20120123 - Senate Debate - Monday January 23, 2012 - 11:00 ...international non-profit organization, SE International, for ophthalmic, medical, surgical and educational services for

1

Leave of Absence Monday January 23, 2012

SENATE

Monday, January 23, 2012

The Senate met at 11.00 a.m.

PRAYERS

[MR. PRESIDENT in the Chair]

LEAVE OF ABSENCE

Mr. President: Hon. Senators, I have given leave of absence to Sen. The Hon.

Vasant Bharath and Sen. The Hon. Bhoendradatt Tewarie from today’s sitting. In the

matter of appointment of a temporary Senator, I have deferred that to later in the

proceedings.

FINANCE (SUPPLEMENTATION AND VARIATION OF APPROPRIATION) (FINANCIAL

YEAR 2011) BILL, 2012

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Winston Dookeran):

Motion made: That the next stage be taken later in the proceedings. [Hon. W.

Dookeran]

Question put and agreed to.

PAPERS LAID

1. Report of the Auditor General of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago on the

financial statements of the Provident Fund for the financial year ended September

30, 2008. [The Minister of Finance (Hon. Winston Dookeran)]



30, 2009. [Hon. W. Dookeran]



30, 2010. [Hon. W. Dookeran]


financial statements of the National Agricultural Marketing and Development

Corporation (NAMDEVCO) for the year ended September 30, 2004. [Hon. W.

Dookeran]




Dookeran]

2

Papers Laid Monday January 23, 2012




Dookeran]


financial statements of the South-West Regional Health Authority for the year

ended September 30, 2005. [Hon. W. Dookeran]

8. Annual report of the Financial Intelligence Unit of Trinidad and Tobago for the

year ended September 30, 2010. [Hon. W. Dookeran]

9. Annual report of the Financial Intelligence Unit of Trinidad and Tobago for the

year ended September 30, 2011. [Hon. W. Dookeran]

10. Annual audited financial statements of the Community Improvement Services

Limited for the financial year ended September 30, 2010. [Hon. W. Dookeran]

11. Annual audited financial statements of the Rural Development Company of

Trinidad and Tobago Limited for the financial year ended September 30, 2010.

[Hon. W. Dookeran]

12. Annual audited financial statements of the Regulated Industries Commission for

the year ended December 31, 2008. [The Minister of Public Utilities (Sen. The Hon.

Emmanuel George)]

13. Budget and planned activities of the Regulated Industries Commission for the year

ended December 31, 2012. [Sen. The Hon. E. George)]

14. Annual administrative report of the Ministry of Public Utilities for fiscal years 2009

and 2010. [Sen. The Hon. E. George)]

ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

Honorary Consul to Denmark

(Details of Mr. Kurt Brusgaard’s duties)

17. Sen. Dr. Victor Wheeler asked the hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and

Communications:

With respect to the Honorary Consul to Denmark, Mr. Kurt Brusgaard, could the

Minister indicate:

(i) what services are provided to the Government of Trinidad and Tobago;

(ii) what financial and administrative support is provided by the Government

of Trinidad and Tobago to the Honorary Consul; and

3

Oral Answers to Questions Monday January 23, 2012

(iii) are there any plans to have Mr. Brusgaard assist the Government of

Trinidad and Tobago in its quest to increase foreign direct investment and

tourist arrivals in the country?

The Minister of Foreign Affairs and Communications (Hon. Dr. Surujrattan

Rambachan): Thank you very much, Mr. President. With respect to the Honorary

Consul to Denmark, Mr. Kurt Brusgaard, the first part of the question, I am advised that

during his service as Honorary Consul to Trinidad and Tobago, since April 2000, Mr.

Brusgaard has principally been engaged in undertaking efforts aimed at furthering co-

operation between the Kingdom of Denmark and the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,

and he has done this by strengthening the commercial, industrial, tourism, cultural and

social ties between the two nations.

In addition to the services outlined, his efforts resulted in the successful facilitation

of two projects which benefited the people of Trinidad and Tobago, namely, the

Surgical Eye Project and the introduction of weekly flights to Tobago by Lauda

Air.

With respect to the Surgical Eye Project, it should be noted that Mr. Brusgaard had

enlisted the assistance of the Rotary Club of Charlottenlund, Copenhagen, and an

international non-profit organization, SE International, for ophthalmic, medical, surgical

and educational services for sight-impaired individuals in Trinidad and Tobago; and this

was conducted in Tobago during the visit to that island which took place in 2004.

The Honorary Consul has, on each official visit by a Head of Mission, assisted

in coordinating the official programme. During the visit of His Excellency,

Garvin Nicholas, our High Commissioner to the UK, and to Denmark for the

presentation of his letters of credence to the Queen of Denmark in November

2011, Mr. Brusgaard arranged and accompanied the Ambassador to meetings with

private sector entities in Copenhagen.

With respect to part (ii), Mr. President, I am advised that it is customary for

Honorary Consuls to be provided with the following: copy of the Constitution; the

national flag and information booklet on the national flag; the Coat of Arms;

pictures of the President and Prime Minister; the national anthem; the order of

precedence; list of Government Ministers, which are updated from time to time;

senior civil servants and their contact details, as well as the contact details of all

Ministries; list of the overseas missions of Trinidad and Tobago; specimens of

travel documents issued by Trinidad and Tobago; Trinidad and Tobago

diplomatic and consular lists; literature on Trinidad and Tobago and other cultural

items—CDs; a telephone directory; instruction on the repatriation of nationals; and

4

Oral Answers to Question Monday January 23, 2012 [HON. DR. S. RAMBACHAN]

a list of countries with which Trinidad and Tobago has visa-abolition agreements.

And within recent times, all our Honorary Consuls have been introduced and

made even more familiar with our website, on which there is a tremendous

amount of information that they can access, and which they do on a regular basis.

I am also advised that during Mr. Brusgaard’s first visit to Trinidad and

Tobago during the period July 5, 2000 to July 26, 2000, administrative

arrangements were put in place through the facilitation of courtesy calls,

transportation on arrival and departure from the airport and protocol courtesies.

It should be noted, that during his first visit, Mr. Brusgaard settled his own

accommodation expenses for his stay in Trinidad, and no financial support was

rendered by the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. It should

also be noted that during his visit, courtesy calls were paid on the Ministry of

Foreign Affairs, officials of the then Tourism Industrial Development Company,

(Tidco), the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the Chief Immigration Officer, and

the Point Lisas Industrial Port Development Corporation, in furtherance of the

Government’s objective to develop trade, tourism, cultural ties and/or investment

opportunities with the Kingdom of Denmark. During his March 2011 visit to

Trinidad and Tobago, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Communications

facilitated the request for a courtesy call on the Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs

and Communications, and transportation was provided for him and his spouse to

and from the airport.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs and Communications also facilitated a meeting

with officials of the Tobago House of Assembly. Let me add, Mr. President, that just

recently, in Washington, all the available Honorary Consuls were called to a meeting in

which they were briefed on the role of Honorary Consuls by the honourable

Ambassador to Washington, Dr. Neil Parsan. This is an activity that will be conducted

also at our London mission later this year for Honorary Consuls in Europe, in

particular.

Section (ii) of the question: I am advised that all Honorary Consuls have been

advised of Government’s priorities and their continued cooperation in identifying and

pursuing pertinent initiatives has been requested. We must also remember that

Honorary Consuls do not receive a stipend nor any financial support, and all of this

work is voluntary on behalf of Trinidad and Tobago. This Honorary Consul, like

others, have been undertaking such work with diligence and have lent tremendous

support in Trinidad. And such was undertaken with a view to ensuring that the

functions of all Honorary Consuls were in alignment with the current priorities

identified by the Government, and as articulated by the hon. Prime Minister.

5


The areas delineated for development were as follows: merchant marine and

yachting industries; creative industries, including fashion, music and entertainment,

film and animation; the food and beverage industries; the sea food industry, with

emphasis on value-added packaged products and aquaculture products; the tourism

sector, with the focus on sustainable tourism, eco-tourism, business tourism and

wellness tourism; and information and communication technologies. I thank you. Mr.

President.

Donation or loan from China

(Details of)

18. Sen. Terrence Deyalsingh on behalf of Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds asked the hon.

Minister of Finance:

A. Could the Minister indicate if Trinidad and Tobago is to receive a

donation or a loan in the sum of approximately US $6.26M from the

government of the People’s Republic of China?

B. If the answer to (A) is in the affirmative, could the Minister indicate when

is the loan/donation sum to become available to the government?

C. What are the terms and conditions of this agreement?

D. Could the Minister also indicate how the government proposes to utilize

this money in the interest and benefit of the people of Trinidad and

Tobago?

E. If in fact the agreement is for a loan, what are the terms of repayment?

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Winston Dookeran): With respect to A, Mr.

President, in September last year, the Government of Trinidad and Tobago and

the Government of the People’s Republic of China signed an Agreement on

Economic and Technical Cooperation. By virtue of this Agreement, the

Government of the People’s Republic of China has agreed to provide the

Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago with a grant of 13 million

renminbi. This is equivalent to approximately US $4.7 million.

