: Madam Speaker, I just want to—

Madam Speaker: What period? I have an idea there is a little dispute about the period during which the eight times occurred.

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: Madam Speaker, you see, I did not want to rise and respond, because the reports are going to come to Parliament.

Mr. Manning: Eight times? You have finished already?

Mr. B. Panday: However, that is the kind of thing you want, where the ADB refuses to give information; and you know that a former Member of this House sat on the steps of the Hall of Justice because another Public Enterprise—PLIPDECO I think it was—refused to answer questions; refused to submit documents, and so on. And that is the kind of "Mickey Mouse" arrangement you want; and that is the kind of "Mickey Mouse" arrangement we are saying you are not going to have. It is as simple as that. Be that as it may, I think you are deliberately trying to get me off what I was saying.

Mr. Manning: I was trying to help you.

Mr. B. Panday: Please do not help me, because with friends like you, who needs enemies?

I raise these matters for a specific reason and that is, if the Government continues the way it is going, it is going to find itself in a position where it will devalue the currency of this country. That is the point I wanted to make.

3.20 p.m.

I want to say again—I do not know, anybody on the other side could speak—that this debate ought not to finish unless they make a statement on whether they propose, in the near future, to devalue the currency of Trinidad and Tobago. Because I am saying, the way they are going—

Dr. Rowley: Irresponsible speculation.

Mr. B. Panday: Why is it irresponsible to ask if you are going to devalue the currency?

All this is because of the kind of programmes they are following. These are the programmes that are contained in the Bill before the House. Not only must


346

they make a categorical statement, if indeed that is the case that they are not going to devalue, but they must not hide behind the definition of the word, "devalue", and tell us that they will not devalue, but then two days later, they go and float the currency which will, in effect, be devaluation. They must tell us that they are not going to float the currency as well, not only devalue. Because the way they are going, they are carrying the country to the brink of devaluation or floating the currency and having the currency effectively devalued.

We are interested because that is going to affect workers; it is going to affect the cost of living, it is going to shatter confidence in the stability of the currency; it is going to have a serious effect upon our capacity to develop a productive economic base for exports, and all the other things that the Government said it was going to do in order to get us out of this problem. I trust that my colleagues will deal in greater detail with that aspect of the Bill that is before the House.

I want to turn to that part of the Bill which seeks to introduce, as the Minister says, the common external tariff with respect to Caricom. It seems to me that the Government has decided that it is going to introduce the CET. I note that although the Government is introducing the CET, it has never given this House the rationale behind the introduction of the CET.

They know what I am talking about; I am talking about the dimensions of this Bill.

Mr. Manning: Perhaps I should invite the hon. Member for Tobago West to make an appropriate pronouncement in respect of the Member for Couva North. The common external tariff was introduced long before the PNM came into Government.

Mr. B. Panday: They are now the Government and they agree with it and they are lowering the rate even further. They have never given the rationale for lowering the rate. I notice, however, that this Government has participated in several conferences since the Member for Tobago East became the Prime Minister, the last being the Heads of Government Conference on October 28, l992—

Mr. Manning: Which Member is he talking about, Madam Speaker? Just for purposes of the record, I should like the hon. Member for Couva North to make a clear distinction between the Member for San Fernando East and the Member for Tobago East. Never the twain shall meet.

Mr. Robinson: Madam Speaker, may I point out that there is no need, whatever, to make a distinction. It is obvious.


347

Mr. B. Panday: And painfully so.

At the Caricom Heads of Government on October 28 last year, there was an agreement to revise the CET. I think it was reduced from its original position of 45 per cent, and that the new agreement would be, as I understand it, from zero to 35 from l993—l995, and then a further 20 to 30 per cent by l998. By that time, although there had been an agreement between the Caricom countries prior to that to reduce the tariff, several Caricom countries had not done so at all. Even by the time when they came to revising the CET downwards, there were Caricom countries that had not even implemented the original agreement. Even after this meeting, on November 5, l992, St. Lucia was promising to do so. There is an article which appeared in the Express on page 19 in which it says:

"CASTRIES, St. Lucia—St. Lucia, one of four Caribbean Community (Caricom) countries which did not implement the original Caricom Common External Tariff (CET) will implement the revised version by January of next year, Trade and Industry Minister George Mallet said."

That should be in January of this year. Further down it says: "Caricom leaders agreed at a special summit in Trinidad last week to

implement a phased reduction of CET rates, with the objective of achieving a rate structure of five to 20 per cent by January 1, l998 with concessions for the less developed Caricom countries."

The question I want to ask the Prime Minister at this stage is: How many countries in Caricom, with the exception of Trinidad and Tobago, of course, have implemented the CET? As far as I am aware, none. If I am wrong, then I am subject to correction.

Mr. Manning: Madam Speaker, I just want, for the benefit of other Members, to indicate that normally decisions of that type are taken on the occasion of the annual budgets for countries. Several countries in the Caribbean will have their budgets from April to July and propose to implement on that occasion.

Mr. B. Panday: On December 16, St. Vincent was making similar promises. There is a report in the Express again, on December 16, l992, at page 31, which says:

"St. Vincent and the Grenadines will introduce the revised Common External Tariff (CET) from next April, Prime Minister James Mitchell said yesterday."


348

He was saying:

"...the CET has the potential to increase opportunities for trade and investment with our region."

I do not think they have done it either.

3.30 p.m. The point I really wanted to make is: Is not the Government putting itself in a

position where it is getting rid of its bargaining chips? For example, one of the problems in Caricom is the problem of implementation. As I said, the first 45 per cent agreement was not implemented. If the Government of Trinidad and Tobago wanted to push—if I may use that term—other Caricom countries into implementing the CET, then one would have thought that it would have insisted on reciprocity before it did so—that was my argument—and that one should ensure that it was being introduced at about the same time as it was being introduced in other Caricom countries. Otherwise, what one is going to end up with is a situation where Trinidad and Tobago alone has implemented the CET; the other Caricom countries have not done that, to the detriment of the local businessmen. That is the point I want to make.

Although the governments of the Caricom countries have been saying that this CET is a good thing, and it is going to lead to business, I want to tell you that the people who are actually involved in production do not think so. As a matter of fact, the TTMA have been putting out an advertisement since October 16, 1992, in which they have been saying—[Interruption] Have they changed their minds? I am not aware that they have changed their position from October, 1992 to now. The manufacturers are actually complaining that this is likely to lead to a loss of jobs. In fact they say that:

"Over the last few years, members of the TTMA have employed an increasing number of workers. Today manufacturing sector employment stands at over 45,000 workers who collectively earn salaries well above the 1991 figure of $865 Million per annum. In that year we contributed 9% of the national GDP (Gross Domestic Product) and brought home $983 Million in foreign exchange earnings."

They were speaking, at that time, for some 1,180 different companies. They went on to say that:

"All of the above is what we seek to save: T&T Industry; many thousands of T&T Jobs and the livelihoods of many more dependants; and T&T itself from


349

the rampant Crime and the other Social Ills which inevitably result from massive unemployment."

They had been complaining about the introduction of the CET, without reciprocity, both within the Caricom region itself and extra-regional.

The other point I want to come to a little later is that we should never have opened our markets to American goods, unless there was some reciprocity on their side. Once you do that, you throw away your bargaining chips and you have nothing to bargain with. And, you are now at the mercy and the whims and fancies of the IMF and the powerful United States economy that sits on your doorstep.

These manufacturers have formed themselves into an association of Caricom manufacturers. At a meeting that was held some time in September, 1992, the President of the Barbados Manufactures Association, Bobby Khan, spoke of a 30 per cent job loss in only nine months since the duties were imposed on raw materials. The President of the Jamaican Association, Major Anthony Robinson—no relation, I understand to the Member for Tobago East—said Good Year International had already indicated that if the proposed measures go through, it would scale down its plant in Jamaica, which presently operated at 100 per cent capacity, and would beef up its Venezuelan plant which now runs at 65 per cent capacity. Mr. Robinson said he was also prepared to close down his factory and to import and retail, should the CET be introduced.

I am sure they supply to our businessmen, and maybe I should read what they had to say on page 19 of the Sunday Express of September 13, 1992:

"He said his government had so far given the private sector in Jamaica no rationale..."

in fact, there has not been any here either.

"...for the line they were taking on the CET. But, Robinson added, since February 1991, the World Bank had told the Jamaican government it was not happy with the 45 per cent CET and asked it to use its influence on its Caricom neighbours to bring it down."

apparently, they did not have to exert much effort on the Government of Trinidad and Tobago—

"The Dominican representative Lennox Linton said word from the public sector technocrats in Dominica was that people should stop behaving as if the regional governments had a say in changing the tariffs."


350

That is the point that is being made. I think the Government should really tell the people of this country that it has nothing to do with this lowering of tariffs and so on. This Government is a pawn in the hands of the World Bank and of the United States. It will do what they tell it to do.

Here is the evidence, where they have been trying to get the Jamaicans to impress its other Caricom partners. Now, we have it the other way around. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago has become the puppet and is now trying to influence the other Caricom countries to lower the tariff rates. The point is that the lowering of tariff rates, in the present circumstances, cannot help this country. In the present circumstances, the lowering of tariff rates is going to help the American economy.

What the American government obviously wants is a market for its goods. It wants the Caricom and Latin American markets. We should not open our doors to the United States unless we had a reciprocal arrangement for the export of our own goods. This brings me to the point that I have been making so long, that there is no way out for Trinidad and Tobago and Caricom as a whole unless it becomes part of NAFTA. The introduction of the CET will result in a one-way flooding of the market share of goods from the United States, and we would be able to export nothing.

The Caricom businessmen are thinking that what they must become are importers and retailers. That was said by the President of the Jamaican Chamber of Commerce. That is exactly what is going to happen in Trinidad: We are all going to degenerate to a bunch of buyers and sellers. Since you are going to destroy the base upon which jobs are created, you would have to borrow money to buy, so that you may sell. That is the road on which the policy of the Government is travelling.

Let me tell you, and I have heard no different from Mr. Poon Tip, who is also, I think, the president of TTMA.

Mr. Manning: What is the date?

Mr. B. Panday: This is last year. As I said, I do not know that the position has changed. They have not indicated that their position has changed. As a matter of fact, our last contact with them indicated that their position has not changed.

Mr. Manning: When was that?

Mr. B. Panday: Recently.


351

"TTMA president Neil Poon Tip, reading a joint news release from the ACM, said the manufacturers 'could not understand, in the light of the Jamaican experience, this apparent callous disregard for the decimation of the manufacturing sector and the impending direct and indirect job losses."

As long as the Government continues this policy of opening up its doors in a kind of one-way stream it is going to destroy the job creating production base.

"Considerable disappointment was expressed, Poon Tip said, 'at what was perceived to be a defeatist reaction on the part of some sectors of regional leadership in succumbing with indecent haste to pressures from sources whose motives are now in question."

3.40 p.m. It is not the Opposition. These are the people who are involved in the

production of goods and services in Trinidad, and they are the ones who are telling you about this kind of indecent haste in which you are moving. And as far as I am concerned, it is a one-sided indecent haste. Let me make it absolutely clear that I believe that the Caribbean should be a totally free single-market economy. The Government of Trinidad and Tobago has the moral and economic strength to bring this about

Mr. Manning: To take the lead.

Mr. B. Panday: Of course, to take the lead, but you are behind. You are in the background. You are the only man I know who is leading from behind. When you give up your chips, how are you going to bargain? When you introduce the CET in Trinidad and Tobago without ensuring that it is introduced in the other Caricom countries, how are you going to move from this position to the position of a one-market economy?

Mr. Manning: That is the lead, from behind.

Mr. B. Panday: Of course, it is. You should ensure that this is being introduced in other Caricom countries contemporaneously. They have a history of non-implementation. Do you want to take a bet that once this becomes law in Trinidad and Tobago, the other Caricom countries are not going to follow?

Mr. Valley: It is law already.

Mr. B. Panday: No, they have not implemented it. I am telling you that. We have checked on it.


352

Madam Speaker: The speaking time of the hon. Member has expired.

Motion made, That the hon. Member's speaking time be extended by 30 minutes. [Mr. R. Palackdharrysingh]

Mr. B. Panday: All we have had are promises, as I have indicated, from Caricom countries to do it some time in the future. We have had promises before and there have been time frames. There is another dimension to the CET which I do not think the Government either appreciates or understands and, that is, the loss of revenue.

Mr. Manning: We do not understand that.

Mr. Panday: Well, maybe you can tell us how you have been collecting the revenues for the first quarter, as I raised in the earlier part of the debate, whether the taxes you are collecting are making up for the loss in revenue by a reduction of the CET.

“Mr. Bacchus, speaking on the Common External Tariff moving from 45 to 30 per cent, said that the Caricom group was very concerned about the effect of rapid trade liberalization on the national economy. He noted that developing countries would lose close to US $3 billion in revenues and US $12 billion in welfare.”

Mr. Bacchus said:

"It is clear that trade liberalization is to be approached with caution. For our Governments to proceed with full liberalization in one fell swoop would spell destruction to our productive sectors and result in social upheaval."

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, I wonder whether the hon. Member would input into all that he is saying the fact that there is an import surcharge relating to those goods he is speaking about. So that although the CET is coming down, there is that import surcharge offering some measure of protection to local manufacturers.

Mr. B. Panday: I know that you will reply in the debate. I am sure. So that the argument on this side of the House is that this Government should take the lead in moving to have Caricom as a single market before it begins to remove the barriers for goods coming from outside of the region. If you do not do that, then you will fail to develop a productive base in this country to compete with goods coming from abroad when you remove the CET. If you do not do that, then you are going to bring this country to ruin. I am sure the Government understands what we are talking about. We have said it many times before. In fact, they are


353

bringing it to further ruin, as my friend, says. The policy of this Government is one that is putting us in a position where you have all the disadvantages of colonialism with none of its advantages. That is to say, we are a base for the market of super powers and we have no access to their markets. And unless you get Caricom to become a single market before you reduce the common external tariff, that is exactly where you are going to lead this country.

I hope that before this debate ends, this Government would tell us what is going to be its approach towards NAFTA. As long as NAFTA develops, on our borders, so to speak, we cannot ignore it. We have got to become part of NAFTA—and maybe before this debate is complete the Government will tell us what steps it is taking to become part of that greater regional grouping.

Madam Speaker, we have not decided whether we are going to support this Bill until we hear what the other side has to say.

The Minister of Sport and Youth Affairs (Hon. Jean Pierre): Madam Speaker, the Member for Couva North, in part of his contribution, outlined the various increased allocations in the Bill, but he scuffed some parts of it. In my contribution, I will highlight the benefits that various disciplines in sport and youth organizations will receive.

The Bill before this honourable House marks a new dimension in the development of measures and incentives for improving both sport and youth affairs and, in particular, in the reduction of cost of equipment, gear and uniforms in these areas.

I consider it necessary to go on record as congratulating the hon. Minister of Finance, on bringing this Bill to the Parliament at this time as the implementation of measures contained therein will have enormous benefits for our sportsmen and sportswomen.

Our manifesto at pages 35 and 36, clearly states the interest that Government would have in sports and our youths. This Bill addresses the assistance that will be given to them. It was John Locke who made the statement that:

"The actions of men are the best interpreters of their thought."

If this statement was uttered with the hon. Minister of Finance, it would be clear that my parliamentary colleagues, both on this side and on the other side, would agree that the action of bringing this Bill to Parliament would demonstrate that his thought must be interpreted as being in the best interest of the development of both sports and youth affairs in the nation.

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. J. PIERRE]

354

Members of this House do not have to be reminded of the sterling achievements of the sportsmen and sportswomen of Trinidad and Tobago over the years. The Minister in charge of this Bill is a fine example as he dominated the 400 metres track event in the nation, the region, the Commonwealth, and won the silver medal in the World Olympics in 1964, just missing the gold by looking back.

3.50 p.m. There have been others who graced this Chamber with their elegance. One can

think of the late Sir Learie Constantine who was an outstanding figure on the cricket field in his day. Even today, this nation continues to produce some of the finest sportsmen and sportswomen the world has ever known especially in track, netball and cricket. [Interruption] The Prime Minister told you it was coming.

The recent outstanding performances of the West Indies Cricket Team both in the one day series and the test matches in Australia, New Zealand and South Africa bear testimony to that fact. Brian Lara, Ian Bishop, Augustus “Gus” Logie, Philip Simmonds and David Williams are household names, not only in Trinidad and Tobago, but also across the globe. We must not forget the achievements of Dwight Yorke and Russell Latapy who are making a name for themselves and indeed, Trinidad and Tobago and the region in soccer. Ato Boldon became the first athlete ever to perform the golden double at the World Junior Athletics Championships, when he won both the 100 and 200 metres.

It would be remiss of me if I did not mention that Trinidad and Tobago is making its mark, not only in individual sports, but also in team events. Our "under 20" footballers achieved the distinction of participating in the World Youth Football Finals, and in September, 1993 our "under 21" hockey girls will be showing their skills in Barcelona at the World Youth Championship. We wish them all the best. I hope, Madam Speaker, that you and my hon. colleagues are aware that gradually our youths are emerging as world beaters, at individual, as well as at team level.

Mr. B. Panday: No thanks to the Government.

Hon. J. Pierre: Any measure, therefore, that is provided as an incentive to promote the development of sporting skills and healthy life-styles must receive the fullest support of this nation. I am a firm believer that sports provide an avenue for the expression of character, discipline and personality. It also is a positive outlet for the utilization of energy, and a universal language of teamwork,


355

co-operation and communication. Sport binds people and nations. Therefore, it becomes a way of life.

In order to maximize the benefits to be derived from sport, coaching is absolutely essential. The availability of equipment and gear, acquisition of a wide range of equipment in the areas of analysis of performance, that is audio visual aids, coaching and training aids, testing and measurement which are so very important for our athletes to continue reaching their goals, will be made more affordable through exemption from payment of customs duty and will allow Trinidad and Tobago to keep pace with the international sporting community.

The exemption of sporting goods from payment of customs duty can contribute significantly to the development and promotion of sport and physical recreation at the following levels: school, community, district, nation and the region. This exemption will have the effect of lowering costs to participants in sporting programmes and opening the way for increased involvement by those who are prohibited by cost considerations. Greater participation in sporting disciplines will improve this country's chances at producing more athletes capable of competing in more disciplines with the best the world has to offer.

At the school level, physical education is considered to be the foundation on which sport skills are built. As such, the opportunity provided by this Bill will contribute to the effort to ensure that all school children are exposed to well-equipped and well-structured physical education programmes.

At the community and district levels, disadvantaged youths and others are likely to benefit from the anticipated reduction of the cost of equipment required for training and coaching. In addition, they are likely to be attracted to disciplines of sport previously unavailable to them because of financial reasons.

At the national level the national sporting organizations will be the first to applaud what they have considered as the long overdue amendment to this Bill. The exemption of payment of duties on a wide range of sporting goods and equipment would greatly contribute to the provision of proper equipment for the various disciplines of sport. This, notwithstanding, my ministry will be better placed to pursue opportunities for individuals for our training and coaching programmes at club, zone, national and regional levels.

The equipment and goods listed as exempt from payment of customs duty cover a range of team and individual sporting disciplines such as table tennis—that the Minister of Health plays so very well—cycling, football, hockey, gymnastics, golf, swimming, billiards, cricket, netball, track and field and water

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. J. PIERRE]

356

polo. While the sporting community is encouraged by the wide range of sporting goods and equipment, that have—

Mr. Humphrey: Would the Minister give way to a question? At page 56 of the document there is a section dealing with the goods exempt from payment of customs duty: equipment for water polo and swimming, excluding swimming pool equipment, inflatable mattresses, surf board for swimming pool and the like.