With respect to B, Mr. President, according to Articles of the Agreement on

Economic and Technical Cooperation, the grant shall be used to fund a project, or

projects agreed upon, between both countries. Discussions are ongoing between

both parties, with respect to the specific projects which will be undertaken by the

Government of Trinidad and Tobago. The disbursement of these funds is

contingent upon the finalization of these discussions.

6

Oral Answers to Question Monday January 23, 2012 [HON. W. DOOKERAN]

With respect to C, the terms and conditions of the Agreement on Economic

and Technical Cooperation between the Government of Trinidad and Tobago and

the People’s Republic of China are articulated in the four Articles of the

Agreement. They are as follows:

Article 1—“The Government of the People’s Republic of China shall provide

the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago with a

grant in the amount of 30 million renminbiyuan”.

11.15 a.m.

Article 2—“The above mentioned grant shall be used on the project(s) agreed

upon between the Government of the People’s Republic of China

and the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

Specific matters with respect to the project(s) to be undertaken

shall be agreed upon subsequently by the two Governments.”

Article 3—“The accounting procedures in respect of the implementation of

this Agreement shall be agreed upon by the China Development

Bank and the Central Bank of Trinidad and Tobago.”

Article 4—“This Agreement shall come into force on the date of its signature

and shall remain in force until both Governments fulfill their

obligations under this Agreement.”

Finally, Mr. Speaker, with respect to (D), specific matters with respect to the

projects to be undertaken in the utilization of the grant are still to be finalized

between both Governments, and since the Agreement is the provision of a grant

by the Government of the People’s Republic of China there are no terms of

repayment.

Sen. Deyalsingh: Supplemental question, Mr. President. Could the hon.

Minister indicate whether any of these funds are to be used in flood relief, bearing

in mind that the then Minister of Works and Transport in September 2010, under

the directive of the Government had set up a committee to look at flood relief?

Hon. Brig. John Sandy was a Member, Minister Baptiste-Cornellis, was a

Member and Minister Jack Warner. It was indicated then by the hon. Jack

Warner, that the Chinese were, in fact assisting in flood relief, and as the Prime

Minister had indicated, there would be a 100-day plan to come up with some sort

of action for flood relief. Are any of these funds to be used for flood relief? Thank

you.

7


Hon. W. Dookeran: Mr. President, as I indicated, the details of the projects

that are to be funded are still being finalized. It could well include that, but at this

stage I do not have that information.

Water and Sewerage Authority (WASA)

(Details of CEO Position)


Minister of Public Utilities:

With respect to the position of Chief Executive Officer (CEO) at the Water and

Sewerage Authority (WASA), could the Minister indicate to the Senate:

(i) Whether any person has been appointed to the substantive post of CEO;

(ii) If the answer to (i) above is in the negative, could the Minister indicate

whether there is any person acting in the post of CEO? If so, for how long;

(iii) The name of the person acting and what is his/her income, allowances and

other remuneration; and

(iv) Whether there are immediate plans to fill the substantive position, and if

so, by what date?

The Minister of Public Utilities (Sen. The Hon. Emmanuel George):

Thank you, Mr. President. Mr. President, the answer to question 19 is as follows:

Members present would recall that on the last occasion that this Senate met, I did

indicate that because we met on a Monday instead of on a Tuesday, as a result of

the debate caused by Sen. Al-Rawi’s Motion, I could not answer the question, but

I was prepared to answer it on that day. The answer to question 19(i), yes an

appointment has been made to the post of CEO;

In respect of 19(ii), given the answer to (i), this question does not arise.

Given the answer to parts (i) and (ii), this question also does not arise.

The answer to question 19(iv)—the position was filled effective October 01,

2011.

I thank you, Mr. President.

Sen. Deyalsingh: Supplemental question. Would the hon. Minister indicate

why the announcement for the permanent appointment, which was made as you

said in October, was not made in October and is only now being brought to the

national community’s attention? It was done in December, but why not in

October?

8


Sen. the Hon. E. George: Mr. President, I draw your attention to Standing

Order 18(2), which speaks to the whole question of elucidating, and therefore I do

not think I should be answering that supplementary question.

Mr. President: The question is not relative to the question asked before,

therefore I will have to disallow this supplementary question.

Trinidad & Tobago Electricity Commission (T&TEC)

(Details of last fiscal year of operation)


Minister of Public Utilities:

A. Could the Minister state whether the Trinidad and Tobago Electricity

Commission (T&TEC) experienced a surplus or a deficit in its last fiscal

year of operation?

B. If the result was a deficit, would the Minister indicate the extent and major

contributory factor in this regard?

C. Could the Minister also state how does the government/management

intend to treat with the situation?

The Minister of Public Utilities (Sen. The Hon. Emmanuel George): I thank

you again, Mr. President, and I rise to answer question 20. For 2010, T&TEC reported as

at December 21 2010, a net surplus of $29.5 million.

Given the answer to part (a), part (b) of this question does not arise and given the

answer to part (a), part (c) of the question also does not arise.

WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

National Petroleum (NP)

(Details of Rental of Trucks)

22. Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds asked the hon. Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs:

A. Could the Minister indicate whether there exists any contract(s) between

National Petroleum (NP) and any company/entity for the rental of trucks to haul

gas and diesel tankers, as part of its distribution network?

B. If the answer to (a) is in the affirmative, who is/are the contractor(s); how many

trucks are so contracted and how long has this/these contract(s) been in

existence?

C. Has the Board of Directors at NP taken any decision to terminate this/these

contract(s) within the past twelve (12) months? If so, when?

9

Written Answers to Questions Monday January 23, 2012

D. In so doing, has the company contracted any new or other contractor(s) to

perform this critical role in its distribution process?

E If the answer to (d) is in the affirmative, would the Minister indicate the name

of the new or other contractor(s), and would the Minister briefly outline the

terms of this/these engagement(s) including the contract price?

Unnatural Deaths

(Details of)

29. Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds ask the hon. Minister of National Security:

For the period June 01, 2010 to October 30, 2011, could the Minister indicate to

this Senate:

(a) The number of unnatural deaths reported in Trinidad and Tobago;

(b) The number of these deaths classified as homicides;

(c) Identify and explain the classification categories in respect of all unnatural

deaths; and

(d) The number of the category at (a) above which were recorded as “unclassified”

if any?

Vide end of sitting for written answers.

FINANCE (SUPPLEMENTATION AND VARIATION OF APPROPRIATION) (FINANCIAL

YEAR 2011) BILL, 2012

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Winston Dookeran): Mr. President, I beg to

move,

That a Bill to supplement and vary the appropriation of the sum the issue of which

was authorized by the Appropriation (Financial Year 2011) Act, 2010 be now read a

second time.

In bringing this matter before this Parliament, we are now about to close the

accounts for 2011. As you are well aware, at budget time, this Parliament would

approve the appropriation and then there would have been a revision of that

appropriation at the time of the 2012 budget. Subsequently, there would be a closing of

the accounts. Obviously when the accounts are closed, there are variations to what was

appropriated, and there are changes that are required in order to finalize the account.

This is a Finance Bill and it has been passed in the other place.

The Bill provides for the supplementation of the 2011 appropriation in the sum of

$2,702,305,000—$2.7 billion to fund urgent and critical expenditure to September 30,

2011. It also provides for the variation and appropriation for the fiscal year 2011, in the

sum of $1,411,951,914. The appropriation is being supplemented under the Ministry of

Finance and under the Ministry of Works and Infrastructure.

10

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [HON. W. DOOKERAN]

May I just briefly put this balance sheet in the context of the three aspects of

accounting to Trinidad and Tobago for the financial affairs of the country. What we are

dealing with today is essentially the central government balance sheet. What we deal

with during the budget debate are two other balance sheets. One is the public sector

balance sheet and the other is the national economy balance sheet.

The national economy balance sheet, Mr. President, focuses essentially on the

sustainability of the financial projections for the year and years ahead of us, and deals

with the issues pertaining to gross domestic product, balance of payments, the foreign

exchange account, the export/import trade balances, the employment levels, the price

and inflation indices and issues of economic performance with respect to equity.

The public sector balance sheet focuses to some extent, or to a large extent, on the

total public sector debt profile, which includes the debt profile of the central

government and the debt profile of the State sector and in particular the state enterprise

sector. It deals with the issue of the priorities of expenditure that is envisaged in the

public sector, as well as to the questions of making the efficiency of that expenditure

more relevant, and hence the value for money. There we deal fundamentally with the

issues of economic growth and the issues of priority for ensuring equity.

Today, before us, is the balance sheet pertaining, as I indicated, to the central

government, focusing largely on the issue of the financial stability of the central

government. In so doing, we focus on the revenue, we focus on the expenditure, we

focus on the consequent fiscal deficit as a result of that or surplus as the case may be,

and we focus on the financing of this expenditure. That essentially puts what we are

dealing with before us today in the context of national accountability, which this

Parliament has as its responsibility. To exact its function, there are institutions in this

Parliament with respect to the Public Accounts Committee and with respect to the

Public Accounts (Enterprises) Committee, which continue the work of Parliament, in

the scrutiny of expenses. It is that framework, therefore, that allows this Parliament to

be the place for which there is full and total accountability on the financial affairs of the

country.

With respect to the appropriation that is before us, may I, before I go into some

details, point out what we are actually doing. We are seeking parliamentary approval to

bring to account, expenditure that has been incurred by ministerial approval from the

Treasury deposits. During the course of the year, there are always demands made for

expenditure that are not allocated within the budget, and there are rules that allow that

to take place in accordance with our system.

During the course of 2011, $2.7 billion was used through advances to the Treasury

deposits. This is not to be confused with the expenditure for the year. This is an

11

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012

allocation for appropriation that has to be done in order to get the parliamentary

approval in accordance with our rules.

11.30 a.m.

The question of expenditure is one in which we had an actual expenditure of

$50.9 billion during the course of the year. We had projected at the time of the

budget of 2012 an expenditure of $5.3 billion, which means that our actual

expenditure was $2.1 billion less than we had agreed to at the beginning, or

during the revised expenditure during the year.

Sen. Al-Rawi: You said $5.3 billion.

Hon. W. Dookeran: Sorry, $53 billion. And what was actually spent was

$50.9 billion. This expenditure—I will explain in detail what the items were that

led to the reduction in expenditure. But before I do so, let me enumerate on what

we are doing now with respect to the appropriation account.

I indicated that there was an increase of $2.7 billion, and that increase comes from

the Ministry of Finance and the Ministry of Works and Infrastructure. With respect to

the Ministry of Finance, the following provisions were made during the course of the

year by advances through the Treasury deposits with anticipation of meeting the

depositors’ claims as policy announced some years before.

With the Clico proposals we had advanced $748.2 million and, as you are well

aware, that process has been going on for some time and we have been able to meet the

obligations that we have identified through our policy with respect to three things: with

respect to the compassionate window that was put in place for those who will qualify

for that support; with respect to the arrangement that we had worked out between the

credit unions and the trade unions to meet their obligations over two tranches; and then

with respect to the policyholders for whom we were able to meet the obligation if they

were under $75,000 in deposits. The amount that was advanced for those purposes, I

repeat, was $748.2 million.

We had also made a provisional advancement to deal with the Hindu Credit Union,

of $100 million. Then we had an outstanding capital expenditure pertaining to the

generation plant in La Brea (Trinidad and Tobago Generation Unlimited), in the Union

Industrial Estate of La Brea, which was well on its way by the time 2011 came into

being, but we had to complete the expenditure that was required for that particular

capital investment, and we raised from the Treasury deposits a further $354.1 million to

complete that task. Those were the Ministry of Finance advances that were made for

these specific purposes.

12


In addition, with respect to the Ministry of Works and Infrastructure, we had made

an advance through Treasury deposits of $1.5 billion to commence payments with

respect to the extension of the Solomon Hochoy Highway in Point Fortin. That work

has since commenced as part of our thrust to trigger infrastructure development as well

as to provide the funding while we work out the mechanics for a longer-term funding

for that project.

Senators are asked to note that in accordance with section 17(1)(b) of the

Exchequer and Audit Act, Chap 69:01, advances made from Treasury deposits are

recoverable within 12 months after the close of the financial year in which the advances

are made. That is the first purpose of the Bill before us.

It is also necessary to have a variation of the appropriation in the sum of $1.4

billion for the fiscal year 2011 to realign the provisions in the fiscal account in

accordance with the new assignments of responsibilities to Ministers and the creation

of new ministries as effected by the Trinidad and Tobago Gazette, No. 89, dated July

13, 2011.

The third area which is being dealt with deals with the transfer of funds between

subheads of the same head of expenditure, and with effect from August 01, 1988

Cabinet had delegated its authority to approve transfers between subheads under the

same heads of expenditure to the Minister of Finance, when it was agreed, among other

things, as follows:

“Requests for transfers of funds between separate subheads under the same head of

expenditure should no longer be submitted for Cabinet but can be decided by the

Minister of Finance on the advice of the budget division.”

Consequently—and in fiscal 2011—the Minister of Finance approved the transfer of

funds in the sum of $675,432,633 between subheads under the same expenditure of

account. It should be noted that the transfers were approved based on notes from the

respective Ministers requesting the transfer. It should also be noted that these transfers

are requested to reflect changed circumstances in the ministries as a consequence of

re-ordering of priorities. They do not, indeed, increase the appropriation in any way.

Statements showing the transfers approved and explanations for these transfers were

circulated in the document to the Senate in which the details have all been brought to

your attention: the Senate document, Finance (Supplementation and Variation of

Appropriation) (Financial Year 2011) Bill, 2012.

May I point out that it was noted in the Lower House that there was a slight typo

error which was corrected and a sheet was circulated to correct that error. The word

“seven” was typed as “two”, but it did not change the bottom line; it was a

typographical error and we have circulated that for the note of Parliament.

13


Members will recollect that at the time of presentation of the 2011 budget in

September 2010 the oil revenue was projected using an oil price of $65 and a gas

price of $2.75 per MMcf. Based on these assumptions, and among others, the

projected revenue for 2011 fiscal was $41.2 billion, and the forecast for

expenditure in the original formulation was $49 billion, resulting, then, in an

anticipated fiscal deficit of $7.7 billion.

Given the revisions that were done later in the final accounts which are before

us, and in which we have found that the performance in the financial sector of the

central government has shown a decrease in our expenditure of approximately $2

billion, which I mentioned earlier, and also an increase in our revenue, of $1.9

billion, as a result of which, our projected fiscal deficit would have been reduced

by near to $4 billion, by a combination of the revenue increases and the

expenditure reduction.

With respect to revenue, the revised revenue for fiscal 2011 was estimated to

be $45 billion; the actual amount collected was $47 billion. This has been the

result, largely, of changes in the oil price from which we benefited, and also from

additional revenue more than we had programmed for—from the tax amnesty in

our original budget.

With respect to the expenditure which fell by $2.1 billion, $1.1 billion was

due to the recurrent expenditure, and the main categories of that are expenditure

for which provisions have been made for the meeting of wage settlements:

salaries and Cola, travelling, subsistence and contractual employment, both in the

central government and in the Tobago House of Assembly. And because we did

not complete all those wage negotiations—a small part remains outstanding—

there was a provision included in the budget, of $259.7 million which was not

spent as a result. It is not that it will not be spent; it will not be spent in that fiscal

year, and we anticipate that that will, hopefully, shortly become due.

On that score, you are well aware that we are at the end of the closing stages

of negotiations with respect to collective agreements from 2008 to 2010 and,

hopefully, we would begin negotiations for 2011 and beyond, having covered that

backlog. There are still certain matters to be resolved, but the bulk of it has been

resolved. It was a responsibility that the Government felt—in fact, it had to

accept, in the context of what we had, in fact, inherited.

14


11.45 a.m.

With respect to other goods and services the details have been outlined; it

amounts to $259 million in reduction. Also, there was a reduction in our interest

payments for the year. We did not make any interest-bearing debt commitments

for the year; although, we did raise some funds through the Inter-American

Development Bank. And we also renegotiated some of the arrangements that were

on the books, by the time we came into office, in terms of interest rates. So, there

was, in fact, a shortfall in interest rate payments of $81.9 million.

Then, the other large category, which is outlined in the documents before us,

is on current transfers, and in some cases we had to negotiate, for instance, the

risk premium for disaster insurance for the Caribbean, and we negotiated lower

rates. But, that was only one item. There were many other items which led to that.

I make this point, because the reduction in recurrent expenditure did not affect the

priorities of expenditure on basic needs. So, we continue with our programme, the

public sector investment programme, which would focus on many of the basic

needs.

There was a shortfall also, in that respect, of approximately 12.5 per cent

during the course of the year. In other words, we had programmes, a certain

amount, I believe it was $7.7 billion, and we spent $946 million less, which is

approximated 12.5 per cent. That represents, therefore, the reduction in

expenditure, but bear in mind almost 88 per cent was in fact spent. That gives a

picture of the financial situation before us at this point in time.

I could also point out that, in terms of current transfers, because of our

decision not to proceed with the Revenue Authority, we had previously allocated

$23.2 million and also we had an allocation of $15.2 billion for international

financial centre. We had projected an increase in subsidy payment—in fact, we

had to commit to a subsidy payment for Caribbean Airlines, of $84.4 million to

honour the fuel subsidy commitments. These are some of the highlights of the

data before us at this point in time and it represents the central government

account. Suffice it to say, that having found a situation earlier on, in which many

had predicted that our figures will be out of line, especially, with respect to

revenue, that that did not happen.

Secondly, we were able to meet a lot of our obligations during the course of

this year— obligations which were upon us when we started the management of

the financial affairs. Not only were we able to meet a large proportion of the

outstanding debts that were owed to creditors of the Government, all of which is

15


not yet completed, but we were able to advance payments with respect to value

added taxes (VAT) and refunds, and that figure was in the order of $2 billion,

which we spent more than we had projected, and have brought the value added

tax system almost on a current basis at this point in time.

We were able, of course, to regularize all the financial commitments which we

inherited. I wish to inform this honourable House that this Government

considered itself obligated, and we honoured every financial commitment that the

previous government had. Whether we liked it or not, whether we thought it was

correct or not, we honoured them all. There were a lot of those that had to be done

during the course of the year. Some of them have entered into the realm of the

courts, but we have taken that position from day one.