Can you explain why you are excluding those things that are needed for training swimmers?

Hon. J. Pierre: Madam Speaker, in my contribution I would explain to the Member for St. Augustine.

While the sporting community is encouraged by the wide range of sporting goods and equipment that have been added to the table of exemptions from duty, further dialogue and discussion are continuing between the Ministry of Sport and Youth Affairs, sporting bodies and the Ministry of Finance.

The 1975 report of the commission of inquiry into the major sports, that is the Narine Report in referring to the high cost of sporting goods stated:

"Specifically excluded from the list were the following items among others..."

The Member for St. Augustine—

"...swimming pool equipment, start pistols, stop watches, sailing boats and equipment…"

4.00 p.m.

The situation today remains unchanged, in that, these and other items are still excluded from the table of exemption from duty. The recommendations in respect of sporting goods and equipment should, where there is doubt, be exercised in consultation with the Ministry of Sport and Youth Affairs and the relevant sporting associations.

My ministry views this exemption from payment of customs duty on sporting goods and equipment as a significant step forward in facilitating the promotion of sport and greater participation in physical education and recreational activities. The consequent lowering of the cost of sporting goods and equipment will help to encourage those who participate in competitive sport to improve their skills and performance towards achieving and maintaining the highest national and international standards of excellence.


357

I think we all would agree that sport has a unifying element, not only for the nation, but for the entire Caricom region, and Time for Action, the Report of the West Indian Commission, clearly indicates the part that sport can play in the integration process.

The suggestion of the establishment of a cricket academy in the region is one of many institutions recommended which can benefit from this reduction of the price of sporting goods and equipment. It is now accepted that the West Indies cricket team has kept the flame of integration burning throughout the years. Just recently, the people of the region had sleepless nights listening to our cricketers down under—Australia and New Zealand—and indeed they made us proud.

My ministry fully supports the policy to exempt from customs duty uniforms and equipment imported by approved youth organizations. We recognize the long-term benefit to youth development work and support the motivation to mobilize young people to get involved in groups. We have scouts, guides, girls' brigade and some of the religious youth organizations and others who should all be encouraged and supported in their work, and the exemption provided by this Bill seeks to do just that.

This Bill will make our sportsmen and sportswomen energized to conquer even greater heights.

I thank you. The Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of

Finance (Hon. Kenneth Valley): Madam Speaker, the basic purpose of the Bill is to put into permanent force the tax measures outlined in the Minister of Finance's Budget Speech of November 20, 1992. We have had quite a number of occasions on which to debate those measures, and one can glean from the contribution of the Leader of the Opposition, today, that there is really very little more to say on these matters.

What we attempt to do at the macro level is to put certain measures in place, not simply to raise revenue, but also to put the economy along a certain path. I think it was last week or the week before, when I had the privilege of contributing to the debate on the statement made by the hon. Prime Minister on January 4, 1993, I made the point that we are working within a long-term framework. We know where we want to go in the longer term and in the medium term.

In the longer term, our position is outlined in the manifesto on which we fought the election. With respect to the medium term, that position is outlined in the Medium Term Policy Framework, which was laid as a paper in this House.

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [HON. K. VALLEY]

358

You would recall that with respect to the medium term outlook, there were three basic objectives outlined in that document. The first was fiscal balance; the second was external balance, that is, ensuring that the foreign exchange was available to drive the economy; and the third one, of course, was to move the economy back on a long-term sustainable growth path such that there could be sustainable jobs in the economy. That is the framework within which we are working. What happens is that in the short term, we have to do things that would cater for those medium and longer-term objectives. In other words, the short-term programme must be consistent with, and drive the medium and longer term.

Obviously, in the short term we have to deal also with the current situation—the problems that we face. We know that. When we came into office, we faced certain problems. For example, we met certain binding conditions. Thank God, no longer was there an IMF programme, but there was still the World Bank loan with certain conditionalities—that was a given. We met a certain level of unemployment. We met foreign exchange depletion. We met certain fiscal situations. I am not blaming anybody. I am merely talking about the conditions we met when we came into office and the fact that we have to deal with those short-term conditions, but, at the same time, ensure that we do not use any measure that will compromise the achievement of our medium-term or longer-term objectives. That is simply what this Government is doing.

You would find that in the budget of 1992 there has been emphasis on stabilization and, here again, in 1993, preparing the economy for growth. I have said that we are in the cocoon stage; we are on the way to being that beautiful butterfly, and we know it. [Interruption] If he had come to the church service on Sunday, he would have known that we ought not to help the break-out process. We have to allow that struggle so that we can really get the strength to fly, and fly we shall. That is the assurance.

Mr. Robinson: Madam Speaker, will the hon. Minister give way to a question? The Minister speaks about stabilization in 1992; will he tell us what the growth rate was in 1992?

Hon. K. Valley: I think it was 0.2 per cent.

Mr. Robinson: May I inform him it was minus two per cent. From a growth rate of plus two per cent it fell to minus two per cent.

Hon. K. Valley: Madam Speaker, I make the point that I was not blaming anybody. Quite simply, when one speaks about growth, one likes to speak about


359

sustainable growth. One does not talk about election growth or oil price increase growth.

The fact that the economy grew by two per cent in 1991 had nothing whatsoever to do with the last administration. But I do not want to get involved in that because that is not my approach. I am merely saying that here we have certain medium-term and longer-term objectives, but that we have to deal with the short-term situation and the short-term situation required a certain incentive package and that is what the Minister of Finance attempted to do in his budget of 1992 and again in 1993.

You will see clearly, Madam Speaker, emphasis in certain areas: savings, the construction sector to move the economy and improved and increased levels of funding for the Unemployment Relief Programme, knowing full well that there would be more persons unemployed. [Noise]

Madam Speaker: Members of the public gallery, I am again to inform you, if you are going to sit here, you will observe the rules of the House. This is a Parliament that is in progress. So you will observe the rules of silence and good conduct.

Hon. K. Valley: I was making the point that one would note that there was an increase in the allocation to the Unemployment Relief Programme because we know that in the short term, there must be some institution available or some place where persons at the margin could find work.

If you look at it, we are saying that we have to move towards efficiency and competition, because we have to gear our economy for the external market. We know that Trinidad and Tobago must be an export platform. That is the reality of the situation. We have to be an export platform. I mean, 1.2 million persons are too few to do anything, but given our allocation and so on, Trinidad and Tobago can be used as the most efficient export platform.

To achieve that, however, we must be an efficient producer. So that one would find that in WASA, in the public utilities as a whole, there is that move towards efficiency. In the central government, there is that move towards efficiency; knowing, however, that there must be some place where persons who are released from jobs can find employment while they wait for other jobs in the rest of the economy. That is basically the plan: An encouragement for savings, knowing full well that investment is a function of savings and more a function of domestic savings.

With respect to that, one can see clearly what the Government has done with respect to Government tax free bonds; and more than that, what we have done


360

with respect to getting public servants to purchase those bonds. I can tell the House that very soon members of the public will be able to purchase those bonds via a monthly deduction plan.

As we move towards this export competitiveness and efficiency, a critical area is our state enterprise area. Another area is with respect to what the Leader of Opposition spoke about, the whole area of what we are going to do with respect to the Caribbean; how are we going to arrange our affairs.

The Member was speaking about making the Caribbean a single economy and a single market. That is a commitment we made in our manifesto. We are committed to that. But he says that and then in the next breath he is criticizing the CET. I wonder whether he understands that “CET” means common external tariff? What it says is that within the borders, within the circle, there is free trade within the Caribbean but that with respect to third parties, parties outside that common region, i.e., the Caribbean, there is a common tariff that is going to be applied by each and every country.

So that if a US exporter wants to sell to Trinidad and Tobago and the duty in Trinidad and Tobago is 45 per cent, he would find that the duty in Jamaica is 45 per cent, that the duty in Barbados is 45 per cent—protecting a similar good within the region, because within the region there would be zero duty if Barbados wants to sell that good to Trinidad or Trinidad to Jamaica. That is fundamental, if we want to move towards a single economy and a single market. I cannot understand why one would want to criticize such a strategy if one buys the overall objective of moving towards a single economy and a single market.

Then the Leader of the Opposition makes the point that we are not really taking a leadership role, because we have implemented the thing and some other countries have not implemented it. I do not know what he means, because, to my mind, leadership implies going in front and it is best done by example. In fact, we are putting our money where our mouth is, we have implemented the thing. [Interruption] We have done it.

The rest of the Caribbean—thanks to the initiative of the hon. Prime Minister—when the Heads of Government met in October, 1992, we obtained agreement on the common external tariff and the other Caribbean countries are now under an obligation to implement the CET by June 30, 1993. That is where we are. The agreement itself calls for that six-month period.

Madam Speaker, let us understand it: Every country has its own agenda and we know that one has to be working under these and coercing persons to come


361

into line. That is what we have to do. We ought to look at what is happening in Europe, countries with longer histories than ours, and see the types of problems they have when they attempt to get together.

We have just got to keep on working, knowing full well that perhaps even in our lifetime, we may not be able to achieve all that we want to.

I had a lecturer who used to say that it is better to travel hopefully than to arrive. So we continue to travel along the road to Caribbean integration, to the one economy, one-market concept within the Caribbean.

The Member wants to know what Government’s policy is with respect to NAFTA. We know that when we look at what is happening in the world, we see that there seems to be more regionalism. There was a time when there was this talk about free trade throughout the world, and I have argued in that nice little document that my colleague, the Minister of Public Utilities, and I co-ordinated, that the whole concept of free trade is a myth. There is no place in the world where there is free trade. In the world now, we see trading blocs—Europe, Asia, North America—and if that is the way of the world, this little island of Trinidad and Tobago cannot argue. We simply have to get in there and plan a strategy of how we can maximize gains within that environment. We are all for NAFTA.

However, let me inform the Member for Couva North that, in fact—he is complaining about duties coming down from 45 to 40 and 35 and so on—NAFTA talks about duties of 5 to 20 per cent. We want that and we want to go there. Now we have CET of 35 per cent, but in addition to that, there is import surcharge. They speak as if there was this trade liberalization to remove everything and let the local manufacturer hatch, as it were. That is not the case. There is the import surcharge, which is being reduced over time, but which offers protection.

I will tell you something, Madam Speaker. There is a certain constituent of mine who is a small business manufacturer and from time to time that small businesswoman will call me. She called me last year complaining about the fact that we are allowing imports, trade liberalization and so on. She was very annoyed with my colleague, Minister Kuei Tung. I am pleased to report that she called me this morning and told me that business has never been better. She just got an order from Miami—she is smiling. That has been her tone for the last three months.

As a fact, the opening of our trade barriers would benefit not only consumers, but also even the manufacturers themselves. It was Edgar Mitten Hall so long ago who said “In complacency lies defeat and death.” That is the reality of the situation. [Interruption] That is somebody else, that is Edward Braithwaite. But


362

with competition, you have to be thinking all the time: “How could I shave a cent here and shave a penny there?” That is what it does and it leads to efficiency. That is what we want. Let us face it; if we put our barriers back up, there will be short-term gain, but in the long term we would be in real trouble. That is the reality, even with respect to employment levels.

Madam Speaker, we do not do anybody a favour—well, we might, in fact, do the individual—but if we are in a business, we are not doing the business, nor the economy a favour when we employ one person more than we need in the business. That is the long-term reality.

If we want to be successful, we have to be lean and mean, knowing full well all the time that we must have institutions in place to take care of those who cannot take care of themselves and that is the “we care” of the PNM. It is not that we want to load up a manufacturing firm or a utility with excess labour, because that is really like throwing money in the sea when you do that.

What one has to do is to ensure that there are institutions in place to take care. There must be retraining and we have said it since 1988, in the document, “With the PNM, there is hope”, Sunday, October 9, 1988. Not only do we say it but that is the difference with the PNM. Dr. Williams said it years ago. He said, I think it was in 1960, “When the PNM says we are going to build bridges, we are going to build them; when we say we are going to build roads, we are going to build them.” The PNM is based on performance. We tell people what we are going to do, then we do it. It lasted for 30 years, went on drydock for five years and now we have come back for another 30 years. [Interruption]

Madam Speaker: Proceed.

Hon. K. Valley: Madam Speaker, I just wanted to quote from page 35 of the 1988 document. Paragraph eight says: “The PNM recognizes that in the case of public utilities such as WASA, T&TEC and PTSC, strictly financial criteria have to be tempered by the social value of the service.” It is not that one would not take into consideration the social value of the service. But we said the emphasis would be on making them efficient and cost effective and that is what we want to do. This is consistently what we have said since that time.

I want to deal with another issue. I think it was in Monday’s or Tuesday’s newspapers there was an article from a former Member of Parliament, who, today, claims to be a leader of a party.


363

At one time remember a certain Prime Minister asked the current Prime Minister, or he told him, “I understand you have been elected political leader, I suppose I must congratulate you, but may I ask you, political leader of what?

4.30 p.m.: Sitting suspended. 5.35 p.m.: Sitting resumed. Madam Speaker: The hon. Member for Diego Martin was on his legs when

we took the adjournment.

Hon. K. Valley: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker. Just before the break, I was making reference to a particular article in the Tuesday's newspaper. Before I proceed, Madam Speaker, I want to backtrack a bit, and simply provide the House with some information I received during the break from our technicians, to effect that the original CET, the original legislation, that is, at the 45 per cent level, imposed—that procedure was implemented by eight of our Caribbean colleagues. There are only four countries which have not implemented the CET, as of now: St. Lucia, St. Kitts/Nevis, Antigua/Barbuda and Montserrat. All the others implemented the original CET.

Madam Speaker, the revised CET coming out of the discussions of October, 1992, Trinidad is the only one which has so far implemented these new rates. The other countries are under obligation to have them implemented by June 30, 1993. I thought I should just inform the House accordingly.

On Tuesday I think both dailies reported that the leader of a particular party, or someone who calls himself the leader of that party—let me not get into their business. It was reported that the Government had in fact implemented a number of the previous Government's policies, but there is one important one that they are not implementing, and that is the NIC concept with respect to paying public servants. Madam Speaker, there are few times when I really feel enraged. First of all, it seems to me that there is no functionary of the previous Government who has the moral authority, none of them, to talk about indebtedness to public servants, and how it is to be paid. That issue should never have arisen in the first place.

We have said on a number of occasions that it was wrong for a government to use its governmental power to take away the wages and salaries of public servants with whom they are dealing in an employer/employee situation. The reality of the situation is that the money is just not there. It is as if they took the money and


364

threw it into the sea. They have no moral authority, not one functionary of that party, including trade unionists who take instructions from them.

We have said something else. We said then, and we are saying now, that NIC did not make sense, it was wrong in concept, it could not work, it was merely a sham. I want for the benefit of the public for the last time to examine the NIC in concept.

Here was a plan to take our more profitable state companies, they say, put them in a trust and give public servants units in the trust equivalent to their indebtedness. Those units to be redeemed over a period of five years, after an initial payment of some $300 million in the first year. They said they would have paid to the public servants $300 million in the first year, and, $280 million per year, for the following five years.

Bearing in mind, first of all, that the concept dealt with the arrears, there was no system, at no time did they talk about stopping the accumulation. Here we had a situation in which a debt was accumulating at the rate of $500 million per year, but they were talking about dealing with $280 million per year.

We can just look at it: in five years the new debt would have been $2.5 billion, and our profitable state companies would have been gone. Even if the concept worked, then we would have had a $2.5 billion debt, in other words, more than the debt with which we started. Right now the gross debt is supposed to be about $2 billion. You start at $2 billion, dealing with arrears, but you end up five years later, your profitable state companies gone and let me tell you the companies, Madam Speaker. They were talking about, our 51 per cent shareholding in TSTT; Trintopec; National Gas Company; TTMC; NP; National Flour Mills; Urea, Plipdeco and our minority interest in companies. All of them would have gone, and five years down the road you still owe public servants $2.5 billion dollars, and not a hope to pay them.

But what did we do? First of all we came in and we said quite clearly, how we would attack the problem. This is the problem with the People's National Movement, we say how we would do a thing and then we would follow through. We said that the first thing one had to do was to stop the accumulation. That is how you attack a problem. If you go home an evening, and your house is under water, you are not going to take a bucket and start bailing out, you would first try to find out where the leak. You want to stop the leak, and then start dealing with the water. So we said that—anybody would be willing to hire me. They know that I am a deal however I come.


365

Quite simply, we turned the tap off, we stopped the accumulation and in 1992, we did not pay $300 million, we paid $441 million. It was not $300 million that was the plan, we paid $441 million to public servants for ten months. In 1993, we are paying $520 million. We are dealing with the current situation and we give the public servants the assurance that we will deal with the arrears. We said it in the manifesto, we said we are going to sit with you and we are going to come to some amicable arrangement for the payment of the arrears, bearing in mind the general acceptance that they cannot all be paid in cash at this time.

5.45 p.m. There is a ministerial team meeting with the trade unions, except one, perhaps,

who wants to gallivant up and down the place; play politics with people's lives. But that is a different story. [Interruption] Are you a trade union leader? You are what?

Mr. Maharaj: What are you?

Hon. K Valley: He says, “What are you?” So that, it was wrong in concept. But that was not all. Let us consider the companies that they were talking about and see whether it made sense. Let us even say they had the concept of NIC, Madam Speaker, consider TSTT. We own 51 per cent of TSTT, at present. They wanted to sell 25 per cent shareholding in the company. In other words Government's shareholding would have been reduced to 26 per cent. You would remember that Government sold 49 per cent of that company for $320 million in 1990. So that they were now divesting a further 25 per cent. We told them then that they should have been divesting to the domestic market at that time. But no, they sold 49 per cent to foreigners. So that by doing this, obviously, the person with the commanding control of TSTT would have been Cable & Wireless. Now, I have nothing against Cable & Wireless. They got a deal and if I were in their position, sitting around a table negotiating a deal for my company, I would go for the very best. I have no problem with that. The problem is that those who were supposed to be looking after the national interest did not appear to consider our interests sufficiently.

Let me give you an example. They paid $320 million for 49 per cent shareholding in that company. In 1991, when the consultants were doing their work, they valued that company at $2.1 billion. So that the 49 per cent interest one year after purchase was worth about $1 billion.


366

Mr. Manning: How much they paid for it?

Hon. K. Valley: The sum of $320 million, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Manning: Corruption!

Hon. K. Valley: Madam Speaker, I said here in that debate that when the story of TSTT is told, it would make TESORO look like a joke; and I repeat it today.

Miss Nicholson: You know your part of it?

Hon. K. Valley: When you talk about a giveaway, that is the value. So that one could not talk about divesting TSTT. Then there was Trintopec on the list, Madam Speaker.

Dr. Rowley: How much profit are they making?

Hon. K. Valley: Let me tell you. Very relevant question. You remember, TSTT had about $1 billion tax loss in 1990 at the time and, we argued on that also. And the reports said that by 1992 the tax loss would have been used up. In other words, by 1992 TSTT would have made $1 billion in gross profit. But we were telling them that. We said, "listen, you have already invested in this company. If you just look at what is happening in the company you would see that this is a cash cow."

Mr. Manning: Let me ask you a question. Madam Speaker, I thank the hon. Minister for giving way. In periods where the company is making so much money, how much of that money will come to the state by way of taxation?

Hon. K. Valley: If one did not have that tax loss provision as a shield—because that is what it is—the $1 billion tax loss shields the profit. Were it not for that, the state would get 45 per cent of that, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Manning: How much are we getting? Hon. K. Valley: Zero! Because of the tax shield. Mr. Manning: Because of the agreement! Hon. K. Valley: That is what it is. Remember Textel was always profitable,

so you merged Textel with TSTT and put that tax shield in. Madam Speaker we argued, we wrote on it, they did not take us on and they gave away our company.