It was, really, our commitment of financial discipline. It was our commitment

to have an approach to financial management that is open to scrutiny, and it has

resulted in a view now that at least when it comes to the central government

finances, we have a sense of comfort that the situation has been stabilized. There

are still issues to be dealt with and there are still commitments that are to be dealt

with.

While we were dealing with the financial accounts and trying to put back in order,

we also set in motion the basis for financing of development. Hence, we began our

programme of securing the necessary financing for development in many sectors,

which will become sectors in which there will be policy changes, which will reflect the

change that the people wanted and the change of priorities that this Government has put

into place—change in priorities with respect to the energy sector; change in priorities,

with respect to the social sector; change in priorities reflected in policy directions in the

housing sector and also in the health sector. So, the policy changes that come out of this

arithmetic is really pointing the new directions, the new directions in which the policy

is being formulated in every one, in every area.

Housing, we recognize, has been a major concern, and as I had indicated in the

budget debate, we had somewhere over 100,000 applicants for new housing in Trinidad

and Tobago, and we began to gradually change the framework and the policy direction

to encourage more development of housing and access to that financing by tax and

interest rate policy in housing.

So, when people talk about not having seen the evidence of change visibly, there

are fundamental changes that are taking place, policy-wise and it will as it is doing,

show its visibility as we proceed—[Desk thumping]—in every area, whether it be

social support, whether it be in housing, whether it be in health, or whether it be

even in financial accountability.

16


I raise that point because the arithmetic by itself does not tell the story. What

it says is that we have put the arithmetic correctly and now we are embarking on a

programme to change the direction of policy, which has been done over the last

two years and continues to be done, and then you will see the output. Now, it is

quite populist for people to say I must see the change immediately. But, I think

people are beginning to understand that there is a lag between policy change and

implementation. And having put your house in order, we must now work towards

those changes. That is why in the last budget—and I would not go into any great

detail to enumerate that there were in fact three broad areas: creation of jobs,

encouragement of investment and continuing an assault on the issues and

challenges of building a safe society were the focus.

It is in that context, Mr. President, that we can view the initiatives of the

Government within recent times, in order to open up the possibilities for

investment. Whether it is in the energy sector or whether it be in other sectors,

this is a world in which you cannot sit home and expect others to come to you. It

is a world in which you will make your presence where the money is, and that is

why we have been embarking on this programme of promoting the investment

potential of Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk thumping]

One week ago, I had the opportunity to be at a function—and I believe all

Members were given documents to that effect—in which we produced an investment

guide. In association with one of the banks, we produced that. It was made public and

was circulated to all Members for their basic information which reflected what the

policy perspectives are, what processes are in place—[Interruption]—it has not been.

Well, I will make sure, before the end of the debate, it is—because it was made

public—an investment guide—and that has now been circulated to all our embassies.

This was formerly announced last week and all the embassies are now equipped, so

that they are now being charged with the responsibility to go out there and encourage

investment with information; not only information as to our macro-economic

performance or information as to our credible debt profile position or information as to

our credit rating as certified by others, but information as to the opportunities for

investment in Trinidad and Tobago.

We recognize that the Public Sector Investment Programme as important as it is,

must continue to be important, and must be supplemented by that investment. During

the course of the debate, perhaps, we may get some more on that issue.

We have also recognized that putting the country back on track to develop a growth

momentum is what we have been engaged in. And, although our expectations for

the gross domestic product (GDP) growth in 2011, based on provisional

17


information, was not as high as I had hoped, all the documents before us have

suggested that we are in that direction. Perhaps, at the end, I will come to more of

that information.

So the arithmetic and the accountability, that I propose to this honourable

House is based on our obligation here as a Government to be open, clear, and

transparent. And when it comes to the public finances of this country, this very

Parliament has sufficient opportunities to scrutinize that expenditure, either

through its committees or here, and the information that we supply is meant to do

just that. It is in that context that we feel now that the issues that were part of the

challenges ahead of us are now well within control.

12 noon

When I first started this responsibility as Minister of Finance, there were very

few nights in which I felt that I was in a comfortable place. Now I sleep very

comfortably in Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk thumping] Mr. President, I beg to

move.

SENATOR’S APPOINTMENT

Mr. President: Hon. Senators, I have received the following correspondence

from His Excellency the President, Prof. George Maxwell Richards, T.C., C.M.T.,

Ph.D.:

“THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO

By His Excellency Professor GEORGE MAXWELL

RICHARDS, T.C., C.M.T., Ph.D. President and

Commander-in-Chief of the Republic of

Trinidad and Tobago.

/s/ G. Richards

President.

TO: MR. RABINDRA MOONAN

WHEREAS Senator the Honourable Vasant Vivekanand Bharath is

incapable of performing his duties as a Senator by reason of illness:

NOW, THEREFORE, I, GEORGE MAXWELL RICHARDS, President as aforesaid, in

exercise of the power vested in me by section 40(2)(a) and section 44 of the

Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, do hereby appoint you,

RABINDRA MOONAN, to be temporarily a member of the Senate with immediate

effect and continuing during the absence by reason of illness of the said

Senator the Honourable Vasant Vivekanand Bharath.

18

Senator’s Appointment Monday January 23, 2012 [MR. PRESIDENT]

Given under my Hand and the Seal of the

President of the Republic of Trinidad and

Tobago at the Office of the President, St.

Ann’s, this 23rd day of January, 2012.”

OATH OF ALLEGIANCE

Sen. Rabindra Moonan took and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance as

required by law.

FINANCE (SUPPLEMENTATION AND VARIATION OF APPROPRIATION)

(FINANCIAL YEAR 2011) BILL, 2012

Question proposed.

Sen. Dr. Lester Henry: Thank you colleagues, Mr. President, for allowing

me to start off the Opposition’s response to this Bill presented by the Minister of

Finance. [Desk thumping]

First of all, I would like to beg your indulgence for a couple of minutes to

express some sentiments. I wish to express my sincere condolences to Sen. Dr.

Bhoendradatt Tewarie, who, I see, is not here, on the passing of his father, which

has been in the news. I also wish Sen. Bharath a speedy recovery, as I am now

hearing that he is not well.

Sen. Hinds: Suffering from “porsche”.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: “Porsche-itis!” And also, I wish to extend

congratulations to Sen. Abdulah, on his elevation to the leadership of the MSJ.

[Desk thumping]

Sen. Hinds: A declaration of war. [Laughter]

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: I would also like to make special mention of our Red

Force Cricket Team for winning the Caribbean Cup T20. [Desk thumping]

Sen. Hinds: In spite of the Government.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: As you know, I am a great fan of cricket and I follow the

game fairly closely. I am very proud of the accomplishment of these young men

who represented our country so well, and continue to do so. Okay, that is all I

have nice to say. [Desk thumping and laughter]

I am a bit surprised and somewhat bewildered, like some of my colleagues

who have responded to this Finance (Supplementation and Variation of

Appropriation) (Financial Year 2011) Bill, 2012. We are somewhat perplexed by

19


the Minister’s comfort because, when you preside over a declining economy, I am

not sure what comfort there is in that. Every occasion that the Minister comes

forward and presents a budget, or some variation, when he comes to this

particular place, he gives very positive vibes and talks about all the incentives and

all the issues that the Government is putting in frame for setting the platform for

further economic growth. Yet, time after time, when we check the numbers,

nothing happens.

So, we have given you the first year in which you came with your initial

budget—this 2010/2011 package— and, hon. Minister, you also get very good

press. If I look at the Guardian: “Economy better in 2011”—a very, very strange

kind of thing. [Interruption] No, no, what the Minister said on Friday—this was

an article on Saturday—I believe was from a financial perspective. Now, do not

get me wrong, what I am saying is that the press took this and gave the Minister a

more favourable headline than he actually admitted to, because he said—

[Crosstalk] Attacking? I will never do such a thing. Some of my best friends

work in the press.

So, what we have here is the Minister congratulating himself, as the Leader of

the Opposition said in the other place, for being fiscally prudent and managing

affairs properly, when there is really nothing to shout about. In fact, some of my

colleagues, including my former colleague who has now left the university,

commented shortly after about the strange congratulatory mood the Minister was

in by announcing the fact that they did not spend as much as they had planned and

that the Government ended up with some surplus—Dr. Mahabir says in the

Guardian of January 22, just yesterday:

“The move by the finance minister has left many unanswered questions. We

need to know why there was levels of under-expenditure…”

Sen. George: “Who Mahabir is dat?”

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: Dr. Dhanayshar.

Sen. George: You are quoting from Dr. Dhanayshar Mahabir?

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: Why not? He is an eminently qualified economist, not

you.

Sen. George: I have heard you—

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: Money was allocated and not spent. [Crosstalk] I will not

be distracted, you will get yours. [Crosstalk and laughter]

20

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. DR. HENRY]

“The finance minister needs to tell the population whether…this amount”—

was necessary “to stimulate activity.”

or not, which is what the whole objective of the budget exercise was supposed to

be. He further adds:

“There was no proper implementation plan in 2011.”

So this is partly what accounted for—so money was not spent that was allocated

to be spent on projects, and therefore it indicates some level of inefficiency. [Desk

thumping] That is what it is. It is not something to boast about.

In fact, another—these are not PNM supporters—Dr. Indera Sagewan-Alli—

[Crosstalk] At least she made a good contribution—[Laughter]

“The minister’s satisfaction with the performance of the economy in 2011 is

somewhat confusing, given that…he projected positive growth.”

I will not read it verbatim, and the projections from all indications—we are going

to end up with, at least negative 1.4 per cent growth because all the numbers are

not in. The final verdict on 2011 is not there yet. The Central Bank and CSO will

do their revisions and take into account particularly the last quarter of 2011, in

which most of the state of emergency and curfew occurred.

Sen. Hinds: But he is sleeping comfortably.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: So there is nothing. I mean, if you look at all indications

leading up—since they were off on a trip to India, we had no Parliament—but if

you look at what was happening in the country on the ground level, I could quote

statistics from the Central Bank and from the CSO to back up the point that we do

not have anything happening. If you look at the poor people on the ground leading

up to Christmas, which is a major barometer, because many people in this country

depend on Christmas sales to take them through the rest of the year. A lot of

people do not make any money during other times—the Christmas into Carnival

season—we know this.

If we look at the Guardian of December 26, “Slow day for Christmas sales”.

“Poor Christmas Sales”—and they are blaming, not the recession, but recently on

the state of emergency and a poorly managed economy. One interviewed vendor

said; “This is the worst Christmas in 19 years for street vendors.” [Desk

thumping]

Sen. Hinds: That vendor is right.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: This is the hardest Christmas I have seen in a long time.

21


Sen. Hinds: UNC Christmas!

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: The people are saying it is the recession, but it is because

during the curfew, many people who worked at night lost their jobs or had

significantly reduced earnings. She said:

“The economy is being badly managed.”

This is a street vendor. [Interruption]

Yes, the name is given there. If we go again—and it is not only in the

Guardian—to the slowdown in San Fernando—it was in Port of Spain where that

vendor was complaining—the President of the San Fernando Business

Association, December 23:

“…earlier this month business owners had expected sales which had slowed

down due to the state of economy, would have picked up in the last week

before Christmas. However, she said yesterday the situation was much worse

than anticipated.

She added: ‘Business in San Fernando, especially High Street and

surroundings, is tremendously down.’”

That was Port of Spain, and San Fernando.

Now, we go to Arima. The headline for the article was “Killing business in

Arima.” Businessman Raj Jadoo said store operators have been celebrating All

Saints instead of Christmas. Now, for those of you who do not know what All

Saints is—sales have been so poor…they feel like they are celebrating All Saints

Day instead of Christmas. All Saints is a day observed by Roman Catholics and

Catholic churches to commemorate the death of their loved ones.” [Crosstalk]

So he is comparing business activity:

“Business is dead all around. Sales have been considerably slower compared to last

year.”

[Crosstalk] Whatever! The slowdown—

“Operating for more than 30 years, Jadoo said several factors have attributed to the

drop in customer purchases, among them the slowdown in the economy, rising

unemployment, inflation, consumers not willing to part with their hard-earned cash

easily…”

Again and again, and we can go on and on. There are other things, in Central, where

you have testimony after testimony of the relative slowdown in economic activity.

22


12.15 p.m.

Therefore, you would see the impact of this in the budget at different phases,

in terms of the revenue from VAT, and so on, when we get there.

The fact that the Minister cannot come here and boast of actual positive

economic growth has to be somewhat embarrassing, given the predictions of the

budget when it was read in 2010.

The Government said that they would put many incentives in place. A lot of

incentives were in the fiscal package 2010/2011. We told them that, on the

Opposition side, we mentioned the fact that these incentives are not magic. You

do not just throw incentives out there, and somehow persons would rush in and

start engaging in all this activity that you would like to see happen.

If we look—a lot of the incentives were put into the energy sector in terms of

giving companies fiscal incentives to drill and to explore and so on. But if we

listen to Anthony Paul, the energy consultant of some repute, in the Business

Guardian of last week when he said:

Additional incentives are not the answer…for increased production.

Because he was talking about the fact that oil production continued to decline.

Of course, it is not the fault of this Government, it has been going on for

several years before, but the fact is it is still declining. Additional incentives

are not the answer for increased crude unless it is tied to concrete measures for

increased production.

In other words, Anthony Paul is suggesting that you tie the incentives to actual

production and exploration figures. So the biggest challenge in crude production

is that we have given in the past fiscal incentives, but have not tied them to actual

quotas to drill. So unless you have incentives that create concrete action, all you

would have on the part of companies is profit taking.

Mr. Paul said:

Too often T&T has a knee jerk reaction, and rather than looking at the

exploration potential of the acreage, T&T gets suckered into fiscal incentives,

old arguments and these are never…” well, I would not say never, but they do

not necessarily get it done.

Just giving fiscal incentives by themselves really does not bring home the bacon;

you have to do more.

23


Let me turn my attention directly to what we are dealing with here today. It

has to do with the fiscal operations of the Government as outlined by the Minister

just a short while ago. Initially, at the end of the fiscal year, they were saying that

the deficit was about $5 billion. The Minister has presented figures today that

were slightly less than that; around $4 billion or so, I think he mentioned. That is

the fiscal year spanning October 2010—September 2011. I am reading from the

Monetary Policy Report of November 2011:

In outlining the plan the Government had programmed a deficit that was much

higher and had a very ambitious Public Sector Investment Programme in its plan

to revitalize the economy.

The strange thing about this, as admitted by the Minister, was higher than

expected oil prices and the favourable receipts from the tax amnesty and so on.

And yet, what do we have to show for it? The country seems to be no better off

economically.

The article continued:

“…there was a drag on the non-energy collections due to the sluggish state of

the economy,…”

Here it is again. So we heard it from the streets, we are hearing it now from

official sources. So in effect:

“Non-energy receipts amounted to $20,662.3 million, 2.4 per cent lower than

in the previous fiscal year.”

Again, the slowdown in activity, very little revenue, and they actually mentioned:

“The diminished contribution from non-energy revenue was linked to the

softness of domestic economic activity and its negative effects on VAT and

other collections.”

So there is tremendous evidence all around of the lack of business activity that

continues to haunt this Minister and the Government, despite the lofty

pronouncements.

Going further, Mr. President, central government expenditure was recorded at

$50,076.5 million,…”—in this publication.

The Minister just provided us with information saying $50.9 million. It is

more or less in the same ballpark. This figure was almost 14.7 per cent higher

than in the previous fiscal year. So you spend at least 15 per cent more than the

Government you accused of squandermania. You increased the budget by at

24


least—so these are the actual figures after the fact; these are not projections. So

you did not only just say you were going to spend more, you did, in terms of

bringing that large budget to the Parliament.

The implementation of the capital investment programme, of course, was very

slow and they tried to speed it up, to spend all the money in the last couple of

months, July/August, when they realized they were being caught off guard and

would have to return all this money, they somehow shaved it down to $2 billion

or so that the Minister talked about. This Bill particularly relates to fiscal

operations of the country as I said.

The Monetary Report also notes that much of the central government’s

planned external borrowing for fiscal year 2010/2011 did not materialize. Why

did it not materialize? Mr. President, the hon. Minister stood when he presented

the budget in 2010 and said: “We are expecting a deficit of X amount;”—$7.7

billion at the time, I believe—and he said, “We will finance, because we have a

philosophical view.” That was what the Minister said when he responded: that we

should borrow from abroad. It was not about whether it was not necessary, it was

a deliberate decision that the Minister said was part of his strategy. [Desk

thumping] When we asked the question, why were you borrowing 70 per cent or

75 per cent from abroad and only 25 per cent on the local market? That was the

split.

Sen. Hinds: Yes, that was it.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: The Minister responded that that was his philosophical

position.

Sen. Hinds: Yes. Now he is resiling from it? “Now he ducking, ducking from

it”.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: I am getting to an even more important point. The nation

would not buy this notion that it was not necessary, after you made such a grandiose

pronouncement about your philosophy of excellence. [Desk thumping] The Minister

said at the time, “I did not want to crowd out the local investors. That money in the

domestic banking system should be used for local firms.” That was the argument the

Minister put forward. You could go and check it.

So why was the external borrowing not realized? It brings to mind the Point Fortin

Highway project, which the Minister just mentioned in his presentation. Our

understanding was that this was supposed to be financed by external borrowing, not

out of recurrent expenditure—$7.5 billion on one project out of recurrent

expenditure.

25


Sen. Hinds: Uh, huh, quite unusual.

Hon Senator: Wow!

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: I must say. So, our understanding was that this was

supposed to be financed by external borrowing, the same borrowing which the

Minister was so proud to say he was going to engage in, and they provided no

explanation as to why the borrowing for the Point Fortin Highway project did not

materialize.

We have noted, on several occasions publicly, from the Opposition side, that

could it have been complete mismanagement or some other form of corrupt—

[Desk thumping]—activity? What was it? [Interruption]

Sen. Hinds: Deliberate corruption! [Desk thumping]

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: Or just complete inefficiency—[Interruption] yes, and

incompetence. What have you given as an explanation for the non-borrowing to

finance that project from the IDB or whichever source you were supposed to be

borrowing it from? Was it that the Minister went out and hired his favourite consultants

and companies that was contrary to IDB’s regulations, in terms of how they disbursed

funds? Was it that? And the whole process was stymied because of that? You cannot

hire the contractors first and then go to the IDB after. Okay. Was it that?