Mr. Marshall: It is in the book! Dr. Rowley: You come alive? They are not reading that. Hon. K. Valley: But let us move on.


367

Dr. Rowley: Marshall come alive.

Hon. K. Valley: Trintopec: At the same time that you had people working on the National Investment Company, there was a committee looking at energy-sector rationalization. That committee had come up with a certain structure for the energy sector that suggested that Trinitopec and Trintoc should get together.

Lo and behold, in this NIC plan, 45 per cent of Trintopec was supposed to be divested. So that the right hand was unaware of what the left hand was doing—energy sector rationalization suggesting one thing, but the NIC boys doing something else. It could not work; it was a sham. It was a programme simply to win the election; spending much money with public relations and all that sort of thing; buying computers. I could tell you, if they had won the election, NIC would have died an ignoble death. That is what it is.

As we go down, we see National Petroleum. After the elections, when I was assigned the portfolio with responsibility for investments, we looked at the work which was done by NIC. We were aware that the previous Government spent a considerable sum of money on that assignment. We have always taken the position that governments come and governments go, but the state lives on. We looked at the work that was done and after analysis of the companies they had earmarked for divestment, we felt that only three of them should be. Those were the Trinidad and Tobago Methanol Company; we had the National Flour Mills which was moved subsequently, for the time being; and the Trinidad and Tobago Urea Company. You would note, that they did not have Fertrin on the list.

We recommended that Fertrin be divested also because of its link with Urea; and, of course, we said that we were not interested in divesting our 51 per cent shareholding in TSTT at this time. We would do so, obviously, if our joint-venture partner would agree, also, to a divestment of its own shares. We did not agree that the Trinidad and Tobago National Petroleum Marketing Company should be divested at this time also; or any of the others.

The point I am making is that we, in fact, considered the approach and we found that it made no sense.

Mr. Manning: It was dangerous for the country.

Hon. K. Valley: Very dangerous! We continue. What about the market? They were talking about divesting $280 million worth of shares on the market per year for the 5-year period. If we were to look at the ability of the market, at the absorptive capacity of the market, we would see that in 1987 the value of


368

transactions on the market was $45.3 million; 1988, $57.3 million; 1989, $146.7 million; 1990, $235.3 million; 1991, $338.7 million; 1992, $94.6 million.

5.55 p.m. Given that environment, remember at the top, l991; $338 million, and one

wants to add $280 million, where you have a market which, at peak, could handle $338 million, can you imagine the effect the attempt to put $280 million of additional shares on that market would have on the economy as a whole; what it would do for share prices or for the economy? So that again it could not work. The market just could not absorb that amount of shares in any one year.

Mr. Humphrey: Talk about supply and demand per shares.

Hon. K. Valley: But that is the point—

Mr. Humphrey: If you have a demand and you have no supply, you have a small market. If you have a big demand and a big supply you have a big market.

Hon. K. Valley: Madam Speaker, we are talking about a given supply on the market, and the point I am making is that you are putting an additional quantity of $280 million on the market. What that is going to do on price, it is going to drive the price down, unless all of a sudden the demand for shares explodes.

In other words, given a demand, if one were to put an additional quantity of shares on the market, $280 million, when the market peaked, in other words you are putting about 75 per cent more on the market, and if you hold demand constant, prices will fall, quite simply.

Madam Speaker: The speaking time of the hon. Member has expired.

Motion made, That the hon. Member's speaking time be extended by 30 minutes. [Hon. M. Marshall]

Question put and agreed to.

Hon. K. Valley: Thank you very much, Madam Speaker and may I thank most sincerely, my co-author.

I am saying that the plan also appeared on the surface to give a benefit to public servants. What the plan was saying is that we are going to take these shares which are held in trust for all the citizens by the Corporation Sole and put them in a trust for the benefit of only public servants. What is unsure is that legally, if one could do that in the first place. Because here you have the Corporation Sole holding shares in trust for all the people and you want to transfer those shares into


369

a trust only for a few. Obviously, you have a constitutional problem. I am sure my friend will tell me that.

But that was merely a sham, because they knew very well that given that they had already cut the public servants' salary, given that they were already behind the eight ball, given that they could not pay their mortgage and so on, they would have had to be flogging those units, that it was merely a pass-through, that they might have held on to those units for about a month or two months, maximum, and that they would be getting cents on the dollar from those who had. So it was really a nice little plan to transfer the shares which were held in trust for all the people, to their friends.

So we said, we do not like it at all. But more than that, the basic concept of the thing is a basic privatization model. To say that you are going to sell your shares in the profitable state companies to pay a current expenditure, we have difficulty with that. We do not have difficulty with that today. In l988, when the hon. Prime Minister, the Political Leader as he then was, made his convention address at Chaguaramas on October 9: "With the PNM, there is Hope," we made the point that one needs to make that distinction between privatization and divestment. It says on page 33:

"I think, however, Ladies and Gentlemen, it is important for me to differentiate clearly between divestment and privatization.

The PNM's concept of divestment to the public involves the transfer of shares in the state enterprises, from the control of the state where they are being currently held in trust for all the people, to direct ownership by a wide cross section of the national community.

Privatization, on the other hand, is the mechanism for transferring the national patrimony from the state into the hands of a privileged few to serve selfish, sectional interests.

And the point is made. We said:

"In this connection the timing of share issues through divestment is of critical importance. If the shares of state enterprises are offered to the public at the height of an economic downturn not only will the state fail to maximize its returns but it may succeed only in transferring real wealth at discounted prices to those who are already wealthy."

We are not making that distinction today; that is our position. That is what we are doing.


370

Mr. Humphrey: Would the hon. Minister give way to a question? Madam Speaker, if, as the hon. Minister says that the Corporation Sole holds the ownership in trust for all of the people and that to transfer it to some of the people would create a constitutional problem—

Hon. Member: He did not say that. Mr. Humphrey: Yes. He even referred the matter to senior counsel on this

side. How do they justify the transfer of what is now owned by all of the people through any kind of divestment programme, to any group of the people, whether they be rich, poor, in-between, foreign or local?

Hon. K. Valley: Madam Speaker, obviously, the Member has a problem hearing or understanding. I am talking about transferring from the Corporation Sole, who holds in trust for all the people, to another trust and the beneficiaries of this trust would be some of the people. Quite different, the Corporation Sole now holding in trust for the people, can sell, the proceeds coming back to the trust, and those proceeds are for all the people. Changing the form of assets from shares to cash, the benefit being for all the people, there is no problem, but if when you sold, the benefits were for a few, obviously, there would be a problem. Quite simply, NIC was a bad idea, a bad concept. It could not work. I want to tell the gentleman that it was no good then and it is no good now.

6.05 p.m. The policy with respect to divestment was spelt out in l988. Quite clearly, we

said what we wanted to do. We saw the state acting as a facilitator and an investor in some situations; that is where we make another distinction with privatization. Privatization works on the basic premise that the state has no right in business, and we say we cannot agree with that. Divestment says, "Listen, you are there and you are going to bring it to a normal stage, divest to diversify your economy, but you may need to get into the economy again. You may need participation to stimulate economic growth in another area."

At the same time that we might be talking about divesting methanol at Point Lisas, one would hear the state talking about taking participation, perhaps, in the methanol plant at Brighton, La Brea. There is no conflict with that, because we see it as important to set up another growth pole and it might be important for the state to get involved and do that. That is the basic difference in concept. We say it fits in at the macro level.

When we look at the medium-term plan, the divestment programme, we say it is extremely important to create a domestic environment which is conducive to


371

private sector investment. The widening of share ownership in the country is also important and we see it as another benefit coming out of our divestment programme. That is what the Bill is about. It is about setting a certain environment, not simply raising revenues, but putting the economy along a certain path. I am saying that these are some of the things which are important in doing so. That is where we are going.

The Finance Bill must be seen as a major policy tool to steer the economy along a certain path. In fact, it must fit into the longer-term vision for the economy, and that vision is stated in our manifesto; the medium-term framework, under which we are working, is outlined in the Medium Term Policy Framework which has been laid as a paper in this House. In both those documents, one would see, quite clearly, that we want to move to a Caribbean that is one economy, one market, fitting into the concept of Trinidad and Tobago as the business and financial centre of that Caribbean.

Critical to the one economy, one market concept, must be a common external tariff. Trinidad and Tobago would continue to take a leadership role in the Caribbean and we have the wherewithal to do that. As you know, a number of the Caribbean countries are indebted to us. As a matter of fact, in April, I am supposed to be leading a team to Guyana. As you know, Guyana is our main debtor—almost $500 million. I have been in touch with the Minister of Finance in Guyana and we have agreed—as you know, their budget is today—to meet early in April, because we believe that there are certain initiatives that could be undertaken for the benefit of Guyana as well as Trinidad. We want to deepen the Caribbean relationship. The Prime Minister has spoken about the incremental approach, working with Barbados and Guyana and then spreading out.

More than that, I think we have got to look at what has happened in our oil sector, not as part of this Finance Bill, but as separate legislation. One knows of the initiative taken with respect to the change in taxation of oil companies, and what that has caused in the energy sector—increase in exploration and so on—the fact that confidence has now returned to the South; increased levels of activity and knowing very well that that is our leading sector. What happens there will, of course, spill over to the rest of the economy. We in the Government say that we know there is light in sight.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. Mr. John Humphrey (St. Augustine): Madam Speaker, I would love to

believe the final statement of the hon. Member for Diego Martin Central, that there is light at the end of the tunnel.

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [MR. HUMPHREY]

372

I see there is a change of mood of the Chair, with the Finance Bill, 1993 that is before us now, permitting Members to stray very, very far from the relevance of matters before us. I welcome it, because this is really a talk shop and Members should have the opportunity to talk. The Member for Diego Martin Central took advantage, in my view, of this new dispensation of a tremendous tolerance for irrelevance. He went on to talk about the still-born proposal of the former regime on divesting the state sector.

Madam Speaker, I do not think he has impressed anyone in this House with his logic. I cannot see the logic of opposing the transfer of equity from the state to some of the people of Trinidad and Tobago as being wrong and transferring equity from the state to foreigners, as being right. The Member for Diego Martin argued, and he quoted from a 1988 document of his political leader's address to the PNM Convention, that the transfer of state resources to the public servants and others of the creditors of the Government—because there are other creditors, for example, the sugar workers who are owed quite a large sum of money—would have eventually led to the transfer, in effect, to a small elite, rich group in the society.

I dare say that would be correct, because it is those who have the money who control things. There is no question about that. The public servants, on receiving the equity, would have been tempted to sell it at discounted prices. We opposed it on the same argument. But, if you are opposed to the transfer of equity of the state to a small group of elitist Trinidad and Tobago citizens, why are you not opposed to the same transfer to a small group of elitist foreigners? Because, that, in effect, is what happened.

The Nucor deal. The Government is dealing with one American individual and making an arrangement with that individual for him to enjoy part of the patrimony of Trinidad and Tobago at concessionary rates—rates that are not being divulged to the people who own it. For whose benefit? The Government says one thing and does quite the opposite.

6.15 p.m. They lead us to believe that measures such as are contained in the Finance

Bill—and if you read the whole document as I have done, you can discern a certain philosophical basis and ideological direction. If you read another document as I had done, you will see the genesis of it. Again, we go back to the structural adjustment programme of the World Bank, and we see the genesis. I am going to quote it for the benefit of the Member for Diego Martin East, a youngster


373

in the game of politics, a newcomer to this House. I recommend to him that he read the whole document because it will give him an understanding of the policies of this Government and the policies of the predecessor NAR Government with which they are continuing. There is no difference.

Mr. B. Panday: Except for one thing.

Mr. J. Humphrey: In this document, Report and Recommendation of the President of the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development, on page 19, No. 62, "Action Program", on the basis of duty exemptions—a major part of the Finance Bill deals with duty exemptions. In fact, if you look at it you will see from pages 59 to 85, lists of items of commodities that are not eligible for conditional duty exemptions. This whole thing deals with what is directed from Washington. I will quote it:

"The Government has decided to refrain from granting duty exemptions for parts and raw materials for new industries, and has initiated a comprehensive review of duty exemptions, with a view to assessing their practical significance for T&T's competitiveness in CARICOM markets, and formulating an action plan for their phased removal over three to five years. Prior to second tranche release, a time-phased action plan would be formulated and agreed with the Bank, and measures would be implemented in accordance with the plan."

That is the plan; that is the genesis. The bosses are in Washington, not in the Twin Towers. The Cabinet of this country is not running this country. It is following a timetable set by the Directors of the World Bank. Pressures are being exerted on the small Caricom countries to follow exactly the same route—and everyone of them is under severe pressure. In fact, the kinds of pressure to which Trinidad and Tobago is being subjected today, far from having light at the end of the tunnel, there is doom at the end of the tunnel.

We are not going to survive this structural adjustment programme. I am sorry for the poor Minister of Finance. He might have found it difficult to make his enterprise of producing beautiful flowers in his horticultural activities viable because he had difficulty competing with many other countries. If he thinks that was a hard time, the kind of time he is going to be faced with, his hair is going to get as grey as that of the Member for Couva South. Notice how rapidly a youngster who came to Parliament with black hair, not dyed, in a matter of a year is getting to become more and more like the leader. It is because of the new pressures being exerted on this poor individual by this whole process.


374

I am really sorry for the Member for St. Ann's East, because he is the one with the responsibility of managing the nation's finances. He has the responsibility, but he has not got the power. The power resides elsewhere. What he is doing is implementing to the letter this programme and it is interesting—Members should all get a copy of this—because it was laid on the Table—and read it carefully. The entire blueprint for national reconstruction is contained in this document. It is a document dated November 21, 1989. It is the conditions that the World Bank attached to lending this country US $40 million with an additional $40 million coming from the Japanese Export-Import Bank. So a total of US $80 million was borrowed and these are the conditions of the loan that the Government is implementing in all of the programmes.

Trade liberalization is a condition of this whole plan, the phasing out of the tariff for Caricom is a condition of the plan. They are permitting for the first year a tariff of 45 per cent, but we have to reduce it. We have a number of years in which we have to remove it altogether. Far from light at the end of the tunnel. Let me paint the real scenario.

In order to support the level of consumption that Trinidad and Tobago has today, the Government finds itself borrowing more and more externally. We are now seeing the hon. Minister of Public Utilities boasting that he has sourced a US $200 million loan for WASA. WASA is not viable in terms of bringing financial returns to the country and yet the Government is borrowing a further US $200 million to finance WASA. The $200 million that is being borrowed is not for WASA, it is for consumption expenditure of the society generally.

What is happening is that in order to sustain the level of consumption, they are borrowing more and more and incurring greater interest charges on those loans, and down the road they are going to have an accumulated debt that they are not going to be able to liquidate. What is then going to happen to us? They are encouraging businessmen to get into the realm of international competition where the manufacturers, internationally, have developed technology to the extent where computer-controlled robots are doing the work of human beings. We are going to have to compete with that. It is not possible for us to compete with computer-controlled robots unless we have computer-controlled robots as well. But if we import the computer-controlled robots we have to borrow the money to pay for them and throw our people on the breadline. That is the trend. More and more debt, less and less capacity to repay because production is decreasing.


375

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, I wonder whether the hon. Member would consider a foreign manufacturer locating in Trinidad; whether we can build this platform so that we can attract a foreign manufacturer to locate here to do those things.

Mr. J. Humphrey: Pie-in-the-sky. If you are going to the United States, for example, to attract investment into Trinidad, do you not suppose that those who have the surplus and savings to invest and are capable of investing, are going to come to Trinidad when they have a serious crisis facing the United States economy, with more and more unemployment?

The new administration in that country is now demobilizing the military. They are now already faced with a very severe unemployment problem and they are exacerbating it with this programme of closing down the bases; of putting tens of thousands of persons out of work. Not only those employed on the bases, but also all those industries that are manufacturing things to support the activities of those bases: tanks, aircraft, weapons and that sort of thing. Hundreds of thousands of persons are being put on the breadline.

You are going to tell me that the United States Federal Government will sit by idly and see their surplus funds leaving the United States to come to Trinidad and Tobago, when what they need there is further investment, further job creation and mobilization of resources in their own interest? They know what they are doing. They are not looking at us. They are only looking at us, quite rightly, as the Member for Couva North said, as expanding their market for export of their own products. It is a one-way street.

6.25 p.m. Since this programme of trade liberalization has been implemented, what have

we seen? We have seen on the roads many fancy new cars in the hands of that elite. Of course, Members of Parliament can get the benefit, but we have a privileged position in that respect, because we do not pay the same price that other people pay. That is what you are seeing.

You are seeing high-rise buildings going up, for what? For the rich to have accommodation. Million-dollar apartments, that is the extent of the construction that you are seeing. Go around the country and see on the other hand, how many low-cost houses are being built; how many little factory shells are being built; how many new businesses are emerging.

Established groups that at one time were going into manufacturing are now putting their emphasis on importing and selling. Drive around Port of Spain and


376

you will see fancy new showrooms for vehicles which we never knew existed, until they started to import them from all over the world, all beautifully decorated and illuminated. We now have fantastic accommodation for these gleaming new vehicles. To sell to whom? To sell to those who have the money to buy; that is the rich in the society.

Distortions are now worse than ever before. They say, light at the end of the tunnel. Light for whom? Light at the end of the tunnel for those who have always had light, and that is the rich, because the rich are the main beneficiaries of this programme. They are removing restrictions so that they can enjoy luxuries that those restrictions inhibited them from enjoying previously. That is the extent of it.

The level of mobilization of the resources of this country is directed at satisfying one class of people. The middle class is rapidly disappearing.

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: It has disappeared.

Mr. J. Humphrey: It has not yet all disappeared, but it is rapidly disappearing. Why? Because the incomes of the middle class are not increasing, but their living expenses are increasing by leaps and bounds. Look at the utility rates as an example. This programme spells doom for us, and far from light at the end of the tunnel, it is crisis down the road.

However, this Government will not listen to anything that any of us has to say. I have felt like a voice in the wilderness for a very long time, because for years I have been trying to persuade people that we must look inside; mobilize our own resources for development and not look outside, either for investment or markets.

If we produce from our own resource base, which of course includes the population, the basic requirements of our people, and mobilize our economic resources to that end, then we have a chance. Instead of trying to persuade our manufacturers to produce for export, what we should be doing as a government is sitting and assessing every manufacturer, either established or potential, on the basis of foreign exchange conservation. In other words, does it conserve foreign exchange for the economy if we import a fully assembled motor car, or if we import that same motor car in kit form, and assemble it locally? I am not saying that we should look at the local motor car assembly industry in terms of marketing the product abroad, because we cannot compete with the people outside there. I am saying, look at the viability in terms of conserving foreign exchange, because foreign exchange is the key to the life of the economy.


377

If we do not have foreign exchange, we would be economically dead, because we would not have the wherewithal to sustain any level of production in the society and no level of consumption. That is a fact. The emphasis should be on foreign exchange conservation. Their predecessor had the right idea. Import substitution! That was the right idea; to produce locally those things that they are importing and try to conserve foreign exchange by so doing. Mobilize the idle resources, especially the people by getting those people at the work place so that they can earn incomes and conserve the foreign exchange.