So the external borrowing—and this one directly to the Minister, through you, Mr.

President. One line further in the same Monetary Report—so if you did not borrow

from abroad, how did you finance your deficit? We are paying attention. How did you

finance your deficit? You said you did not borrow, it was not necessary, but yet you

still have a deficit, so it has to be financed, because you are admitting to a $4 billion

deficit. [Desk thumping]

Hon. Senator: He cannot answer that.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: No, the Minister knows the answer. He said it. But the public

may not understand that what the Minister has been doing is borrowing at domestic

sources and drawing down the balances held at the Central Bank.

Sen. Hinds: Ohhhhh!

Dr. L. Henry: So that is why we are not seeing official debt increase.

Sen. Hinds: “Duckanomics!”

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: We are not seeing the debt statistics go up, because he is

drawing down on the reserves on cash balances at the Central Bank. Do you

remember the Minister referring to balances at the Central Bank in 2010?

26


Sen. Hinds: No, not balances, “balances”!

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: He derided the past government for doing such, and said

that they put us on the brink of a precipice and made all kinds of alarmist

statements.

Sen. Hinds: Yes. Remind him again.

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: Balances! Yes. So this is not adding to the stock of debt,

they are drawing down from the Central Bank.

Sen. Hinds: “Level trick!”

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: And it is in the vicinity because the deficit is about $4

billion according to the Minister’s figures.

Sen. Hinds: “See, me eh no economist; I would not know dat.” Thanks for

telling us. [Desk thumping]

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: So they are drawing down from the Central Bank, and the

point is that that is not the full story. So the Government, despite—[Interruption]

the claims of mismanagement, the Minister is engaging in the same practice, but

then why does the Minister not explain what he is doing? How is he financing the

deficit? That is what the public would like to know, instead of just lofty stories

about how well things are looking, and rosy pictures and nice blue skies and so

on.

What we have is the Central Bank advancing money to the central government

on a massive scale. In fact, they have continued to do it without issuing new debt

in terms of Treasury bills and so on, that the normal Government operation

entails.

12.30 p.m.

That is why you are not seeing a massive increase in public debt. In fact,

under public debt, despite the deficit of five-point-whatever billion it was

supposed to be, there was not a large increase in debt stock due to the central

government drawing down on its balances held at the Central Bank. This is what

is happening.

There is another side to this story. That is not the complete picture. One of the

reasons that the Minister may be engaging in this monetary expansion without

bringing it to the full attention of the country is his pet project, the Clico solution.

The Clico problem that the Minister cites as his biggest accomplishment, in terms

of coming up with some kind of solution might have some kind of role to play in

27


this process because the solution, that is now being implemented where the

depositors, who are being bailed out, are getting 80 cents on the dollar and not 81

cents, requires an agreement with the commercial banks.

The Minister actually held up a piece of paper saying he had an agreement

with the banks, sometime early last year. The Minister said, “Well, look I have it

right here. We just had an agreement with the bank. They are going to get—”

Then I raised the issue at the time: “Well, it is subject to the yield curve.” I hope

hon. Senators remember that, and the Minister came back in his summation and

agreed with me. He said, “Of course”. I remember it clearly. He said, “Of course,

he is right. It depends on the yield curve.”

Now the banks and the Minister entered into an agreement somewhat

unofficially because they never signed the document, from my understanding—

completely unsigned. It is written on paper with no signature, that they should

have a predictable yield curve for a three- to four-month window up until March.

I believe that is where the agreement is.

So, one of the conditions for the banks agreeing to this is that the Government

issue very few or no new Treasury bills. So you tied your hands in such a way to

allow the banks to cash in on the deal. In doing so, the downside is that you are

engaging in the same practice that you derided the Government before of doing—

operating on advances from the Central Bank; drastic monetary expansion—and

we may feel the effects of it sometime down the road. We are not feeling the

effects of it yet because there is not much happening. If we were in a buoyant

situation, the whole picture could become very different.

So, there is a lack of issuance of Treasury bills in order to finance the deficit,

which is the normal way. The Minister now says, “Okay, well we did not have to

borrow from abroad.” So the implications for drawing down balances at the

Central Bank, the Minister should be fully aware of, as he was so opposed to it at

that time.

What we have now is that this continues today because the agreement is that

they should hold this line until March for the banks to make money off the

transactions. Because of that, the amount of advances from the Central Bank, Mr.

President, is cause for some concern because if you look—and I am sure the

Minister will understand and appreciate this point—if you continue to do this, you

actually may be breaking the law because you may be in breach of the Central

Bank Act, Chap. 29:02, which says:

28


“The total amount of outstanding advances made under this section”—

meaning from the Central Bank to the Government—“shall not at any time

exceed fifteen per cent of that portion of the estimates of annual revenue of

the Government which comprises the sum of total recurrent revenues and

capital receipts (exclusive of local and external loans) for the financial year in

which the advances were initially made.” [Desk thumping]

So I would like to hear how far we are from actually breaking the law by violating

the Central Bank Act, or will the Minister confirm that we are not there yet? Like

I said, I am asking a significant question.

Now, on the issue of the Clico problem that the Minister takes so much time

to boast about, a lot of the extra appropriation in this Bill was for Clico. The

Ministry of Finance sank over $1,800 million or so into solving the Clico

problem. Now what you have is the Minister who is taking this on as his pet

project and not budgeting adequately for it which, I think, should cause some

embarrassment to the Minister. How could you not know that you would have to

pay out or whatever you are going to do in terms of your solution? We cannot tell

you; you are the Government. It is your solution. You have no idea and you made

no mention of it in terms of 2010/2011 and also no mention of this same amount

in the 2012 budget even when you had the opportunity.

What we have now is a huge amount of money being spent on Clico, which

we all agree we must solve at some stage; but I am also curious to understand

what is going to happen at the end of the day with the new entity that will be left

after all this is paid off; after all the EFPAs, the long-term policyholders. Even

after all of them are paid off, what will happen to the new entity supposedly

earmarked to be called “New Clico” or some variation like that.

I would also like to ask the Minister publicly, here and in this honourable

House, if he would tell you what role is the Fairfields law firm playing in terms of

the restructuring or the marketing of the new Clico, and to what extent the

Government is paying people in terms of how we restructure the basics of an

insurance company—something I think we are quite familiar with in this

country—and what is the role of Citibank in all this? [Interruption] Yes, Citibank

again. The Government’s favoured bank it seems.

What is their role in terms of the amounts of money they are receiving for this

supposed consultancy on Clico? What are they actually doing and who will own

the new entity when the Government is finally finished paying off all this money

29


and the Minister’s plan is actually implemented at some point? So it is still in

process in terms of that and we are waiting to hear what is going to be the

outcome of this new operation in Clico.

Now, one of the other things that was mentioned in the Central Bank

Monetary Report, and in the Lower House several times, is the increase—another

sign of decline in business activity and problems in the economy—in the extent of

nonperforming loans in the system, which went up from 5.2 per cent to 7.5 per

cent during the fiscal year.

Now, the Minister just proudly proclaimed that the Government honoured all

the debts of the previous Government without clarifying whether the issue of the

non-performing loans, which included some government-guaranteed loans, was

addressed—the loans to Evolving TecKnologies and Enterprise Development

Limited (e TecK) that were taken out to set up e TecK and so on, which is

mentioned in the Financial Stability Report of the Central Bank and in the

monetary report, I believe. What was the reason these loans went into default?

Defaulting on government-guaranteed debt is a serious matter. It can have a ripple

effect in the financial system and this is not something that any government

should be proud of. This is actually quite disastrous, and they quietly do it as

though it is nothing. It is business as usual. So we did not pay a few loans, or

whatever.

This is in keeping with their natural mode of operation. They botch everything up

and come the next day and say, “Well, okay; so what; we just move on. No problems.

Forgot about it. Small thing!” So whether you damage the international rating of the

country—when the financial rating agencies come and find out that we are defaulting

on government guarantees, it is not a problem. [Desk thumping] And the same A-rating

that the Minister inherited and was so proud of will be in jeopardy. [Desk thumping] I

am also surprised to find that he is still Minister of Finance. That is a significant matter.

The Minister also talks about reviewing the tax system; making it equitable,

without ever really adding any meat on the bones to say how he is going to make it

more equitable. What I have taken that to mean—and we on this side—is that the

Minister may be starting to panic and realize that revenue has to be raised from

somewhere. You cannot keep bringing bigger and bigger budgets without any kind of

additional revenue; [Desk thumping] and you cannot give a tax amnesty every year,

otherwise you set up a moral hazard and people will stop paying taxes with the

expectation that you will give them an amnesty a year down the road. You cannot keep

doing that to get additional revenue as you did last year. There is some kind of

panic.

30


Also, we have had the problem in this country where our tax system was

reviewed over and over again by the same IMF that the Minister favours in his

commentary, that we do not need another tax review. Is this another excuse to hire

a foreign consultancy firm to tell us something that we already know? [Desk

thumping] This seems to be the trend of this Government that you run and seek

foreign consultants to tell us some very obvious things and drain us of millions of

dollars of foreign exchange. That is the pattern of this Government.

As I come fairly much to my close, I would like to add that, in the context of the

overall management of the economy, this Government continues to receive a failing

grade and the Minister, by his own admission, has to take full responsibility for it. It is

either that or we have to think that the Minister is trying his best and being set up.

Whatever other explanation could you have for such mismanagement and lack of

performance? [Desk thumping]

12.45 p.m.

In early 2011, when I looked at some of the indicators there were one or two

positive signs which I agreed with the Minister on—some credit to the private sector

was beginning to expand in the early part of 2011, real estate mortgages were picking

up and new car sales. So there were one or two positive signs emerging, and then they

came and killed all of them in August. They implemented a state of emergency and

completely destroyed any prospect for a reinvigoration of local economic activity. That

is what happened. That is the consequence when you choose to imprison the population

rather than the criminals. [Desk thumping]

Hon. Senators: Ohoo!

Sen. Hinds: “Well putted, well putted!”

Sen. Dr. L. Henry: If people are imprisoned in their homes, they cannot go out

and spend any money. So instead of imprisoning the criminals—in fact, this

Government seems—sorry I do not want to stray too much, Mr. President—to have an

impeccable record of setting people free. [Desk thumping and laughter] I am not

casting any aspersions. [Crosstalk] On the other hand, all of our law-abiding citizens

were imprisoned in the curfew and it killed off economic activity.

Even in the energy sector, there is information that the workers had to go home—

they wanted to make sure that they got home on time—so they left three and four hours

ahead of schedule, so it had a significant impact in many, many, ways. I am not sure

before they actually called this thing that they actually realized the kind of damage

that they were doing, but this is what happened.

With these few words, Mr. President, I thank you.

31


Sen. Subhas Ramkhelawan: Thank you, Mr. President, for giving me the

opportunity to speak on this Bill. As I rise, first of all, I want to take the

opportunity to wish the nation and my colleagues in this Senate and the other

House, health, wealth and prosperity for the new year, and with that we can

continue to deliver and do the work that we were meant to be here for in the

interest of the citizens of this nation.

I am pleased to see that the hon. Minister is here today to listen to some of my

comments, which I have not had the good fortune to have for some time actually

in the Chamber. I think that he set the stage for a discussion, not only of what the

changes have been with regard to the budgeted figures of 2011, but for a

discussion that we can have with the nation as to budgeting and its impact on a

number of aspects inclusive of policy with direct economic growth.

I think the concern of the nation is one that, while all the underlying

adjustments are taking place, the nation is not experiencing economic growth. We

have seen the decline in the area of the economy for the past three years, and

citizens want to know that there is something there that is being done that will

translate into economic growth, not so far out in the future that we cannot see it. I

am sure that you know, Mr. President, but, more so, the hon. Minister knows that

famous saying about the economy, that if we have to wait for the long run to see

the economy, in the long run we are all dead. So what is going to happen? What

are the things that are going to take place in the short to medium term to give

some kick to the economy?

Let me start, however, as a take-off point to discuss some of the comments

that the Minister has made, and let me see if we can address some of those. First

of all, this Bill is about the whole question of appropriation in three parts. It has to

do with supplementation, variation and I would use the term virements.

Supplementation is an increase in the allowable expenses or the expenses that

were previously approved. In this case, the Minister speaks to two parts: one is the

extension of the Point Fortin Highway for which an additional allocation of $1.5

billion has been made; the second is made up of several subparts which are

housed under the Ministry of Finance for some $1.2 billion, which is variously

composed of an allocation for payments in respect of Clico of about $748 million

and, secondly, an allocation for payments in respect of the Hindu Credit Union of

$100 million; and thirdly some payments in respect to Trinidad Generation

Unlimited, that power generating company which was set up primarily and

initially to service an aluminium plant which never came into effect, and for

which that electricity generation is going to go into the Trinidad and Tobago grid,

32

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. RAMKHELAWAN]

and that amount was something of $350 million. So that is where the increase in

budgeted expenditure would have been set. Of course, we heard the hon. Minister

speak to savings that were generated in 2011 in terms of reduced expenditure in

other areas, and we heard him speak to increased revenue generated from the

energy, oil and gas sectors.

So, apart from the supplementation, the next area is the variation. The

variation, for the benefit of our citizens, is about moving allocation from one

ministry to another. So it is interministerial or across one head to another head.

Many of the heads are ministries and some of them would be service commissions

and the Office of the President and so on. So, it is about moving allocations from

one area to another, and that accounts for, I believe, $1.7 billion. That would have

been accounted for because of the changes in the responsibilities of ministries and

new ministries which would have been formed.

The third area is intra-ministerial or intra-head, which is moving money from

one area to another within a ministry or within a particular head, and that area, I

believe, is called virements. These are the three areas that the Minister has sought

to address: supplementation—increased allocations—variations, which is the

movement from one ministry or one head to another and, thirdly, virements,

which is within the Minister’s power to make various adjustments within the

ministry at the request of the ministry. In general, that is what it is all about.

So the matter is not really that there has been increased expenditure as the

Minister has expressed. It is that there has been increased allocation for certain

areas, and when you consider taking everything else into consideration—the

increased revenue and the reduced expenditure in other areas—it is not a question

really of significant increases in expenditure.

I think that the Minister opened up the discussion in speaking about his three

balance sheets. He started with the discussion about central government which we

have just covered, and then he spoke about the balance sheet of the public sector,

which is central government plus the other aspects of the State like the statutory

corporations, the state enterprises and other expenditures, and then he spoke to a

national economy balance sheet which is about GDP, balance of payments,

inflation, employment and monetary issues and so on.

I hope to address some of these areas in my contribution today but, in

particular, to deal with the question of how well is the budget acting as a policy

tool or instrument to direct the economy, because this is really part of the ultimate

33


goal. It is not just about debits and credits and so on, which I do not think the

Minister is quite experienced in. I think he is more experienced in the area of

generating and giving impetus to the economy.

As I looked at the budget, my mind turned to the whole question of policy to

effect development. That is the area I want to turn to about the budget policy in

effecting development. I hold the firm view that apart from energy, there are three

areas which need to be focused upon to create sectorial growth in the economy.

The first, of course, is in manufacturing. Most economies that are vibrant, in

terms of developing economies, have large manufacturing sectors, and because of

the Dutch Disease, in a sense, where in our case, energy has been the great provider,

and because we seem to be disconnected in our definition of what is diversification in

the economy, we always seem to get stuck on using energy to build the manufacturing

sector.

The last administration spoke to the “magnificent seven”: merchant marine music,

et cetera. When one looks at the allocations that were made to develop these sectors—

$5 million here and $7 million there and so on—it became very clear that if you want a

return on a sector, if you put $5 million and you get a 50 per cent return, the best you

can do in terms of value added is $3 million and $4 million. So the question is, where is

our concentration to achieve some of those goals that our citizens are crying out for?

Citizens may not cry out for economic growth in the strict definition of that word. What

they want is a better standard of living through greater personal wealth, and that can

only be generated on aggregate by lifting the economy overall.

When I started to look at the budget and the hon. Minister’s claim about injections

in the budget to drive policy, I started to get a bit worried. He had spoken to housing,

and I want to speak to the areas which we need to develop in order to achieve growth

perspectives. Let us have a look then at some of the areas. We have talked about

manufacturing, and I want to also address the area of financial services and the capital

markets. This is an area that is near and dear to me. When we talk about financial

services and the capital markets, we have to look back historically at what has

happened.

For many years there was this discussion about an international financial centre

which will drive growth in terms of the capital markets. That has now been put aside

and, in its place, what? The financial services sector, if my memory serves me right,

contributes to about 11 per cent to 13 per cent of GDP, which is a very significant

amount and would probably be the next highest contribution to GDP after the energy

sector. How are we going to grow that? What are the policy initiatives and what is

happening in the budget to give effect to that?

34


1.00 p.m.

As I said, the only reason I want to harp on this is, people want to know,

where is our growth going to come from? Where is our increased wealth going to

come from? How are we going to take better care of our children? How are we

going to build better houses? How am I going to drive a better car, and how am I

going to have all these facilities that would allow me to contribute better to the

nation?

That is the only reason I am raising it. So, we will look at this—and then, of

course, agriculture. I believe that agriculture is a very low-hanging fruit, but it is

clear that since the turn of the century nothing much has been done for

agriculture. In fact, the decimation of the sugar industry, which I considered to be

a reasonable initiative, was never replaced by anything. So, we drive all over the

country, for those of us who get past the Caroni bridge, and those of us who do

not necessarily think that the country ends at the Piarco International Airport. I

know that you are not one of those, Mr. President, so I can speak freely as to the

matter.

The point is, we have some 50,000 acres of land, from which sugar has been

removed and there has not been a replacement, and any serious government—you

cannot eat houses. Mention has been made of houses. The point is that you had 75,000

acres and about 15,000 acres were set aside for the construction of residential homes

and for commercial building purposes, but I am speaking to the 50,000 acres that

were set aside for agriculture, and nothing has been done since the decimation of

the sugar industry. So, you would see grass. Mr. President, if you were from a

rural area, you would know the different types of grass that would be growing on

that acreage: para grass, bamboo grass and elephant grass, but all grass. And there

might be other kinds of grasses that would be growing, not in the plains of Caroni,

but in other places.