When they open up the markets, we would find that we cannot meet our debt obligations externally and have to keep borrowing to do it. They are only too happy to encourage it, because the international lending agencies are controlled by the great United States which is the biggest depositor of the IMF and the World Bank. They are only too happy to see their markets for export expanding, so they would lend us any amount of money to buy what they produce, which is in fact what is happening. We are not borrowing the money to invest in productive activity and to mobilize our own capacity to produce the things that our people consume. We are borrowing the money to enable our people to consume what others produce. That is a road to disaster.

I see one economist who is now beginning to say exactly what I have been arguing for years. Recently, Lloyd Best has come out and stated that the main strategy of the Government should be to mobilize domestic capacity to meet basic domestic needs, and to manage the Trinidad and Tobago economy separately from the external economy. That is what I have been saying. Separate the two things; separate the foreign exchange position of the country from the domestic money situation in the country. Find some means of insulating it. I do not have to say it again.

Over tea, the Member for Diego Martin Central said that half of what I said is right.

Madam Speaker: The Minister of Foreign Affairs, would you please put that away.

Mr. Maraj: Sorry, Madam Speaker. Mr. J. Humphrey: I should like to hear him say which half of what I am

about to say is right or whether any part of it is right.

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, it is the second occasion on which a private discussion with the Member for St. Augustine found its way into a debate. This is obviously telling me something.


378

Mr. B. Panday: What the Member says in private, he does not want it made public. I understand. That is allright with me.

Mr. J. Humphrey: The Member should welcome that. I am not criticizing him or condemning him for it.

I want him to participate in an exchange—

Mr. B. Panday: What he is saying is that what he told you in private is not true. That is all.

Mr. J. Humphrey: I do not know why the Member is upset by that.

Madam Speaker, you might not be aware of it, but the laws of this land require that the amount of TT money in the system is limited by the amount of the reserve account held in external assets. It is not pegged to the ability of the economy to produce. The money that is managed by the Minister of Finance, with the Central Bank, which is the bank available to him, is not issued; it has no relationship whatever to the nation's capacity to produce. It is not managed in such a way as to mobilize the capacity to put the people to productive work, to utilize the infrastructure that is in place, to enable the country to produce more for itself. That is not what it is used for.

It is limited by this foreign account by law. The Central Bank Act spells it out clearly. What the Central Bank Act says is that we must hold a foreign reserve account as a nation. It must be denominated in gold bullion or gold coin, or in convertible paper. It has to be denominated in externally held assets of a convertible nature. If it is currency, it has to be convertible currency. In other words, you can hold it in US, pound sterling, Deutsch mark, Swiss francs or Japanese yen. Those are the convertible currencies. The law says we must have that as a reserve. And when you have that, you now can issue 150 per cent maximum of that value in Trinidad and Tobago currency. That is what it says. In other words, the issue of the money in the system is not related to the country's capacity to produce, to mobilize people, to take idle resources and produce goods and services; it is related to the paucity of an account.

6.35 p.m. Whenever a devaluation occurs, some of us are fooled into believing that it

was a strategic decision of the Government to put us in an advantageous position for export purposes; and to reduce our costs to make them more competitive, when in fact it is not so at all. Devaluations occur when the reserve account diminishes, by one means or another, and they have to maintain the balance


379

according to law of the issue of currency. That is what it is. A devaluation occurs either when the foreign reserves account diminishes and it is imposed on us, or the Government requires more TT currency on the basis of its existing reserves. Those are the two considerations.

Now the governments tell us that they do not devalue to get more TT currency, but they do that. In fact, I should like the hon. Minister of Finance to do an investigation into the accounts of this country of every devaluation that has occurred to see what the foreign reserves position of the country was. I hope the Member for St. Ann's East is listening. It would be an interesting exercise to see why the devaluation occurred.

I have been advocating for the longest while that we manage our external account for trading purposes, for investment; do it strategically. Go out there and educate the people of this country on how this system works and let them know that the reason so many are jobless is that you do not have the money to pay them to work, and the reason you do not have the money to pay them to work is that you do not have the foreign exchange in reserve. In fact, if you could pay them to work, they would produce more, which would put the country in a position to get the foreign exchange, because the only way you can export more is to produce more.

I only hope that the logic is getting through and that the Member for Diego Martin Central is measuring what I am saying so that privately he can tell me, well this half of what you said was right and that half was wrong. This is fundamental. We are actually driving a vehicle with one pedal and that pedal is the brake. We do not have an accelerator. We do not have the means of stimulating the economy or of putting our idle capacity to productive work, and we are getting more and more dependent on the whims and fancies of the external situation, which is not a good situation. If we do not start to recognize that situation and take a conscious decision to tear this to smithereens, put it in an envelope and send it back to Washington and tell the President of the World Bank, “Impose these conditionalities for structural adjustment on the US economy and on the US President”.

Do you know, Madam Speaker, that these conditionalities would be laughed at by the United States’ administration? And yet here we are accepting them lock, stock and barrel, going down the merry road to destruction and not even being aware of that.

The proof of the pudding is in the eating; and if in fact we do not see improvement in the economy—and improvement can only be measured by output


380

and by absorption of the unemployed in the process. If you do not enhance your output, if you do not increase your production and create new job opportunities for people, there is obviously no improvement. What we are seeing with this light at the end of the tunnel is a threat to retrench tens of thousands of people who now have jobs, far less create new jobs.

I am a voice in the wilderness and I do not think that I should waste my time alluding to these things any more. I am reaching the stage in my life where I am tired of virtually talking to myself, and it is not like Michael Jackson who talks to the man in the mirror. I virtually talk to myself because nobody who has the power listens. When I was in the Government I sought to talk to those who had the power. They did not listen and I was booted out of the Government.

Mr. B. Panday: Then you must get into power yourself.

Mr. J. Humphrey: Madam Speaker, I have two options. I can withdraw and go into retirement because I have reached the age now where I am entitled to retire. I am sixty years old now. I have that choice—either go into retirement and come out of this game and let the people rebel because that is what is going to happen. The signs are there. There is no way that the Government can deliver to satisfy the demands of the population. In fact, go back to this very document. They recognized the dangers and I am afraid that the so-called safety net is not sufficient. The signs are there. Instead of disciplining your policemen for demonstrating their disfavour, you should be sitting with them and listening carefully to what they have to say. Why are they not happy? They are part of the citizenry, and if a disciplined service like the Police Service would come out and say they are not happy about certain things to the extent where they will do what they did, can you imagine what the rest of the citizens are going through?

Instead of seeing light at the end of the tunnel with some hope, what you are seeing is a revolutionary situation in the making. If 1990 should recur, it would be 10 times worse than it was then. That is what you are seeing.

Let these people know that enough is enough. The children of this country want an education. The teachers say, listen we will withhold our services until the Government gives us part of what they owe us. Why? Because they are paying the foreign creditors and the local institutions, every part of what they owe them but they are not paying the people. So, they are unhappy. Who could blame them for being unhappy?

I saw some interviews on television with children who were affected by teachers not coming to the schools and the children said that. The children said


381

that the teachers have to live. They have their families to support—[Interruption] I saw that on television. I do not have a dish. I am not too interested in what goes on outside, I am much more interested in what goes on here. Take the hint.

The Leader of the Opposition said that we did not know whether we were going to support this, and I do not know whether the Leader of the Opposition is satisfied with what Members on the Government Benches have said so far on the Finance Bill, 1993. Quite frankly, the hon. Leader of the Opposition raised some very important basic issues and I am not satisfied that the Member for Diego Martin Central has addressed those issues.

6.45 p.m. Madam Speaker, what is the context in which Trinidad and Tobago is being

managed? We have Caricom. We are trying to make Caricom a single-market economy. We understand that context. But Caricom is now in the midst of a massive wave which is curling over and flooding the whole world—this wave of market economics, where the basic principle of market-place economics is that those who have the money are the market because they are the ones who can buy. Those who have no money are outside the market. They have no money and, therefore, they cannot buy.

So the principle of market economics that the world is looking at today, and it is threatening the former socialist countries of Europe to the extent where things would be far worse with the cure than you had with the illness—in fact, it is that way already. In Russia, which was the one hope of stability, we are seeing now where the President is up against his entire Chamber of Deputies, where he is threatening, in fact, a permanent state of emergency to rule that country by decree. What is the difference? Totalitarian rule returning so soon after the dismantling of the socialist state.

Instead of looking inwards and finding a strategy which we could manage in our own interests, we are looking to jump into that. That is to be our salvation. Well, there is no hope for us.

I think I will have to speak very seriously to my leader, because when he says “go out there and get the power”, what he is saying is that the group of people with whom I have been associated in struggle for so long, if we get the mandate from the population we know what we will do: We will put the emphasis of development upon the resources of our own people and not on the resources of other people, on the markets of our own people. We will aim our manufacturing establishment at providing what our people need, not what other people need,


382

which is export, and we will aim at getting the economy stimulated on the basis of the resources of our own people, including a vibrant government, and not on the basis of some hoped-for investment which will come from abroad. It is not going to come.

They will come and help themselves to our petroleum; they will come and help themselves to our natural gas; they will come and take the fish from the see, Madam Speaker, but they are not coming to invest in the interest of the people of Trinidad and Tobago.

I want to make this last appeal: Please rethink the strategy. Look at the date, November 21, 1989; this was not of the PNM’s making. Reject it. They should go to the people and tell them they got a mandate to change, that the people who adopted this were totally rejected in the elections. Go out and say that you will not pursue this, that they will close ranks with the interests of our own society and instead of writing off trade union leaders as being involved in politics, embrace them. Bring all of them into the process of decision-making and get a level of commitment and involvement from the people. That will be the salvation of Trinidad and Tobago.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. The Minister of Housing and Settlement (Dr. The Hon. Vincent Lasse):

Madam Speaker, I shall confine my contribution to elements of the Bill before us which touch on my portfolio as Minister of Housing and Settlement.

I intend to establish beyond a doubt that the PNM is keeping faith with the people. The PNM is honouring pledges made in its 1991 manifesto; the PNM has put in place the mechanisms for implementing its programmes and projects; and the PNM is doing this despite financial constraints and the pronouncements of gloom and doom as we have just heard from the other side.

Madam Speaker, to put my statement in proper perspective, I wish to refer to the 1993 Budget Speech of the Minister of Finance where he alluded to measures to stimulate economic activity and to afford relief to various categories of taxpayers. The Minister also addressed the question of efforts to stimulate construction activity and employment, and here I would quote from the Budget Speech, pages 51 and 52.

The Minister was addressing efforts to stimulate construction activity and employment. He said:

“In an effort to kick-start the construction industry we propose to implement measures that will exempt from personal and corporation taxes all rental


383

income that may accrue from residential, industrial and commercial properties, the construction of which begins after January 1, 1993 and is completed by December 31, 1994.”

He went on to state that: “In addition, gains or profits, including capital gains, derived from the initial sale of such newly constructed properties would also be exempt from tax.” Madam Speaker, Part XX(b) of the Finance Bill, 1993 would amend the

Income Tax Act by reducing the deduction for owner-occupied properties from $36,000 to $24,000. At the same time, the interest up to a maximum of $24,000 would be allowed as deductions on bridging finance to construct the house to be used as a residence.

Part XX(e) addresses the granting of a deduction for expenses incurred in the production of income or profits from the rental or initial sale of buildings constructed during the period January 1, 1993 to December 31, 1994.

Let me now turn to positive development which took place in the housing and settlements sector in 1992 and I am sure will continue in 1993. I speak of the availability of housing lots which, with the assistance of the Inter-American Development Bank, was provided by the Government of Trinidad and Tobago. I speak of the infrastructure work being done and the serviced lots to alleviate squatting on the one hand, and to contain squatting, on the other.

This Government made certain commitments in the 1991 manifesto pertaining to housing and settlements, and I am happy and confident that we shall continue to be on course despite, as I have said, challenges and obstacles. I feel that 1993 could be a successful year as far as the construction of houses is concerned.

With specific reference to housing, I must draw to the attention of this honourable House what was stated in our 1991 manifesto, and I would quote briefly. On page 29 of our manifesto, it is stated that:

“Under the PNM, the nation’s housing needs were well looked after to the extent that by the end of 1986, over 50,000 housing units had been provided by the State…”

It went on to state that:

“By contrast, the present Government (that is the NAR) has demonstrated total disregard for the housing needs of the population.”

What the PNM Government intends to do to correct this misguided approach is:


384

“Reactivation of a comprehensive approach to housing, recognizing that land development on its own does not address the needs of most citizens.” Here I would go on to the question of putting in place the proper infrastructure and

climate to kick off the economy as far as the construction industry is concerned. The Ministry of Housing and Settlement initiated two major policies: As early

as January 14, 1992, with the concurrence of Cabinet, in my capacity as Minister of Housing and Settlement, I appointed a committee to deal with the question of squatter regularization, the terms of reference of that committee being to explore the possibilities and modalities for accommodating the squatter regularization programme within the framework of Act 20 of 1986 as is modified, and also to make appropriate recommendations.

This was the first major initiative in the development of what I consider policy instruments designed to achieve the pronouncements in the 1991 manifesto as they concern housing and settlement.

The report of that committee was submitted to Cabinet in April 1992, and it was referred to a task force on housing and settlement which was appointed by Cabinet in March, 1992. Now, the terms of reference of the task force are as follows:

(1) to make recommendations in respect of a comprehensive housing and settlements policy, including the policy of squatting;

(2) to identify appropriate funding arrangements; and (3) to advise on the institutional arrangements by which this policy could be

implemented.” This would all be taking us back to what we are discussing here today and what I consider a practical approach to the resumption of the construction of houses.

Madam Speaker, as hon. Members are aware, the task force reported, and its report, together with the report of the committee, was laid in this honourable House on November 13, 1992. I wish to reiterate that the two reports represent two major initiatives that this Government took in the housing and settlements sector in 1992.

Madam Speaker, permit me to deal briefly—and I say ‘briefly’ with the question of squatting, the need to amend Act 20 of 1986 and, of course, the urgent need to contain squatting. It is estimated today that the squatting population is in the vicinity of some 50,000 households and when we multiply the households by five, we are talking about some 250,000 persons, which would be roughly about 10 per cent of the population of Trinidad and Tobago.


385

In 1986, legislation was put in place to deal with the problem when the squatting population was in the vicinity of some 7,000 to 8,000 squatting households. The present legislation, which is Act 20 of 1986, did not cater for this proliferation in squatting and, as such, the Act must be amended in order to deal with the present realities of our time.

Very soon, I will be bringing to this honourable House the relevant legislation designed to remove the legal obstacles to the regularization process and I trust—

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: Would the Minister give way to a question? Would he indicate whether he is talking about merely squatters on state lands or squatters who are on private lands as well?

Dr. The Hon. V. Lasse: My address is specifically to squatters on state lands where the state has jurisdiction. However, as the Member for Caroni Central is aware, I have on one occasion, at least, travelled his area with him where there are squatters on state and private lands, and I mentioned to him then that the Government has jurisdiction over squatters on state lands, but that the Government would act as a facilitator to assist wherever possible with the regularization of squatters on private lands.

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: You have a programme for that? Dr. The Hon. V. Lasse: Very soon, Madam Speaker, as I said, I will be

bringing the appropriate legislation for the amendment of Act 20 of 1986 to address the realities of the time. I trust that I can count on the wisdom and good judgment of Members on the other side to assist me in speedily passing this legislation.

I think I should address somewhat the practical application of squatting regularization because, from this will flow avenues for construction and persons may well utilize the concessions given in this Bill.

Squatting regularization under the agreement between the Inter-American Development Bank (IADB) and Trinidad and Tobago, is proceeding smoothly. We also have squatting regularization under the National Housing Authority.

Going back to the IADB agreement, I wish to report that in respect of the pilot project which started at Bamboo Settlement No. 3 for some 330 lots, on Wednesday, March 10, 1993, the contractors handed over the completed site to the Government and, therefore, we are about to start with the regularization process whereby persons would receive their legal title to the land.

On Wednesday next, we will be carrying out the same exercise at Maturita Triangle, where some 301 lots will be handed over to Government and all we


386

have to do is to begin the regularization process as in Bamboo Settlement. We are talking about some 601 lots.

As far as the price is concerned, we intend to regularize pursuant to Act 20 of 1986, whereby persons would receive legal title on the payment of $0.25 per square foot and $1.00 lease. If we compare this to what obtained before, and the whole question of sites and services, this would take us to what I call the affordability question, which was introduced by this present Government.

The position of the last Government was that persons had to pay up front for the full value of the land, which ranged from $15,000 to $30,000. What we have introduced is the concept of affordability, whereby persons would pay only for the raw value of the land; they would have their title, and they would be able to access their loans.

Let me give you the extent of squatter regularization works under the IADB. Some 2,500 squatter families on 12 sites would be regularized. Under the NHA segment, regularization is ongoing and would involve some 2,332 squatter families, and this we hope to continue during 1993.

Madam, let me turn to the housing policy of this Government, and here I would quote from the Medium Term Policy Framework on pages 44 and 45. I quote:

“Government’s housing policy has been directed to low and middle income families. A quarter of the homes provided by the National Housing Authority (NHA) during the 1980s was rental accommodation for low income families. The remainder, comprising mortgage accommodation, was allocated to middle-income families…subsidies provided to housing in general include below-market interest rates on mortgages directed to low and middle income families as well as tax rebates on mortgage interest up to $36,000; low rents on public housing based on household income rather than cost; sale of homes free of administrative and land costs; corporation income tax exemption to mortgage finance institutions; exemption from capital gains tax to housing developers; and deposit of social security and other government funds at low interest rates in mortgage finance institutions…”

It went on to state that: “Of the $2.5 billion (1985 prices) spent on housing during the 1980s, over

90 per cent was expended in the first half of the decade. The NHA currently provides serviced lots only. However, it still holds in its portfolio 16,612 mortgage units and 5,572 rental units.


387

With the end of the housing boom of the early 1980s, employment in the construction sector fell from approximately 20 per cent of total labour force in 1981 to approximately ten per cent in 1989.”

I now would wish to address briefly the achievements of this Government as far as the Ministry of Housing and Settlement is concerned in 1992.

IADB assisted component sites and services: There was a continuation of development works at Bon Air West, Arouca, Couva North, Phase I, and Harmony Hall, Gasparillo, to yield a total of 1,829 serviced lots in 1993. Land development works began in La Paille, Caroni; Union Hall, San Fernando; Debe, Phase II and Malabar Phase IV.

The scheduled completion dates are La Paille—June 1993; Union Hall—February 1994; Debe, Phase II—June 1993 and Malabar, Phase IV—October 1993. The estimated yield from these sites is 1,593 serviced residential lots. Each site will be served with similar facilities—paved roads, drains and electricity. The lots sizes vary from 3,587 to 5,700 square feet.

7.15 p.m. Let me turn briefly to what we intend to continue doing in 1993. IDB-assisted

Components Sites and Services: Additional sites to be developed at Calder Hall, Tobago, and Buen Intento, Princes Town. These sites will provide an additional 469 serviced residential lots.

Shelter construction is scheduled to commence in June/July, 1993 at Bon Air West, Arouca; Couva North and Harmony Hall on some 1,829 lots. Finally, on shelter construction, during 1993, as far as squatter regularization is concerned, upgrading of physical infrastructure is scheduled to commence at Warden Road, New City, Zone 8, Blitz Village, Pleasantville, and this will amount to some 1,400 squatter household residents on these sites and they will be earmarked for regularization.

Madam Speaker, I said that I would have confined my statement to aspects of this Bill which would touch directly on what my ministry is doing and here I have, more or less, confined myself to the question of construction.

To conclude, let me state that it should be clear from all that I have said that while work was done in the housing and settlement sector, in 1992, to satisfy the basic needs of the national community in housing, the momentum must be kept up in 1993. I submit that the concessions provided by this Bill will assist in achieving this noble objective. Thank you, Madam Speaker.


388

Miss Hulsie Bhaggan (Chaguanas): Madam Speaker, in rising to speak on this Bill, I wish to make reference to the contribution made by the Member for Couva North, when he referred to a range of increases in terms of administrative and user fees, in the 1992 budget, and where he said that what was left out then, was in fact included this year in a range of items for which the charges have been increased.

My question, therefore, is, given all these increases, is it a deliberate policy of the Government to further transfer the burden of adjustment to the people of Trinidad and Tobago? As far as we are concerned, in the first place when taxes, are collected one would expect that they would be used to fund the public administration system to a large extent. Therefore, you ought not to have to increase further charges on the people to meet certain kinds of expenditures.

As far as we are concerned, what the Government is doing is concentrating the revenues it is collecting on foreign debt payment, and so whatever shortfall that is being generated, the Government is now placing that burden on the taxpayers. That to me, seems logical, when I examine the way this Government is operating. The people of this country, therefore, are expected to fund the running of this Government because they are taking most of our resources to repay the foreign debts.

What I have also found, is that the foreign debts are being bunched into two to three years, between 1993, and 1995 and I wonder why it is not being spread more evenly over the years. I strongly suspect, though, that the reason for this is that 1996 will be an election year and by then most of the payments would have been made. In that election year, the Government could then splurge. When one actually studies the trend of elections in this country, one sees that Government tends to put the majority of its funds into those years.

Mr. Humphrey: It did not help the National Alliance for Reconstruction.

Miss H. Bhaggan: Well, this is the point I am going to make. It did not help the National Alliance for Reconstruction. In the past, people used to be fooled by that strategy, but not any more. When one examines the situation of the people in this country, one sees that we have found ourselves in a state where the poor is becoming poorer—and I agree with the Member for St. Augustine, when he said that the middle class is now becoming eroded.

Let us look at the situation as it is today. Although we have to pay all these increased administrative and user fees, today for instance, we do not have public transport, so it means transportation cost is something we have to bear personally.


389

Secondly, water, an essential commodity is now becoming a scarce one. Pipelines are being run to communities, but there is no water in them. The Member for Laventille West is now sourcing a loan—I think it is US $55 million—to be able to upgrade the various mains in the country. So we will have to wait until that loan is received by the Government. The way the Member was behaving on television, you would assume that it was a grant he was getting. He was so happy he was getting this loan, as if to say that we do not have to repay it.

When we look at the transportation system—that is an additional charge on us. We have to pay more for water. I see there is an agenda for health for the 1990s. I hope that agenda is completed within the 1990s, because when you examine the history of the PNM, most of their projects go beyond 10 years. Presently, citizens cannot access proper public health care service in this country. They have to dip into their pockets to pay private medical bills and to buy pharmaceutical and other drugs.

I hear the Member for Point Fortin making a big boast about the National Housing Authority and all those things they are doing, but before I make my point, I would like to ask the Member, how many of the developed serviced lots he is talking about were initiated under the PNM? I believe their policy is one of building housing units. I did not realize that it was distributing serviced lots for housing.

I do not understand how the Member could boast about NHA development when persons who are in those homes today are being threatened with eviction because they cannot afford to pay their rents or whatever else they are required to pay for those houses. As a matter of fact, I think the rents are going to be increased.

The other point has to do with the fact that we are paying taxes, but we do not have security, so today apart from paying our normal taxes, we have got to ensure that there is either a private guard or some neighbourhood watch being set up, or we would have to put electronic devices in our cars, or on our gates. We have got to create bars around our homes. As a matter of fact, I believe someone said in the newspaper that people were now living behind bars.

7.25 p.m. So why are we paying taxation when now we have to take care of our own

security? That is a further burden on the population of Trinidad and Tobago. It seems to me, therefore, that one of the reasons why the "donkey dance" became so popular in this country is that the people of this country are being recognized


390

as beasts of burden; and the burden is that of adjustment. So the Member for St. Augustine is right, again, when he continues to repeat his arguments, because I believe they are relevant today with respect to the kinds of policies which have been implemented by the Government without understanding the needs of the people of Trinidad and Tobago.

Madam Speaker, the other point I want to make has to do with the various items in this Finance Bill, some of which have been able to benefit from exemption of duty, and I know it has a great deal to do with the policy of trade liberalization.

I do recall, some time ago, one economist did a research paper for the Trinidad and Tobago Manufacturers' Association. If I recall, that economist forecast that at least 14,000 jobs will be lost in the manufacturing sector, as a result of trade liberalization. He also went on to speak about the other investments in the manufacturing sector and the kind of losses that we shall suffer as a result of that.

I would like this Government to tell this country whether it has undertaken any study with respect to the impact of trade liberalization and whether it is prepared to tell this population exactly what its forecast is in terms of the impact on employment and the economy in general. Because I believe if that study were done, Madam Speaker, they would have been able to see that we are going to have serious problems in the manufacturing firms in our country. As a matter of fact, I believe one firm is now threatening closure, the CONSOL appliance company.

I also saw on television, recently, where one company was saying it is going to get rid of a couple lines in its production because it is more feasible to import that particular line due to the company’s link with an international agency. That is what is going to happen. When a manufacturing company feels that it cannot manufacture a product at a competitive price, it will find it easier, therefore, to close down that particular line, or even the whole company, and import the particular item instead.

So what you may have is a situation like, maybe, St. Maarten, which has become more of a distribution centre and a free port. They do not manufacture things there. Right now St. Maarten is in trouble. I know we cannot parallel both countries because of St. Maarten's political arrangements and system, but the principle is the same. St. Maarten is a place where more immigrants live and the local population, somehow, does not have a stake in the resources of the country.


391

Right now, that is a subject of much debate in that country and, in fact, the country was closed down for two days because of that kind of debate. I was there about a month ago and was part of a discussion where people were talking about the fact that they had no say in their own country and their economy.

We have got to look at our country and look down the line at what is going to happen. Because I see a situation developing where we are going to be back to square one; and if I recall, more specifically in the early 60s or 70s the debate in this country had to do with the fact that we did not have the resources for development, so they pursued a policy of industrialization by invitation. After that policy went on for about 10 years or so, and it was not working to the extent that it was found that the locals were not involved, the Government then nationalized those industries; and now they are saying that has not worked as it should and they are going back to inviting foreign investors into the country.

All the parameters may not be the same, but the effect is likely to be, and, maybe, ten years from now we are going to have another development where some other government would take over what was then called "the commanding heights of the economy". So it seems to me as if this Government, which is of the same party, does not know what it is doing—I quite agree with the Member for Couva North when he said that it seems that the right hand does not know what the left hand is doing; and I believe the Member for Diego Martin Central also said the same thing.

I also saw where the Minister of Industry, Trade and Tourism in the company of the Minister of Labour and Member for Laventille East/Morvant visited the Dunlop factory. While there, he had an intense meeting with the Management, from what was reported, and eventually he said that the importation of used tyres will now be subject to certain restrictions and there are to be certain specifications with respect to standards.

The point I am making, therefore, is, why does the Minister have to go to Dunlop to find out the effect of trade liberalization on that industry? If the trade liberalization policy was being done in a systematic and professional manner and a study had been made of the various industries, they would not have needed to go to Dunlop and then decide that they are going to give some protection from used tyres coming into the country. I believe what this Government is doing is taking the blind-mice approach. It is just following things all about the place; it is not clear as to where it wants to go. It is following external instructions; we do not see any kind of development which, really, seems to be relevant to the internal development of our country.


392

Then, too, I want to question something here. When certain pronouncements are made with respect to retrenchment and forecasting with respect to the increase of unemployment, given trade liberalization, why is the Government silent? I am wondering whether there is not a sinister development in this whole thing where, because we have the reputation of being a relatively high-wage economy that, perhaps, it is in the interest of the Government's investment policy to allow unemployment increase, to allow wages to go down as a result, to somehow interfere with the trade union movement by attacking and everything else, and so create a situation where the rate of employment in terms of the wages and so on, would be lowered and so Trinidad and Tobago would become more attractive to investors.

Investors tend to like an economy where labour is not organized, because once labour is organized it is very difficult for them to operate under the kind of conditions they tend to operate under in other countries, especially countries in the Eastern zone. I am wondering whether that is not a hidden policy of the Government as far as its approach towards investment is concerned.

Then, too, I saw where in the Finance Bill there is a rebate on raw material inputs, but we do not have the same kind of arrangement with respect to replacement parts. I guess the thinking there is that we ought to be able to stimulate the manufacturing of components and so on. But the point is, do we have the facilities to be able to do that? Will the fledgling industries that we have now be able to withstand the kind of changes that are happening in the world and the kind of developments that are taking place in our trades? I should like the Minister to explain to us why we are going to have a rebate on raw material inputs, but not have that same kind of concession with respect to replacement parts.

Madam Speaker, if I may go to a point that I really like with respect to children. In one section we have goods which are being imported, like clothing for poor children, will be exempt from customs duty. That is commendable. But the question I am asking now is, apart from clothing, what about food? I thought we had an ECHO programme. What has happened to that? The last time I raised it in this House I believe some study was being done with respect to restructuring that programme. We have not had any indication in this House as to what has happened to the provision of food, which is an integral part of the social amelioration programme. So we would like to get some answers with respect to ECHO.


393

Another point in respect of children, is that many children will not be able to benefit from this particular concession, because it is limited to those children who are in institutions or schools. The really poor children in our society are not going to school and are not in an institution. So how do they benefit from that provision? Madam Speaker, you will recall there was a forum, recently, at which we were both present, also the Member for Barataria/San Juan. A non-governmental organization which was making charitable donations spoke about the community in Couva North where children were so poor that they could not go to school; did not have clothing; were not registered in terms of birth certificates, and so on. That kind of poverty described then, is existing in many parts of the country. So the question, therefore, is not just providing for the clothing of these children, but also providing other things to help them have an equal opportunity to education and other rights in the society.

I also saw where the Minister has proposed something on emblems. I am just choosing at random, really, and this had to do with being able to bring artificial flowers, miniature flags, buttons, brooches and small emblems, of no commercial value, for sale as tokens. In this particular case these emblems will be approved by the Cabinet. I am wondering whether political parties also will be falling under this particular clause—

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: Balisier?

Miss H. Bhaggan: And whether political parties other than the PNM will benefit from it, since it is going to be a PNM Cabinet that is going to approve this.

Mr. Palackdharrysingh: Only Balisier.

Miss H. Bhaggan: Given the way the PNM operates, especially with respect to the URP, I hope that when the UNC decide to benefit from this provision, we will not be discriminated against as we are discriminated against under the URP, Madam Speaker.

Mr. Mottley: Are you going to submit lists?

Miss H. Bhaggan: We will not talk about the lists at this point.

7.35 p.m. Madam Speaker, I want to make a very brief contribution, really. Firstly, I

want to commend the Member for Port-of-Spain South for her contribution. I am always happy when I hear the women on the other side speak, because I really believe that they ought to have a stronger voice in the Cabinet and in the


394

Parliament. Her contribution was well done and I think really outshone some of the male counterparts on her side. I liked her commendation of the sportsmen and sportswomen and the acknowledgment of sport and the Member for St. Ann's East being an athlete of much national accolade. I want to congratulate her on that.

I am a bit disappointed, however, that we are boasting about equipment. How are you going to use this equipment if you do not have recreational facilities? Are you going, for instance, to use your lovely bat, ball, wicket and whatever else you provide for cricket, on the road? You see, about 75 per cent of this country, people of all ages, play cricket on the roads. Everybody in this House knows that. They play football on the road and there are some people who have actually installed basket-ball courts on the road. So it is good to get the equipment. I believe that to speak so highly about a new dimension for sports and youth is great, but you do not just provide the equipment, you have got to provide the facilities to go along with it.

I recall maybe two or three years ago where, in Central, a beautiful young woman was jogging in the canefield because there are no facilities. She was brutally raped and murdered in the most sadistic manner. She happened to be a victim, but the point is, there are many women today who have to jog in canefields and near the canefields. In fact, those recreational grounds are just pieces of land on which cows and goats compete with people for space. It is something that we all know about.

I am hoping that the Minister of Finance will have some serious discussions with the Member for Port of Spain South and come up with proper allocations—if they really want to help the young people—for sporting facilities. In Central Trinidad we do not have a stadium or any kind of facility to host any games. I believe the time has come when the sporting facilities ought to be decentralized, when the available grounds have to be properly upgraded. Do not only look at cricket and football, but promote sports in which more women can become involved. In fact, many women these days are putting on a lot of weight, because they have nowhere to do their exercise, except to pay some exorbitant fee to a gym and try to work out.

I believe that we ought to promote facilities for indoor sports also, because many women play indoor sports. We should have places for night cricket or night activities for women, because the men in our society leave much of the domestic chores to the women, so the women are able to benefit from any kind of exercise only during the night. So we have to set up facilities with lights for the women to exercise. [Laughter]


395

I believe they ought to also read the various messages which were given out and the things that took place on March 8, l993 for International Women's Day. I suggest to all the male Members, on both sides, that next year International Women's Day is going to be greater. By then I hope that we would have seen in the next budget, some kind of indication that there is care and concern for women.

As a matter of fact, I was interviewed by a young woman who was doing some research and she told me she just came from a particular Minister on the other side, who said that women are well taken care of in the society and they are being treated equally and he is not aware that there is any problem with women. Of course, I responded to that. I am sure the Minister knows whom I am talking about. But if he wants me to call the name, he could always get up and say so and I would call it.

Hon. Member: Who is that chauvinist?

Miss H. Bhaggan: The person who usually objects the most but today is very quiet.

The other point I want to make is in reference to what the Member for Diego Martin Central spoke about. He referred to the Unemployment Relief Programme, which, I can assure them, will never be a dead subject in this House. He said that it is a short-term programme for persons at the margin. I asked a question on URP some time ago and I requested a written answer, and this is the second time I am getting an answer to this effect. I have asked for a listing of those persons, their names and addresses, who would have been employed in the LID Programme. Last year I got the same answer and this year I have got it again, where the Minister of Works and Transport is saying that it is not proper to disclose names and addresses of private citizens in this honourable House.

I have got to seek some counsel on that matter from the Member for Couva South, because I am not aware that I am a public person. I thought that in this House we are supposed to be privy to information. I am also a Member of the Public Accounts Committee and I am sure that matter will come to that committee at some time. In the interim, I would be seeking counsel to find out whether the Minister has the privilege to withhold information, especially when a Member of this House has asked for it under the Standing Orders. This is the second time that type of information has been refused from that very ministry.

I looked through the projects very quickly. In fact, I asked for a listing of the projects, which I got. The Government always insists it does things according to

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [MISS BHAGGAN]

396

region. Just at random, I took region 1, then I took region 6, which is where my constituency falls. I am not sure where region 1 falls. But when I looked at the kind of allocation, I saw where in region 1 the Government spent more than $8 million on its projects and in region 6, it spent 50 per cent of that—$4 million. What I find interesting is, the Member for Diego Martin Central was saying a while ago with respect to the former regime, that it is wrong for a government to use its powers to take away public servants' salaries. I want to find out now, is it not wrong also to take public funds and distribute them in such a way that people are not being treated equally?

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, let me answer the Member. If that is happening, that is wrong, but that is not happening.

Miss H. Bhaggan: Is he saying what I have just said is not happening?

The Member also said that resources must be for the benefit of all, as opposed to a few. I will further analyze these figures. I want to suggest to the Member for Diego Martin Central that I believe he lives in his own dreamworld.

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, I think she should hold her conclusions until after she has analyzed the figures properly.

Miss H. Bhaggan: Madam Speaker, the point I am making, therefore, is that the Government ought not to say one thing when it is referring to another regime and practise something else. In this debate today we went into different areas and we touched on many things, because, basically, what we talked about today, has a lot to do with what we also discussed in the budget debate.

I want to support quite clearly what the Member for St. Augustine has stated, because this is just putting into place some of the measures in terms of an overall economic policy that the Government is pursuing. We, on this side, do not believe that the policies that the Government is pursuing now are to the benefit of the people of Trinidad and Tobago. We are saying that the Government is contradicting itself, because when it was in Opposition, it said one thing and now it is in Government, it is doing something else. Even up to now, the Government comes here and insists that it is carrying out and keeping faith, as the Member for Point Fortin said, with the people of Trinidad and Tobago.

We do not support that view, because when we look at the kind of deals which are being struck, when we are seeing a situation where we are selling our assets to be able to pay off our foreign debts and then we are continuing to borrow in the process, the question I want to ask this Government is: When you continue to sell


397

to liquidate your foreign debt, there will come a time when you are not going to have anything else to sell, and when that time comes, what are you going to sell? I believe it is going to be the people in terms of their labour. The question of recolonialization, therefore, comes back. It might be a kind of neo-colonialism approach, but the point is that we are selling the very independence for which we have fought for so long.

7.45 p.m. Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, I think it is not only in Parliament, but outside

also, where there is a misunderstanding. The Government is not selling assets to pay foreign debts. The use of the proceeds of divestment is a by-product. The divestment programme hinges on certain clear strategies which are enunciated, that is, the fact that the Government believes it should act as a facilitator; it should take certain steps in the economy. The proceeds of divestment are to be used for capital investment, as well as the payment of foreign debts, and other things, as spelt out in the manifesto. It is not something new. We are not doing something that we did not say we would. We said it quite clearly in the manifesto.

Miss Bhaggan: Madam Speaker, that is left to be seen. But as far as we are receiving it from our end, and as far as the population is receiving it, the signals are clear. As a matter of fact, the Prime Minister himself made that statement. If the Member wants, we can furnish him with the information, where it was reported in the press that some time last year the Prime Minister made that statement and that was when we brought it to the attention of this House.

It does not matter how it is defined or what pie-in-the-sky approach one has, the point is that the net effect is that we, as a country, are losing our independence because we are going to become a facilitator. What does a facilitator mean? It means that you are not going to intervene as much as in the past in the state sector; it means that we are giving up some of the powers that we have fought for as a country. A facilitator is somebody who just helps to make things happen without getting involved.

As a matter of fact, the point I was making recently on International Women's Day is that if the Government does not intervene with respect to the integration of women—women cannot somehow be integrated by market forces; it has to be deliberate policies on the part of the Government. Whether it is the integration of women; the possession by the people of this country or power—whatever it has to be in giving direction to this country—it has to be deliberate policies of the Government. It cannot be where one just facilitates. I cannot see development being facilitated.

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [MISS BHAGGAN]

398

One can allow a certain amount of facilitation, but not to the extent that this Government is talking about. The incremental approach the Prime Minister speaks about, when one looks down the line, is going to be one that will gobble up the whole system. We must not look five years ahead to the next general election day; we have to look way ahead into the next 10, 15 and 20 years. Because what we have to do is to project ourselves into the future. I do not believe this Government is projecting itself into the future. It has a fire-fighting approach; every time fire breaks out, one just puts it out. There is no clear and deliberate strategy to take this country out of the mess.

I cannot see, for instance, how the Government is going to pay, on the one hand, borrow on the other, and expect that somehow to help the country. We are talking about: “From stabilization to Growth”, but we have had a negative growth. We are talking about development, but unemployment is increasing every day. What is happening? The crime situation is out of hand. In fact, the Members on the other side always speak about this country being a manufacturing financial hub of the Caribbean. That sounds great, they are lovely words, but how is this going to be a manufacturing and financial hub if crime is at a stage now where nobody can live in peace.

If local people cannot live in peace, can you imagine, for instance, foreigners who are more easily discernible by their features and so on, being able to survive? They are going to be victims more than we, I believe, because then the impression will be that those people who are foreigners have more money than "we" and they have "US" currency.

So, one cannot talk about setting up that financial and manufacturing hub without first dealing with the domestic problems in our country. If more workers are going to be retrenched, if the crime rate is going to get worse, if more and more people are going to leave the country, how is this going to be the financial hub? It will be a hub, of course, but it would be with locals. It will be a hub, probably, like St. Maarten and Aruba. In fact, Aruba, right now is being bought out by the Mafia. That did not happen overnight; it happened over a period of time. I am saying, therefore, that we are opening up ourselves to all kinds of elements because we are losing control of the society.

With those comments, Madam Speaker, I therefore find it very difficult to support this Bill because it is part of an overall economic policy being pursued by the Government which really is not taking this country anywhere forward. As a


399

matter of fact, I agree with the Member for Couva North that it is a retrograde step.

Thank you, Madam Speaker. SITTING OF THE HOUSE

The Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of Finance (Hon. Kenneth Valley): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that this House continue sitting until the conclusion of the debate in progress.

Question put and agreed to. FINANCE BILL

Mr. Ramesh Maharaj (Couva South): Madam Speaker, I assure this House that I will not be long, but I could not have allowed this debate to be completed without making a contribution in this matter.

I think it is an important debate because these measures are part of the policy of the Government to implement structural adjustment programmes. The hon. Member for St. Augustine has read extensively, he has read from time to time from the report and recommendations of the president of the International Bank. I think it is quite clear when one looks at pages 6, 7 and 45 of that report that what we are doing here today, is the implementation of that programme. When one looks at the measures that we have before us, one sees vast increases for the provision of services and registration of documents. One has to ask the question: What sort of effect is this going to have on people and, generally, whom are they going to affect?

Madam Speaker, I am a bit disappointed that since I have been in this House, I have not been able to see produced in this House, and I have not been told that any survey has been done to see what effect these measures are going to have on the population—and we know that the structural adjustment policy has affected people—and what sort of people they affect. Now I should have thought that the Government would have conducted a survey to show that it has measured and analyzed the socio-economic effects of its policies, in particular, these policies. And, in particular, how much its policy in any particular matter, affect the living standards at the household level.

It is only when Government does that, can it understand the consequences the economic planning or policy would have on the welfare of the different household groups in the country. Therefore, one would recognize that if one is implementing a measure like this, perhaps, some household groups would feel the effect greater

Finance Bill Friday, March 12, 1993 [MR. MAHARAJ]

400

than other household groups. Therefore, one would have expected that the Government would have determined which household groups would be more potentially vulnerable to its policies.

In any policy, and in any implementation of policy, there would be persons who gain and persons who lose. I think that when one is in the business of government, if I may use that expression, one would have to determine what sort of effect such measures would have on the income and in the homes of those who are losing. I think it is time, if Government has not done it as yet, to do a survey or some planning, to introduce some measure whereby it can get a reliable base of information so it can properly formulate its economic and social policy properly.

7.55 p.m.

Any policy which affects the lives of people and their households can have grave social impact on any society. When a policy affects the household, it has effects on health of the members, the education of persons in the household; the survival and very existence of the members, the stability, the family life and security of the household. If those matters are not considered by the policies made, whether consciously or unconsciously, one is contributing to the problems that face the society. For example, if one looks at the problems of drugs, crime, juvenile delinquency, poverty and unemployment, one is not saying in all cases, but one sees that these problems can contribute to that sort of human problem. That is why, if you really want true economic growth, you must have proper measures for human development.

When one looks at some of the measures which have been introduced, for example, firearms—I am just going to deal with a few of them: A firearms user's licence increased from $40 to $150; that is 275 per cent increase. There is an increase for the grant of work permits from $200 to $600, an increase of 200 per cent. In respect of registration on agreement for lease, from $5.00 to $15.00, an increase of 200 per cent. With respect to registration of newspapers from $30 to $100, an increase of 233 per cent. Under the Births and Deaths Registration Act, the Provisional Collection of Taxes Order No. 2/1992, had increased the fees for registration of births where the child was between three months and 12 months, from $2.50 to $100.00.

The Finance Bill by virtue of section 14 has reduced this figure to $50—that is one of the things we had criticized but that is still an increase—an overall increase of 1,900 per cent. Similarly, where the Provisional Collection of Taxes Order 1992 had increased the registration fee for a child over 12 months from $50 to


401

$150.00; it has now reduced this to $75.00 but this is still an increase of 2,900 per cent.

We have not seen any basis or any documented issue put forward for these increases. Is it just a figure out of a hat? What effect is this going to have on households and people? One sees under the Motor Vehicles and Road Traffic Act, a wrecked vehicle from $25 to $40, an increase of 60 per cent. You see the weighing of a vehicle increased from $1.00 to $20.00, an increase of 900 per cent. There are other increases with respect to the agriculture industry with increase of fees for the inspection of animals from $5.00, in the case of a horse or mare—that is 300 per cent and any sheep, goat or pig from $1.00 to $5.00. Those are some of the increases.

This brings me to the point: Who in the society is really facing the brunt of the adjustment? One sees that what has happened—and that is the point made by the Members for St. Augustine and Chaguanas—is that it is the ordinary person in society, the person who is in the lower income group.

Madam Speaker, if you would permit me—this week I had two delegations. One from traders at the Airport. These are people who have been bringing and selling goods in the country and they have been doing this for several years.

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, I wonder whether the Member can inform the House if they came to him in his capacity as a lawyer or as the Member for Couva South.

Mr. R. Maharaj: Madam Speaker, I do not think it makes a difference. Madam Speaker: It is knowledge that has been brought to his attention and

he is using it as ammunition in his debate. I do not think it will make a difference.

Mr. Valley: Madam Speaker, I am guided by the Standing Orders. I think it is Standing Order 36 which talks about conflict of interest.

Madam Speaker: The Member is in the fortunate position of wearing two hats: an attorney-at-law as well as a parliamentarian. If there are matters that come within his knowledge as an attorney-at-law, which of course has political tones to them, there is absolutely no reason why the Member cannot use that in the debate.

Mr. R. Maharaj: Madam Speaker, I did not ask them in what capacity they came to me but in future, I will draft a document so that I can send it to the hon. Member for Diego Martin Central. So I would ask them: In what capacity have you come to me?


402

These people stated and, if I may be permitted to read from a document which they have given to me. They stated that they have been trading in goods and:

"The normal situation was that goods will be handled at airport..."

when they import their goods.

"(a) after normal travellers with strictly personal effects. (b) if the airport is very crowded traders goods will be retained by customs for review by a review officer who works at the airport daily. (c) if goods are prohibited items, amendment to cargo or seizure may be recommended."

They said a particular supervisor of customs—I would not call his name—apparently with the blessing of the Comptroller and also possibly the Minister, on the advice of certain persons—

"...decided to amend the cargo without chance of review all the so called trader or trafficker goods at airport."

He has done this without putting in place any machinery at Customs to handle the extra workload in other areas."

What has happened is:

"By amending the cargo with no review it costs importers approximately $50.00 per package transport to the bond."

Which means that these goods are now transported to the bond and they have to pay extra for that.

"He makes it imperative that you pass an entry with a broker. It takes approximately one week to process documents and retrieve your goods which is one week of lost time in which all you do is try to follow your goods around and receive aggravation. All this amounts to an increase in the cost of goods.

The new system will not result in any increased revenue for Government because we will pay the same money but lose time without compensation.

We estimate as traders traffickers, whatever name that we pay approximately $25 to $30 million for the year in duty at great extent with all the other related monies that we spend; tickets, payment to porters, use of airport taxes, departure tax, vat on tickets, and we feel that we deserve to have a voice and get some consideration...from this Government.

We have collected in just two days about three hundred names from persons all over Trinidad except San Fernando and we can probably make it


403

five hundred, because we supply to a number of stores items not normally imported in much bulk.

We believe that through you, as the representative for our body, which we want to solidify, we could get consideration with respect to the matters by Customs and Government.

We want to have our goods checked at the airport, as we are accustomed by an officer or officers that customs deem fit examined. We cannot afford the time wasting with the new intended policy. The transport charges—I added for goods going to bond and broker documents, we find prohibitive. Jamaica had a problem trying to push their traders out of the airport, and eventually, they had to arrange for a section of the airport to be made available for the traders.

We feel that these considerations we are seeking for are not much considering the amount of duties we pay per year at the airport. The people concerned in this situation are prepared to band themselves together in whatever way necessary and show a united front in getting the situation regularized."

Then, there are the signatures of the people. That shows to a great extent what the small trader is undergoing.

8.05 p.m. The Maxi-Taxi Drivers Owners' Association has a very grave problem. These

days I get so many complaints from all sections of the community. We know that the maxi taxi owner cannot give his vehicle to anyone to operate. There are people who have been ill or injured and they have to pay instalments, and there is a situation where the Licensing Authority is dealing with a change in the nature of the licence.

If Miss “A" as in a particular case, has children; she was injured or is sick and owns a maxi-taxi, she has instalments to pay on this maxi-taxi, she cannot work the maxi-taxi; nor can she give it to someone to work it, because under the present law it has to be operated by the owner with insurance.

I would like the Government to consider all the different policies in these matters and see whether the policies it is implementing are not for only a section of the population. The policies are having very adverse effects on the population. Maybe the Government should listen to us and set up some sort of machinery so that the people who feel that they are being left out of the system would be able to


404

complain and have effective determination of these complaints, there would be some interfacing with the population, and people would not feel that they are not loved and taken care of.

Madam Speaker, I congratulate the hon. Member for Port of Spain South. I am probably prejudiced in this because I have a soft spot for her. I must say that her contribution is always very inspiring and motivating. We on this side of the House congratulate her. I do feel a bit sorry for her in that she has to administer a sporting policy which I am sure she is not happy with, but I can understand that with the system under which she operates, she cannot speak about it.

When one looks at the measures on page 31 of this Bill, "Goods Exempt from Payment of Customs Duty" where the exemption started. If one looks at page 55, one would see the exemptions such as slip-catching machines, tennis trainers, pumps for balls, gymnasium equipment—I will not go into those details—track and field equipment and equipment for indoor games.

However, I find it very strange that from the list, after water polo and outdoor sports like racing-cycles et cetera, excluded are starting pistols, stop watches, equipment for motor-car racing, motor-cycle racing, horse racing, sailing, motor-boat racing, water skiing, scuba diving, hunting, fishing and card games. The little man who plays “all fours” is affected with his cards, and in the other aspects of sporting.

What is the reason that some of these sporting activities are not exempted? Why is there exemption for some and in others there is none? This brings me to the question: What is the sporting policy of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago? Are they going to give exemptions in respect of some games and none in others? It is all well and good to say that you are going to give exemptions with respect to matters, but I ask: What machinery will be provided for sportsmen who cannot afford to purchase some of these items?

We can remember very clearly the case of Gene Samuel who had to go to Barcelona and he was forced to raise his own funds. What are we doing? What is the sporting policy? The hon. Member for Port of Spain South, in her enthusiasm and dynamism had to ask for contributions in order to get someone to a particular destination to represent Trinidad and Tobago. I do not think she would mind; she came to me and the Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj Foundation gave a donation of—I think—$500.

There it is, someone who was representing Trinidad and Tobago had to be begging for donations. I should have thought that apart from a cosmetic and


405

superficial approach, if the Government—I say now that I think the Minister is doing a very good job—is serious about showing its commitment to sports in this country, it should provide facilities. It should come with a policy and tell the people what are the training facilities it would provide.

According to the hon. Member for Chaguanas, what about recreation grounds? What facilities is it going to provide? Is it that the sporting policy would be limited to just giving some exemptions here and not giving with respect to others? Here it is again, I see that there is this ad hoc approach to matters.

There is one other aspect that I find—Item 3 (a) Aircraft and their component parts. These are goods which would be exempt. It goes on, one-seater aircraft specially built, et cetera. Who are the people who will benefit from this exemption, and what contributions do they make to our domestic economy, whether it is taxes, investment, employment or whatever? Given that BWIA does not own any planes, who would benefit from these exemptions? Are they going to result in lower air fares? Will the air fare from Trinidad to Tobago be reduced because of this exemption? We would like to know

On the question of the one-seater aircraft, we have to consider, who is it? Aerial spraying. There was a newspaper report quite recently, where houses near to cane fields were being affected by this spray. What is the Government going to do? Is it just going to give concessions without taking steps to protect the environment?

Is this the kind of piecemeal approach? More importantly, I think that there should be some explanation as to who will benefit from this.

8.15 p.m. Finally, I want to touch on the aspect of "there is light in sight or at the end of

the tunnel" and my leader stated that there is a train coming. I want to refer this House to a publication produced by the Economist Intelligence Unit of Great Britain, which is sent to me from time to time, Trinidad and Tobago, Guyana, Windward and Leeward Islands, Suriname, Netherlands, Antilles and Aruba: Country Report No. 1/1993—Analysis of Economic and Political Trends Every Quarter.

In the Trinidad and Tobago section, the economic policy which begins on page 27, states:

"In November, 1992, the Minister of Finance, Wendell Mottley, sought to move the economy from stabilization to growth. To this end the Government


406

announced a number of stimulants. These include incentives for major construction projects, new initiatives to attract investment in the energy sector, and the speeding up of private sector investment approvals with the assistance of the National Business Advisory Board. The government was clearly not happy that the highest estimate for real GDP growth in 1992 was a minuscule 0.2 per cent and is anxious to ensure a stronger performance in 1993. Mr. Mottley emphasised the government's desire that the private sector take the lead. To reactivate construction, rentals on commercial and residential property built between January 1993 and December 1994 will be exempt from tax. Investment in venture-capital companies will become tax deductible. The introduction of a 0.25 per cent levy on gross sales was not viewed as a disincentive since it may be deducted from corporation tax."

Let us see how the policy is being analyzed, and from the figures which they said they received from the Central Statistical Office—and the Minister might be able to dispute this if it is not correct—at page 28, it says:

"THE ECONOMY

Growth remains elusive.

The economy again failed to grow in the third quarter of 1992. GDP at factor cost declined by a seasonally adjusted 3.1 per cent, following declines at 1.4 per cent and 0.1 per cent in the first and second quarters, respectively. The petroleum sector led the fall, contracting by 6.7 per cent in the third quarter. Crude oil production dropped to an average of 131,500 barrels/day, 11,900 barrels/day below first-quarter production. Refinery throughput declined by 23.2 per cent. The non-petroleum sector declined by 1.6 per cent in the third quarter, distribution being the worst performer (13.2 per cent fall). On a year-on-year basis to September, real GDP fell by 1.6 per cent over the same period in 1991."

We know that the provisional estimate for 1992 is anticipating that there will be some real growth. I continue:

"Inflation starts to slow again.

The relative price stability achieved in 1991 appeared to be threatened as consumer prices rose by 5.5 per cent during the first half of 1992. In July-October, however, the effects of the tax rises and salary increases recorded earlier in the year seemed to have worn off. Prices rose by just 0.5 per cent during the four-month period with the pace of price rises slowing in most


407

categories. Price rises in housing, household supplies, services and clothing were modest or actually negative in the first ten months of the year. The annual rate of inflation still rose to 7.6 per cent in October from 7.1 per cent in June, but there is a good chance that it will have tailed off by the end of 1992."

Perhaps, the Minister could help with that.

"The fiscal deficit shoots up—

The deterioration of public finances already evident in the first half of 1992 continued in the third quarter. In July-September the central government reported a deficit of TT $380.9m, which brought the deficit for the first nine months of 1992 to TT $737.3m (US$173.5m). The larger deficit in the third quarter reflected both higher spending and lower receipts than in the previous three months. The figures for January-September suggest that overall spending has been just below the budgeted level while revenues have fallen far short of expectations."

We see, according to this, that the revenues have fallen far short of expectation.

"A deficit of up to TT $1 bn is not impossible for the year as a whole.

—causing public debt to rise

To finance its deficit the government had to increase its debt. Domestic debt increased from TT $4,719m in December 1991 to TT $5,067m in November, 1992. Most of this was raised through a TT $320m floating rate issue. Foreign debt rose by TT $240m to TT $6,872m, after falling for most of the year, following the US $100m Eurobond flotation. This increased total central government debt by TT $552m to TT $11,938m.

The monetary squeeze continues

To accommodate the government's borrowing requirements without causing overall credit to explode, the Central Bank has pursued its policy of tight money, The bank rate has remained at 13 per cent while the commercial bank prime lending rate was unchanged at 15.5 per cent. At the end of October credit to the private sector was 0.7 per cent below its level at the end of 1991 while credit to the central government was up by 21 per cent during the same period. Loans to other state entities fell by 11.7 per cent. Total domestic credit was up by just 3 per cent in the first ten months of 1992."


408

Looking at this, I do not see any great set of light and I do not see how you are going to get growth to expand. Because of the monetary squeeze, there is a shortage of money available to small businessmen who want to expand.

Perhaps, I can close by saying that I agree that we have a serious situation and that there should be national effort in trying to solve our problems. I also agree that the Government is not in an easy situation and sometimes we have to try to forget the causes of these problems—we have to forget personalities. But what we must also agree upon is that it is impossible to solve the problems of Trinidad and Tobago unless the human resources are mobilized, and you cannot mobilize the human resources unless there is true national unity and the policies which are to be implemented by Government are policies which the people of Trinidad and Tobago will feel are equitable and fair and not for a certain section of the population alone.

With that, I hope that the Government would recognize that we are at a very serious road junction and unless that air, that feeling of arrogance is removed; unless they look at the problem as one which affects them personally and demonstrate that they will look at it seriously in order to have all the people involved, not only they, but also the people of Trinidad and Tobago, are going to be faced with a serious problem from which we may not be able to recover at all.


8.25 p.m.

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Wendell Mottley): Madam Speaker, there were a number of points made by several Members. The hon. Member for Couva North, for instance, spent a lot of time seeking to show that the Government was increasing a number of fees in very steep fashion. In particular, the Member concentrated on quoting percentage increases. I have the list in front of me and in several instances some of the 500 per cent increases he quoted were for matters such as examining any deed, will or other document in which a tremendous 500 per cent increase was put on. One would believe that in so doing the legal profession and the beneficiaries of such services were going to be driven into the ground.

I have to tell you, Madam Speaker, that the 500 per cent increase moves the fee up to 50 cents. In a number of instances the fees have not been touched for so many years that they are still quoted in shillings, 24 cents and so forth. As we are going through, there are a number of ministries reporting on what fees should be


409

increased to bear some measure of the costs incurred in granting them. It is unfair that it should be put in the light only of percentage increase.

Another criticism is the one from the Member for St. Augustine about this question of how the monetary system operates. There is an element of truth in what he says, in that, there has always been an element of a dual economy in Trinidad and Tobago. This economy has been driven by oil, petroleum and natural gas and, more recently, petrochemicals and even before that, sugar and cocoa, which were the foreign exchange earners. That was the linchpin in the economy. Behind that productive sector, there are the whole transport, retail and distribution elements of the economy which were tied to that foreign exchange earning sector but not as directly as one would perhaps have liked.

It was, therefore, possible in some measure to separate the dual economy from the prime or driving economy. Therefore, it is possible to some extent to stimulate and get the non-prime economy to do most of the employment and so on in Trinidad and Tobago, but still there is the link back to foreign exchange earning capacity. The point I have made several times in this House is that even for those in the non-prime economy, who are not directly concerned with earning foreign exchange, their consumption habits, nevertheless, tie in the requirement to earn foreign exchange and it is not entirely possible to separate the two elements of the economy.

We have had the problem in the past. The hon. Member for Tobago East was trying to claim credit for the last administration in saying that there was growth. There was growth, yes, but two very fundamental circumstances underpinned the growth through 1991. The first was the Saddam Hussein effect when oil prices temporarily went up and, based on that drive, the non-prime economy began to respond—the retail section, the distribution section and so forth. But when the Saddam Hussein effect was dissipated that other section of the economy continued to grow, it quickly began to use up the foreign exchange reserves which had been accumulated during that short period and very quickly the growth was shown to be unsustainable. That is what we are now trying to avoid.

That is why we have set about planning and shaping the economy in this new direction—a new direction which is being followed by several other countries. When the member for St. Augustine almost despairs and says, “Look, the way


410

you are going is a hopeless path, it is not going to get us out of our difficulties,” I would try to encourage him by saying that it is not a path without risk that we are taking, but that certainly other countries have gone that route.

For instance, this morning at the Hilton Hotel the DFL had a seminar at which over 160 business, university and other people attended. The DFL brought down a number of experts from Australia, New Zealand, Mexico and so forth and they were recounting their experiences in going, more or less, along the same path which this Government has now outlined for Trinidad and Tobago.

It was very instructive and I wish that the Member for St. Augustine and others who are interested could get some of the results of that seminar in pointing to the path that Australia, Mexico and New Zealand have taken. The facts are that those economies, after taking some of these measures, not in the long term but even in the medium and some economies in the short term recovered, unemployment began to fall, export earnings began to come in, capital flight was reversed and the foreign exchange constraint was relaxed.

There are problems—and I refer now to matters raised by the Members for Chaguanas, St. Augustine and Couva South—in that, associated with that line of development have fallen off short-term problems especially of a social nature, as in the interim in any period of rapid change; there are problems of severe adjustment and people do suffer and, therefore, the requirement to put in place this so-called social safety net. We have been moving apace in Trinidad and Tobago to try to put in place a number of measures to assist people who are hurt in this transitional period. For instance, specifically related to the matter of utilities, we are putting in place measures to assist workers who are being separated. But more than that, there are families, as well, who are unconnected to the utilities, unemployed et cetera, and we are putting in place measures, whether they be unemployment relief or new programmes such as the Civilian Conservation Corps.

Most especially, Madam Speaker, we are using apprenticeship programmes on which we are trying to fashion Trinidad and Tobago on the European experience and pick up ever increasing numbers of school children, starting this year with several thousand and ultimately building, hopefully, to 10,000 plus who would get into this programme and work for a small stipend of probably not more than $30 a day, who would be attached for a period of at least six months—depending on the


411

programme, to last as long as two years—to industry, commerce, state enterprises, private business, Government agencies, farms, et cetera, who would learn the business of the world of work, the discipline and also a particular skill and trade.

Several of them, we hope, will remain with their companies of employment. Since all of them will not be able to remain, the others will at least leave that programme with a marketable skill which will assist them in the transition from the world of school to the world of work. All of these are programmes which we are putting in place.

We are seeking, as well, assistance from our divestment programmes, assistance from the multilateral agencies in putting more funding into school feeding and a number of programmes, such as may fall under the Ministry of the Member for Barataria/San Juan, which will be addressing the real concerns that both Members opposite and on this side have raised which flow from this transition period.

In every period of change, worldwide, wherever it has been, there are people who, in the short run, find themselves in difficult situations. We as a society, Trinidad and Tobago, especially the kind of society that we are, which separates us from many other societies, that are far less caring—and I do not mean that in the narrow political sense. The fact is that Trinidad and Tobago as a society is far more of a caring society than other societies in this hemisphere and we, knowing the dangers of the approach we are taking, have to put some of these measures in place and we are addressing them.

Madam Speaker, I go on to talk about some of the specifics on the amendments which are before us. If I could quickly go through them: One-seater aircraft. This is a measure specifically designed for aerial spraying.

Items for fishing, for example, fishing rods. They are already free under the tariff, consequently there is no need for an exemption.

The list of items ineligible for conditional duty exemptions—these were agreed by the Heads of Government and these items are basically available in sufficient quantities in the Caricom region, hence the items are ineligible for duty exemption. If supplies are not available in the Caricom region, suspensions of the CET rate of duty can be obtained.

Rebate on replacement parts, machinery continues to be free under a Minister’s licence.


412

I should like to turn now, Madam Speaker, to certain amendments. I mentioned in my first approach that there were several amendments which we have tabled and, in addition to those, I should like now to make mention of some more amendments. Clause 22(i)(b), in relation to section 134—

Madam Speaker: One minute. Do we have those amendments or are these further amendments?

Hon. W. Mottley: These are further amendments, Madam Speaker.

Madam Speaker: Then how are we going to deal with them? May I have a copy?

Hon. W. Mottley: Yes, I will pass them to you.

Madam Speaker: All right. You were under what?

Hon. W. Mottley: Clause 22(i)(b), in relation to section 134, (6D)(a) of the Income Tax Act. What is being proposed is to delete in paragraph (a) the words “under which” occurring before the words—

Mr. Maharaj: Madam Speaker, can the Minister state the page? I just want to follow.

Hon. W. Mottley: Yes, page 25, clause 22. We want to remove the words “under which”. It is just a repetition. Most of these are just cosmetic. On page 63, clause 25(1)(e) delete in relation to (a) heading 2606.00, the world “Aluminum” and substitute the word “Aluminium”.

On page 65, heading 3819.00, we have the word “then” and we want to substitute the word “than”. Not “Less then”, but “les than”.

On page 73, 25(1)(e), heading ex 34.01, we have the word “excluded” and it should be “excluding”.

On page 78, heading 6113.00, we have “5906” and it should be “59.06”.

On page 79, instead of “6217”, it should be “62.17”.

Page 88, insert in item 6, after the word “correct”, the word “any”.

That is the penultimate line of page 88.

Madam Speaker, a little more substantial, clause 23(a), in relation to section 3A(2)(d) of the Corporations Tax Act. I think we had circulated an amendment on that in the first place. We are now changing the amendment which was circulated. If you look at the amendment—it is the first amendment on the list and we want


413

to delete paragraph (d) and substitute the following paragraph, (which I will make available to you):

Clause Extent of Amendment

23(a) Delete paragraph (d) and substitute the (in relation to) following paragraph: section 3A(2) (d) “…the Deposit Insurance Corporation, the of the Corporations Agricultural Development Bank, the Public

utilities Commission or exempted by Order of the President; and …”

What this is in relation to, Madam Speaker, is corporations that will not be paying the business levy.

Madam Speaker, with these further amendments, therefore—

Mr. Humphrey: Before the hon. Minister concludes, Madam Speaker, am I correct in assuming that what he has said is that Australia and New Zealand have succeeded with structural adjustment programmes imposed on them by the World Bank?

Hon. W. Mottley: No, Madam Speaker, it is not imposed by the World Bank. Mexico is perhaps the most interesting case because Mexico was an absolute basket case and long before any of the present economic strategies were worked out, a series of very brilliant economists in the Mexican government, starting with de la Madrid and then continuing under President Salinas, worked out a programme of resuscitation of the Mexican economy.

You will remember, Madam Speaker, that Mexico, in particular, was the country that was most severely caught in the debt trap and it was well on its way to absolute economic chaos. Then they started with a programme of very tight fiscal reform. They built on that trade reform and lowering of tariffs and integration of a very inward looking Mexican economy, hidden behind very high tariffs and quota restrictions and integrated Mexican business into international trade. The pinnacle of that particular trade reform achievement was the NAFTA negotiation. Paralleled with that, Mexico then proceeded to the divestment of several of its very inefficient state enterprises. Mexico had over 2,000, most of them highly inefficient, state enterprises, which were sucking the Treasury of Mexico dry, not being able to sustain levels of employment and, in fact, collapsing the Mexican economy. After they succeeded with that, they then went on to pull together the whole series of social reforms, correcting many of their


414

customs problems et cetera, completely refashioning and reshaping the Mexican economy. It is out of that experience, paralleled somewhat with the experience in Chile, that some of the lessons have been learnt on which some of the World Bank and so forth are now piggy-backing.

Australia did some of this in a more piecemeal fashion. New Zealand, in particular, has been very advanced in this, even more advanced than Australia. New Zealand, especially in its public sector reform, has been extremely advanced and the New Zealand economy is doing reasonably well. The thing about all of these, Madam Speaker, is that—

Mr. Humphrey: Will the Minister answer a question in relation to Mexico? Did Mexico service its external debt, meet its debt obligations or did Mexico, in fact, sell its debt at discounted rates? Were they not able to negotiate a massive reduction of the external debt by having the lending agencies reduce that debt and transferring it to other agencies at massive discounts?

Hon. W. Mottley: Yes, Madam Speaker, because Mexico became virtually a basket case and could not repay its debt, found itself in a situation in which its debt was trading at $0.20 to $0.30 on the dollar. [Interruption] They were able, with their divestment proceeds, to buy back some of the debt. We in Trinidad and Tobago are not in that situation. Our debt trades at probably $0.80, $0.85 on the dollar.

Madam Speaker, no country exactly parallels another. There are general lessons to be learnt, but they are not exact parallels. Our situation is not Jamaica’s, nor Guyana’s, thank goodness.

Our fortunate situation is that, after two more years, the worst of our debt service will be over. Other countries are not in that fortunate situation.

Mr. Humphrey: You are continuing to borrow.

Hon. W. Mottley: When you look at our fiscal programme, we are continuing to borrow, yes, but we are not massively increasing our debt and in a short time we will be reducing our debt. The maturity structure is played out much longer and we are reducing our debt from here on. [Interruption]

If the economy recovers, it makes it that much easier to carry some of these burdens. We should not be pessimistic in this House that the economy will not recover. One of the main stimulants has been that petroleum legislation—and Members on the other side, who live here, should feel encouraged by the fact that a number of these companies are really doing a lot of exploration activity.


415

I understand that Amoco’s deep well is now—I think they are going to 16,000 feet and they have gone to about 7,000 or 8,000 feet already. Exxon is getting ready on land.

So that, Madam Speaker, we are extremely optimistic that the energy legislation will pay dividends for this country and make life a little more tolerable for most of our citizens, not in the long term, but in the medium term.

There is one point I did forget to mention. Madam Speaker, the Member for Couva south raised a matter in relation to Customs at the airport. Yes, we are changing procedures at Piarco Airport. There have been a number of complaints, particularly from ordinary passengers who find themselves inconvenienced both in terms of space at the baggage handling area and also in time because they get behind somebody who is processing $6,000 or $7,000 worth of imports and they are behind there with just a suitcase and cannot get through.

In addition, it poses a difficult situation for us to supervise at the Customs, wherein just floods of people are coming through. In the absence of documentation they are coming through with $7,000 to $10,000 worth of material of varying types and they are just there, one-on-one with a Customs officer, no written documentation and rates of duty being calculated and so forth. So we are regularizing that situation. The intention is certainly not to press the members of the public who do this suitcase trade, a number of them small businesses.

Mr. Maharaj: Madam Speaker, what is the difficulty, if the hon. Minister can say, in putting a commercial line with a particular Customs guard or officer so that it can flow easily, and the ordinary passengers can have a line?

Hon. W. Mottley: Madam Speaker, our intention is not to press the suitcase traders, but within the very limited confines of that baggage handling area at Piarco—we all know because we have been there—are times when coupled with the leftover from Guyana, plus the baggage which comes in on some of these flights, there is literally no room to turn around. This is the consideration in having a separate facility and we are looking to see if we can do something nearby so that some of the problems which they are raising can be addressed without pressing them.

They have written to me, as well, and there are problems. I have been told they have to get Bureau of Standards and other bureaucratic things which I will try to alleviate because we really do not want to press them. It is just that we want to make sure that other passengers are not inconvenienced and at the same time the thing is dealt with in a transparent and accountable manner that does not have


416

the situation which is not good for the passenger nor for the Customs officer on a one-on-one, non-written declaration basis in which thousands of dollars of duty liability is being addressed.

Mr. Humphrey: Declaration for all travellers?

Hon. W. Mottley: We are doing that; the Member for St. Augustine is spot on. Madam Speaker, this is part of the general customs reform which will be coming before this Parliament. Today one item has been tabled already, which will be on for debate within the next few weeks, and later on the customs declaration form that is being mentioned here by the Member for St. Augustine, will come before this Parliament. With these few words, therefore, Madam Speaker, I beg to move.

8.55 p.m. Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a second time. Bill committed to a committee of the whole House. House in committee. Clauses 1 to 21 ordered stand part of the Bill.

Clause 22. Question proposed, That clause 22 stand part of the Bill.

Mr. Sobion: Madam Chairman, I beg to move that the words "under which" be deleted from clause 22(i)(b)(6D)(a).

Question put and agreed to. Clause 22, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Mr. Mottley: Madam Chairman, I beg to move that paragraph (d) be deleted and substituted by the following paragraph:

"the Deposit Insurance Corporation, the Agricultural Development Bank, the Public Transport Service Corporation, and public utilities under the jurisdiction of the Public Utilities Commission or exempted by Order of the President; and..."


417

Question put and agreed to. Clause 23, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill.

9.05 p.m. Clause 24 ordered to stand part of the Bill.


Mr. Mottley: Madam Chairman, we propose the following amendment to clause 25:

Page 63: Heading No. 2606.00—that the word "aluminum" be substituted by the word "aluminium".

Page 65: Heading No. 3819.00—that the word "then" be substituted by the word "than".

Page 73: Heading No. ex34.01—that the word "excluded" be substituted by the word "excluding". Page 78: Heading No. 6113.00—that "5906" be substituted by "59.06".

Page 79: Heading No. ex6217—that "6217" be substituted by "62.17".

Question put and agreed to. Clause 25, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 26 to 30 ordered to stand part of the Bill.

Clause 31. Question proposed, That clause 31 stand part of the Bill. Mr. Mottley: Madam Chairman, I beg to move that clause 31 be amended by

including the word "any" before the word "clerical" in the penultimate line of page 88.




418

Mr. Mottley: Madam Chairman, I beg to move, that clause 35, on page 93, be amended as follows:

"(b) in section 35, by inserting after subsection (3) the following subsections:

(4) Where a person imports goods under section 40 of the Customs Act or imports goods for manufacturing in bond under regulations 193 to 210 inclusive of the Customs Regulations, import surcharge shall not be charged under this Part on the entry of the goods imported.

(5) Where a person imports raw material inputs to be used in a local manufacturing industry, import surcharge shall not be charged under this Part on the entry of those inputs where the tax authority is satisfied that the inputs are not produced or manufactured locally in the form and quantities required by the importer.

(6) In this section, "raw material inputs" includes intermediate goods, packaging materials and other inputs used in the manufacture of goods."



Mr. Mottley: Madam Chairman, I beg to move, that clause 45 be amended as follows:

Delete subclause (2) and substitute the following subclause: "(2) Sections 22, 23 and 39(e) are deemed to have come into effect on 1st

January, 1993." Question put and agreed to. Clause 45, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Question put and agreed to, That the Bill, as amended, be reported to the

House. House resumed. Bill reported, with amendment; read the third time and passed.

Adjournment Friday, March 12, 1993

419

ADJOURNMENT

The Minister of Local Government and Minister in the Ministry of Finance (Hon. Kenneth Valley): Madam Speaker, I beg to move that the House do now adjourn to Friday, March 19, 1993 at 1.30 p.m.

As is customary, I wish to inform Members that next Friday we should like to debate the Customs (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, and, time permitting, the Transfer of Prisoners Bill. Also there will be a Finance Committee meeting at 1.15.p.m. on that day.

Mr. Maharaj: Is there a motion on the adjournment?

Mr. Valley: The Member for Tabaquite has agreed that it is no longer necessary. We have been able to solve that behind the Speaker's chair.

Question put and agreed to.

House adjourned accordingly.

Adjourned at 9.15 p.m.

APPENDIX

WRITTEN ANSWER TO QUESTION

LIDP (Projects for 1992) 132. (a) The Minister of Works and Transport provide a listing of all LIDP

projects for the year 1992 with the following details: (i) Project name/location?

(ii) Actual cost and total number of persons employed per project?

(iii) Actual date of commencement and closure of each project?

(iv) A listing of the names and addresses of persons who worked each fortnight in region 6?

(b) Would the Minister provide the total number of women employed in and the cost of the school cleaning segment of the LIDP?

(c) Would the Minister provide a listing of the names and addresses of women who worked in the school cleaning segment of the LIDP in Region 6?


420

The following reply was circulated to Members of the House: The Minister of Works and Transport wishes to reply as follows:

(a) The answers to (i), (ii) and (iii) are contained on the attached listings given that the total number of persons employed on each project at any one time is 14. (iv) The Minister of Works and Transport is of the view that he should

not disclose the names and addresses of private citizens in this honourable House.

(b) The total number of women employed in the school cleaning segment on LIDP is 18,612.

(c) Again the Minister of Works and Transport is of the view that it is not proper to disclose names and addresses of private citizens in this honourable House.

Ariapita Road Region #1 27/07/92 continuing 188,303.98 Avocat Landslip Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 240,896.04 Aripero Footpath Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 224,794.80 Andrea Avenue Boxdrain Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 246,705.76 Anglais Project Region #5 31/08/92 08/11/92 85,430.75 Arena Sidewalk Region #4 30/03/9 not completed 228,188.70 Africa Playground Region #2 29/03/9216 Fortnights 160,646.80 Africa Drain Region #2 10/05/92 13 Fortnights 111,218.72 Almond Drive Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 74,338.30 Annisette Street Region #2 13/09/92 4 Fortnight 47,604.70 Allick Terrace (Bagatelle) Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 227,224.93 Agnes Field Drive (Rich Plain Road) Region #1 20/07/92 continuing 227,224.93 Aranguez Drainage Region #3 27/05/92 08/11/92 143,215.15 Arima Old Road Region #3 27/04/92 08/11/92 191,745.75 Adam Street Box Drain Region #3 16/03/92 07/06/92 85,390.47 Bertie Road Phase I &II Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 253,815.46 Bon Air Sidewalk Region #3 16/03/90 8/11/92 238,386.72 Boodoo Street Drain Region #3 30/03/92 02/08/92 134,101.48 Basanta Trace Devel. Region #3 08/03/92 11/08/92 86,983.14 Benedictine Street Region #1 27/04/92 continuing 187,673.91 Bamboo Village Region #3 16/03/92 27/05/92 72,735.31 Belle Vue Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 98,375.95 Belle Vue Bridge Region #1 31/08/92 continuing 33,949.92 Boissiere No. 1 Region #1 20/07/92 continuing 90,704.70 Belle Vue Extension Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 92,364.67


421

Bird Street Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 231,820.23 Boisierre Lane Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 268,647.85 Blue Basin (Water Wheel) Region #1 17/08/92 continuing 66,315.99 Bournes Road Region #1 13/04/92 continuing 165,237.82 Basilon Street Constru. Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 110,744.41 Beecahamy Coco Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 70,832.36 Beetham Drain Constru. Region #2 29/03/92 16 Fortnights 200,320.51 Beetham Entr. Constru. Region #2 12/04/92 15 Fortnights 167,922.40 Beetham Hard Court Region #2 26/04/92 14 Fortnights 143,506.89 Boundary Road Region #2 24/05/92 12 Fortnights 137,175.19 Blanchisseuse Infra. Region #4 08/06/92 08/11/92 142,993.45 Brazil Village Sidewalk Region #4 16/03/92 not completed 236,598.94 Bonne Aventure Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 29/03/92 227,697.10 Bhagaloo Bridge Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 353,567.20 Balmain Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 231,826.59 Battoo Boulevard Retaining Wall Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 246,241.55 Bobb Street Box Drain Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 267,493.03 Battoo Avenue Footpath Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 229,577.35 Black Street Box Drain Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 228,558.33 Bamboo Village Region #8 27/04/92 06/11/92 183,292.68 Bamboo Village #1 Region #3 27/05/92 08/11/92 152,535.45 Cap-De-Ville Footpath Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 228,969.02 Caura Development Region #3 08/06/92 02/08/92 50,744.23 Cleaver Road Phase 1 Region #3 13/04/92 08/11/92 222,299.38 Canefarm Drain Region #3 30/03/92 26/04/92 28,609.41 Champs Fleurs Drainage Region #3 16/03/92 19/07/92 128,580.48 Chatham Landslip Region #3 16/03/92 19/07/92 128,580.48 Clara Gregory Avenue Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 233,529.85 Community Centre Road Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 217,756.61 Cocoyea Community Centre Extension Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 319,427.37 Cipero Railwayline Road Works Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 198,474.61 Cocoyea Rec. Ground Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 240,556.31 Charles Street Footpath Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 236,601.41 Calcutta Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 220,013.33 Carapichaima Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 16/04/92 243,110.76


422

Charlieville Flat Footpath Region #6 16/03/92 10/05/92 37,454.96 Caroni Savannah Road Footpath Box Drain Region #6 06/07/92 06/11/92 143,933.10 Chaitan Avenue Region #5 14/09/92 11/10/92 13,567.62 Coal Mine Footpath Region #5 16/03/92 10/05/92 51,164.28 Cumuto Footpath Region #5 27/11/92 08/11/92 203,230.18 Caparo Drainage Region #4 16/03/92 not complete 237,084.16 College Trace Drainage Region #4 16/03/92 21/06/92 97,823.64 Carib Tokyo Panyard Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 58,029.12 Caledonia Ext./Vegas Region #2 24/05/92 12 Fortnights 162,357.79 Chinapoo Drain Construction Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 59,235.42 China Town Constru. Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 127,566.20 Coconut Drive Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 112,921.00 Celestine Trace Region #1 16/03/92 08/07/92 113,998.52 Cameron Road Region #1 06/07/92 continuing 108,281.23 Covigne Infrastructure Region #1 11/05/92 continuing 164,797.97 Cumaca Project Region #5 06/07/92 30/08/92 55,001.23 Caiman Road Dev. Region #1 31/10/92 09/10/92 38,834.93 Diamond Vale Retaining Wall Region #1 14/07/92 continuing 55,001.23 Dundonald Hill Region #1 06/07/92 continuing 103,437.54 Debe Road Region #1 20/07/92 continuing 108,557.60 Desperlie Crescent Region #2 19/07/92 8 Fortnights 91,299.60 Don Miguel Construction Region #2 27/09/92 3 Fortnights 33,060.83 Downtown Port of Spain Region #2 19/07/92 8 Fortnights 60,036.93 Dorata Street Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 111,366.26 Duncan Street Region #2 29/03/92 16 Fortnights 201,179.64 Deake Street Playground Bleachers Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 238,107.83 Dallas Ext. Road Works Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 250,457.64 Escallier Terrace Region #1 14/09/92 continuing 50,257.41 Egypt Drain Region #2 10/05/92 13 Fortnights 127,539.04 Erica Street Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 144,846.60 Erin Beach Development Region #8 30/3/92 6/11/92 248,159.75 Embacadere Bleachers Stand Region #7 16/03/92 8/11/92 271,217.79 El Dorado Sidewalk Region #3 11/05/92 16/08/92 115,377.53 Freeport Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 216,569.37 Foster Street Region #2 10/05/92 13 Fortnights 163,618.55 Factory Road Region #1 17/08/92 continuing 66,772.87


423

Fern Drive Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 22,100.00 Freeman Street Region #3 16/03/92 07/05/92 71,746.42 Fuller Street Region #1 16/03/92 07/05/92 66,315.99 Grand Chemin Region #5 16/03/92 02/08/92 125,215.69 Grande Riviere Region #5 03/02/92 continuing 213,302.58 Guapo Footpath Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 237,825.66 Glen Lane Region #2 12/04/92 15 Fortnights 181,997.81 Goose Lane Region #2 10/05/92 13 Fortnights 137,241.40 Grand Fond Bridge Region #3 30/03/92 08/11/92 207,676.44 Gookool Street Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 230,750.70 Haig Street Region #1 08/06/92 continuing 136,699.67 Harpe Place Region #1 08/06/92 continuing 162,958.50 Harlem Region #2 02/08/92 7 Fortnights 64,262.10 Hirondelle Street Region #2 19/07/92 8 Fortnights 113,445.77 Hockett Drain Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 116,557.53 Hunte Road Constru. Region #2 25/10/92 1 Fortnight 173,825.70 Hector Street Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 228,673.60 Henderson Street Region #5 13/04/92 08/11/92 211,586.02 Hutton Road Dev. Region #3 17/08/92 08/11/92 74,931.86 Irving Street Road and Drain Repair Region #3 11/05/92 08/11/92 134,533.43 Icacos Footpath Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 210,640.54 Issac Settlement Region #6 30/03/92 11/09/92 300,104.45 Jean Avenue Region #1 04/06/92 continuing 212,787.09 John Street Drain Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 149,251.55 Kanhai South Trace Region #5 08/06/92 08/11/92 167,446.85 Kansammy Footpath Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 189,688.00 Kernahan Bridge Region # 4 22/06/92 13/09/92 115,535.03 Knowles Street Footpath Region #4 17/08/92 08/11/92 76,669.34 Kumar Village Box Drain Region #6 13/04/92 06/11/92 213,201.23 Lu Lu Trace Road Region #5 31/08/92 08/11/92 55,673.41 La Rufin Bridge Region #5 17/08/92 30/08/92 10,610.40 La Fillette Infrastructure Region #1 11/05/92 08/11/92 172,198.60 Libertville Ext. Drive Region #5 03/08/92 08/11/92 76,233.11 Lily Trace Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 197,065.96 La Brea R.C. School Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 173,833.69 Lendore Hindu School Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 221,706.39 Lucky Street Mobile Station Region #7 25.05/92 08/11/92 231,625.69 La Sophie Road Works Region #7 30/03/92 05/07/92 107,434.11 La Pai Road Works Region #7 16/-3/92 08/11/92 229,280.42 Loney Road Works Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 223,670.75


424

Lopinot Road Ret. Wall & Box Culvert Region #3 26/10/92 08/11/92 6,528.30 Lopinot Landslip Lopinot Road Region #3 28/09/92 08/11/92 87,623.50 La Seiva, Maracas/ Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 221,292.12 St. Joseph La Mango Development Maracas/St. Joseph Region #3 11/05/92 08/11/92 176,451.61 La Canoa Ret. Wall Region #3 16/03/92 27/09/92 10,736.45 La Hoe Dev. L’tille Rd. Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 218,721.28 La Horquette Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 208,345.30 Lastique Streeet Region #1 17/08/92 continuing 102,668.59 Lucien Lane Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 283,349.99 Las Lomas #1 Footpath Region #4 16/03/92 07/06/92 91,801.70 Londgenville Road Sidewalk Region #6 14/09/92 08/11/92 35,466.09 Maingot Road Region #3 27/04/92 08/11/92 169,130.54 Manoram Bridge Region #3 11/05/92 11/10/92 31.05 Mohammed Trace Rd. Dev. Region #3 28/09.92 08/11/92 32,289.83 Maracas Royal Road Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 181,817.47 Mt. Hope Drainage Region #3 16/03/92 16/08/92 133,420.30 Mt. Lambert Drain Works Region #3 30/03/92 16/08/92 127,871.33 Mt. D'Or Drainage Region #3 11/05/92 08/11/92 170,473.40 Maloney Street Sidewalk Region #3 31/08/92 08/11/92 49,732.21 Morne Coco Road Region #1 16/03/92 11/09/92 214,558.65 Mc Kai Lands Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 274,750.81 Mt. Hololo/Cascade Region #1 30/03/92 14/08/92 241,931.19 Mariquite Street Region #1 20/07/92 continuing 116,339.97 Monsanto Lane Region #1 03/08/92 continuing 81,680.02 Morne Roche Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 212,091.39 Maturita Drainage Region #4 16/03/92 not completed 252,436.30 Marie St. Drainage Region #4 16/03/92 not completed 245,299.22 Malabar Sidewark & Drainage Region #4 30/03/92 not completed 229,226.06 Maloney Road Works Region #3 30/03/92 not completed 231,156.89 Mausica Footpath Region #4 08/06/92 not completed 61,105.37 Malick Rd. Bridge Const. Region #2 05/07/92 9 Fortnights 83,273.81 Manago Alley Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 139,812.80 Marie Rd. Drain Const. Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 69,565.10 Marcus Drive Drainage Region #3 11/05/92 08/11/92 179,354.00 Mt. Hope Park - Park Ave. Region #3 17/08/92 08/11/92 72,728.22 Mc Shine Drain Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 29,146.40 Mentor Alley Region #2 29/03/92 16 Fortnights 212,834.10


425

Mon Repos Rd. Const. Region #2 27/04/92 14 Fortnights 165,264.83 Morvant Central Drain Region #2 10/05/92 13 Fortnights 153,163.61 Mendonza Dr. Box Drain Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 260,239.26 Mayaro Sub Office Region #5 27/04/92 continuing 323,182.18 Mafekin Box Drain Region #5 14/09/92 11/10/92 18,920.00 Manz. Community Centre Region #5 16/08/92 08/11/92 234,055.87 Munroe Rd. Footpath and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 246,396.75 Mahaica to Techier Footpath Region #8 14/04/92 06/11/92 205,701.36 New Village Region #8 08/06/92 06/11/92 135,456.87 Nora Road Region #5 14//09/92 08/11/92 41,704.17 N/Manz. Main Dr. Region #5 16/03/92 30/08/92 125,242.35 North Oropouche Footpath Region #5 22/06/92 08/11/92 158,693.76 Nohar Road Roadworks Region #7 30/03/92 09/11/92 209,200.27 Never Dirty Drain Region #2 29/03/92 16 Fortnights 69,735.99 New Africa/J. John Area Region #2 10/02/92 13 Fortnights 83,100.16 Ninth Ave. Barataria Region #2 21/06/92 10 Fortnights 93,640.30 North St. Infrastructure Region #3 20/07/92 16/08/92 25,623.29 Olton Rd. Drain Phase I & Phase II Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 240,724.17 Ortoire Community Centre Region #5 03/08/92 13/09/92 39,161.74 Orange Valley Flat Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 246,396.75 Oil Sand Quarry Region #8 25/05/92 06/11/92 183,324.15 Picton Footpath Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 208,381.62 Pleasantville Ave. Terrace Boxdrain Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 304,157.00 Palmaria Footpath Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 208,050.96 Princes Town Carpark Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 261,345.72 Pleasantville Basket Ball Court Bleachers Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 256,930.68 Poonah Bridge Repair Region #6 16/03/92 08/11/92 29,578.02 Poonah Drainage Work Region #6 16/03/92 24/05/92 73,606.69 Preysal Sidewalk Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 226,007.43 Phillip Trace Region #5 14/09/92 08/11/92 48,155.49 Plum Road Footpath Region #5 11/05/92 08/11/92 202,773.37 Plum Road Quarry Region #5 28/09/92 17/11/92 27,814.44 Prizgar Lands Construction Region #2 10/05/92 13 Fortnights 89,530.36 Picton Branch Road Region #2 29/03/92 16 Fortnights 198,337.14 Piquetteville Construction Region #2 16/08/92 6 Fortnights 69,345.90 Potential Construction Region #2 29/09/92 3 Fortnights 20,707.30 Pasea Drain Region #4 30/03/92 16/08/92 163,051.66


426

Pinto Road Drainage Region #4 30/03/92 not completed 227,788.89 Printeryville Road Works Region #4 27/04/92 not completed 174,208.57 Piarco Footpath Region #4 16/03/92 16/08/92 133,316.62 Pois Casse Region #1 26/04/92 17/07/92 148,220.72 Petit Valley Ret. Wall Region #1 16/03/92 14/08/92 192,924.39 Powder Magazine (Drain) Region #1 27/04/92 continuing 236,009.85 Prescott Alley Region #1 08/06/92 continuing 155,633.52 Players Symphony Region #1 03/08/92 continuing 98,908.33 Pipiol Drain Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 209,795.02 Petit Curacaye Dev. Region #3 11/05/92 08/11/92 182,346.99 Palm Drive Development Region #3 20/02/92 11/09/92 51,717.17 Paul Village Drain and Sidewalk Region #3 08/06/92 08/11/92 180,707.03 Phillip Trace Region #3 08/06/92 21/06/92 113,495.40 Queen Street Culvert Region #3 27/05/92 19/07/92 52,199.96 Quarry Road Region #3 30/03/92 08/11/92 212,703.46 Quash Trace Project Region #5 30/03/92 02/08/92 125,465.86 Quarry Circular Rd Bridge Region #2 29/03/92 16 Fortnights 173,942.96 Ryan Street Development Region #3 08/06/92 11/08/92 147,960.33 Ramgoolie Trace Region #3 03/08/92 30/08/92 25,049.35 Red Hill Development Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 238,842.65 Robertson Drain Region #3 08/06/92 08/11/92 161,130.19 River Estate Pavement Region #1 17/08/92 continuing 157,603.43 River Estate Cottage Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 110,687.61 Ross Land Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 231,287.53 Rock City Bridge Region #2 29/03/82 16 Fortnights 178,958.85 Radix Footpath Region #5 20/07/92 08/11/92 130,940.56 Rio Claro Footpath Region #5 30/03/92 02/08/92 113,071.48 Railway Road Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 16/03/92 19/07/92 137,107.06 Roy Joseph/Carlton Lane Basketball Court Repairs Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 247,852.27 Rambert Village Comm. Centre Extension Region #7 08/06/92 08/11/92 190,771.16 Rochard Douglas Footpath Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 198,494.35 Ramai Trace Region #8 16/03/92 16/11/92 224,653.64 Ramai Street Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 208,909.60 S.S. Erin Road Region #8 16/03/92 06/11/92 217,124.57 Santa Flora Footpath Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 236,524.85 Salazar Trace Footpath Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 218,874.74 Sobo Footpath Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 228,502.75 Santa Flora Playfield Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 273,526.56 Sennon Village Region #8 30/03/92 06/11/92 215,030.70


427

Ste. Madelaine Footpath Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 287,701.28 Smith Street Playground Hardcourt Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 241,172.29 Southern Main Road Box Drain/Footpath Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 225,605.79 St. Vincent Basketball Court Bleachers Stand Region #7 30/03/92 08/11/92 246,099.77 Springland Basketball Court Bleachers Region #7 25/05/92 08/11/92 189,603.66 Success Drive Region #6 20/05/92 12/06/92 243,138.76 Savonetta Sidewalk and Box Drain Region #6 20/07/92 06/11/92 109,786.29 St. Mary's Box Drain Region #5 16/03/92 16/08/92 148,972.22 St. Margarets Rd Footpath Region #5 17/08/92 13/09/92 29,792.30 Sans Souci Dr/Wa Region #5 16/03/9208/11/92 235,130.05 Sargeant Drive Region #4 16/03/92 08/11/92 232,250.45 Samaroo Drain Region #4 16/03/92 not completed 234,642.12 Spring Village Region #4 17/08/92 08/11/92 90,697.57 Sealots Drain Const. Region #2 21/06/92 completed 180,337.90 7th Avenue Malick Drain Region #2 26/04/92 continuing 156,606.16 Silk Cotton Drain Const. Region # 2 29/03/92 continuing 132,585.72 Sogren Trace Drain Region # 2 16/08/92 continuing 186,764.98 Snake Valley Region #2 02/08/92 completed 102,521.91 St. Joseph Community Centre Region #2 02/08/92 continuing 94,026.16 St. James Youth Centre Region #2 02/08/92 continuing 182,408.00 St. Paul Street Const. Region #2 21/06/92 contiuing 144,370.73 Stephenville Region #2 29/03/92 completed 204,522.35 Sarganga Roadway Region #1 20/07/92 continuing 58,219.59 Sea Trace Bagatelle Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 242,078.11 Sparrow Drive Region #1 01/06/92 continuing 40,743.00 St. John Street Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 135,598.00 Smith Hill Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 218,564.38 St. Pius R. C. School Region #3 30/03/92 07/06/92 73,732.14 Sesame St. Drain (Upper Fairley Street) Region #3 03/08/92 08/11/92 87,292.85 Settlement All Purpose Hardcourt Region #3 11/05/92 08/11/92 179,114.39 Sherwood Park Hardcourt Thomasos Terrace Region #3 31/08/92 08/11/92 69,893.57 Success Village Dev. Region #3 08/06/92 08/11/92 140,101.42 Silver Mill Drain Region #3 30/03/92 27/05/92 62,613.60 St. Helena Footpath Region #4 16/03/92 08/11/92 239,487.61


428

Torouba Road Footpath Region #7 08/06/92 08/11/92 151,977.13 Tortuga Flat Sidewalk Region #6 08/05/92 06/11/92 161,059.44 Tapana W/Plant Region #5 02/03/92 continuing 507,778.81 Traffic Management Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 39,592.39 Tamana Bridge Region #5 16/03/92 08/11/92 257,793.43 Tumpuna Sidewalk Region #4 16/03/92 not completed 243,896.03 Tumpuna Drainage Footpath Region #4 16/03/92 not completed 222,728.58 Trincity Dinsley Footpath Region #4 22/06/92 08/11/92 134,662.51 Talparo Drain Rec. Ground Region #4 30/03/92 not completed 226,467.42 Third Avenue Barataria Region #2 24/05/92 12 Fortnights 154,516.39 Tacarigua Pavement Region #3 08/06/92 08/11/92 155,787.21 Tacarigua Road Dev. St. Michael Region #3 17/08/92 08/11/92 64,490.01 Tilbury Place Construction Region #2 12/04/92 continuing 186,488.63 Thomas Street, Infrastructure Region #2 12/04/92 continuing 173,119.92 Union Road Region #7 16/03/92 08/11/92 239,217.52 Upper La Puerta Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 246,054.40 Upper Simeon Link Road Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 38,908.16 Upper Quarry St. (Wall) Region #1 30/03/92 17/07/92 121,443.10 Upper St. Babb's/Fatima Region #2 29/03/92 continuing 257,845.26 Upper La Seiva Road Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 205,343.70 Upper Moraldo Street Region #1 30/03/92 continuing 214,711.80 Upper Fairley Street Region #3 16/03/92 08/11/92 270,026.68 Upper Bournes Road Region #1 13/04/92 continuing 223,981.69 Vance River Footpath Region #8 16/03/92 16/03/92 214,604.72 Vega Dev. Orp. Region #5 11/05/92 08/11/92 185,187.74 Valencia Footpath Region #5 16/03/92 05/07/92 117,605.07 Valencia Junction Region #5 31/08/92 08/11/92 99,690.47 Wallenvale Co-op. Lds 1 Region #5 30/03/92 08/11/92 192,601.13 Wallenvale Co-op. Lds Region #5 06/07/92 08/11/92 217,143.51 Waterhole, Cocorite Region #1 16/03/92 continuing 40,174.56 Waterloo Rd Flat Sidewalk Region #6 16/03/92 06/11/92 219,102.21 Wharton Trace Region #8 22/06/92 06/11/92 159,117.44 Wharf Trace Region #3 16/03/92 10/05/92 59,175.00 White Drain Region #3 16/03/92 07/06/92 81,218.85 Woods Avenue Dev. Region #3 28/08/92 08/11/92 10,736.45

Documents

19930312, House Debates - Friday March 12, 1993 · is to be hoped that we shall be able to achieve national consensus on an issue ... Friday, March 12, 1993 317 NUCOR ... NUCOR Corporation