So, I am concerned when I look at the budget, the developmental budget for

agriculture, under the Ministry of Food Production, Land and Marine Affairs. You

would see very little in terms of new initiatives. And when I looked on—I must praise

the Minister; I do not know if his Porsche has shut down or something, I have not seen

him here, he may be ill. I saw, to his credit, the hon. Minister of Food Production, Land

and Marine Affairs, was getting into a programme to provide for agricultural acreages

of 50 acres and so on, that will allow for this. I want to commend him, in his absence,

for that particular initiative, but I am not seeing a hell of a lot in the development

budget, to give effect to some of those things. I hope that the Minister, being here,

will be able to give me some answers to some of these areas as we go along.

35


Manufacturing, financial services and agriculture: agriculture, less than 0.6

per cent of an economy. Any economy like ours should have at least 3 per cent or

4 per cent, in terms of agriculture, and the reason is we do have arable land of a

certain quantity. Why is that not happening? I want to put it that part of that is in

terms of the budgetary mindset as to what we are doing to drive this economy.

The other factor about agriculture is that agriculture has a way of creating a higher

employment-to-capital invested ratio. Now, you know, Mr. President, we would put up,

through external investors in the main, a $1 billion plant that would employ 60 people.

I cannot think too much about the arithmetic and so on, but I do know that is a very

high capital-to-employment ratio. Yet still, we have low-hanging fruit—as some of the

new investment gurus and management gurus talk about it—in terms of the agricultural

sector. And I do not believe, and I have never believed, really, having come from the

rural areas, that the question is “access”. I have seen sugar in those 50,000 acres,

brought out from every nook and cranny to the sugar mills. So, I think it is an important

area that has not been addressed, in terms of the budget.

When you look, for example, at the expenditure, the capital budget—I will find the

figures in a short while—but the development budget in food production is $143

million, of which more than $63 million is for fishing, and I am not seeing anything

about the whole question of development of that acreage. And $143 million in a

budget that is plus $50 billion, or in a budget where the capital expenditure is so

much focused on a road from San Fernando to Point Fortin, it begs certain

questions about the balance of development and developing a modern economy

for Trinidad and Tobago.

The next area that I looked at was the area of the capital markets—

international financial services, as we like to say. I think it is very clear to all and

sundry that we have worked very hard to build an offshore economy and use the

rents therefrom to distribute some of those benefits onshore. But, there has been little

connect with what is happening offshore with what is happening onshore. The whole

question of the international financial centre and capital markets has not yet been

clarified and dealt with, because we have stopped the international financial centre. In

effect we have said; we are not going to go forward with an international financial

centre. But what have we replaced it with? That, really, is the question.

We go about the world, as we rightly should, saying that we are an energy

country. There are many things that we can be proud of in the energy sector.

There are many things that we were first in, or near first in, LNG being one of

them. But, the question is: where do we go from here to build that financial

sector?

36


I looked at the whole question of building the economic infrastructure, in

terms of capital markets, and I would come to other questions with regard to trade

and investment in a while. But, when you look at the Development Programme

under the Ministry of Finance, it is $47 million. How are you going to develop

and do the pre-work and the development work to build out capital markets and

the financial sector with $47 million, and none of which is dedicated to any kind

of feasibilities or studies for developing the capital market?

We say a couple of things in a very two-faced way. The first is, “We are an

energy country, yet still there is not one energy stock of note on the Trinidad and

Tobago Stock Exchange. It is a disconnected country. Something is happening

offshore and it is not connected with what is happening onshore. In terms of

budget—to define, to feed policy, to make the changes aimed at economic growth

and economic transformation, and building a modern and wide-based economy—

you really see nothing, as far as the budget is concerned.

As I said, if you have an energy country, it stands to reason that probably the

more important component of your stock market should be weighted in favour of

energy stock, and that is not the case. So, therefore, is our budgeting disconnected

from the economy? And the answer is, yes, it is. It is disconnected in the context

of building a modern well-diversified economy. That is the area of capital growth.

I want to turn to the other area for which the Ministry of Finance would have

responsibility. This is another thing that we like to say. First, we say we are an

energy country. Then we say, “We are the regional capital market for the

Caribbean”, of which we have no evidence. Because, the industry is not being

built on the activities of regional capital markets. It is not. Much of the

employment, in fact, virtually all of the employment is for the local capital

market—in the banking sector, in the insurance sector, and so on. Nothing is

happening.

I want to turn my attention to another favourite saying that we have: “Yes, we

are the gateway to Latin America”. And it is important for the Minister to address

this, because I am sure when I look at the very nice and glossy investment guide, I

am sure, having not read it, that we are going to say in that document that we are

the gateway to Latin America. The fact is that we are not, and we are not putting

in initiatives to ensure that we can take advantage of that, because others larger

and more powerful are going to come and eat off our plate. That is happening

already. It is happening, when you start to look at the linkages, because Trinidad

and Tobago—we have often recited—is excellently placed and has the

infrastructure for Latin America.

37


Now, I will tell you why it is a myth that we are the gateway to Latin

America. We may be, but we do not have the key for the gateway. We may be the

gateway, but the gateway is locked up. I will tell you why—and part of that is the

responsibility of the Ministry of Finance; we have no double taxation agreements

of note with Latin America.

If you want to penetrate Latin America, there are about three things that you

must do: you must have agreements for trade in goods and services. You must

have that, because if you do not have that, you would have tariff barriers, and you

will always have some non-tariff barriers for entry into those markets. When you

speak to some of the energy companies, they tell you: “Well, if we have to sell

goods into Brazil or other areas, we are subject to certain heightened tariffs, and

so on, that we would not have if we use our trade agreements with Canada and the

US.”

So, if you want to be the gateway, there are three keys that you must have.

The first is agreements for trade in goods and services with these countries, of

which, I think, only recently we have one that is workable with Costa Rica. We

have a partial scope agreement, I believe, recently signed with Panama. Would

you believe, Mr. President, that in the context of what is happening there, even

with that partial scope agreement, that is only for certain goods, limited goods, but

no services, but you want to be the regional capital market.

It is an aspiration that we all have, but I am saying, in order to convert the

dream and aspiration to reality, we must put in our budget and make allocation in

our budget for the studies, infrastructure and economic infrastructure, to ensure

that we have that key.

Therefore, I think I have made the point that, while we might be the gateway,

we do not have the key. It is a myth that we would have to translate to ensure that

we can actually penetrate those markets here from Trinidad and Tobago, not in

terms only of energy, but in terms of manufactured goods which we ought to be

getting into.

So, I looked at the budget and I did not see anything about capital market

development. Therefore, if we are serious about capital market development, we

have to have investments in the economic infrastructure to ensure that we can

realize some of these goals.

38


1.15 p.m.

I was speaking to some of the three things that we must have. One is trade in

goods and services, and I am saying that we have only started the work for

agreements. So, we have an EPA already signed with Europe, but we have nothing

with Latin America for which we should be the gateway.

The second area—well, I talked about trade in goods and services—of course,

is double taxation, which I have spoken to. Thirdly, and very importantly, as you

know, Mr. President, we like to look at Singapore as the gold standard. What is

Singapore doing: And I can tell you, Singapore, as far back as 30 years ago,

would have established all of these trade agreements, and would have established

all of these double taxation agreements in order for there to be reciprocal trade

flows—and flows in finances that would energize the country to be that regional

capital market. So, if you want to look at some of these countries as the gold

standard, let us see what they are doing, and let us execute in that framework as

well.

The third area—trade in goods and services, double taxation agreement—

would be reciprocal agreements with the regulatory authorities in finance and

investments in those countries. If you do not have that, do not come and tell me

about being the gateway. No keys, and the gate is “rusted up”. So, if we are going

to do that, we must work back from the budget, as a policy tool, to ensure that we

are going to get the kind of development, in a balanced way, that we want to, and

I am not seeing that in this budget.

Mr. President, it would have been easy for me to go back and do all the

arithmetic, but arithmetic is easy. Any 3rd standard child could do that. It is not

about the arithmetic, it is about the budget as a policy tool for economic change

and transformation. It has other roles, the budget, but the role that is being missed

is this tool.

I was on the third point about reciprocal agreements, in terms of the capital

markets, and when you look at the gold standard you will we see that there are all

these reciprocal agreements. I want to digress a little bit to, through you, Mr.

President, mention to my learned friend, the Minister, that this is the third attempt

that we have at a Securities Act. As you know, Mr. President, the last Securities

Act, which really establishes the playing field for the capital markets in this

country, was passed in 1995, the Securities Industry Act, and that would be about

15 or 16 years ago.

39


Two years ago, a new Securities Act was brought to this Parliament. It died in

the hands of a joint select committee, as the term of Parliament expired. Last year,

the Securities Act was brought back again, only tabled, but nothing happened.

And so, it is my understanding that now, because that new Securities Act was

developed as far as back as 2002, before it has reached Parliament for a decision,

before a vote is taken, the Act is no longer applicable. It is my understanding that

a new Act is being considered through consultants and so on. But, I want to tell

the hon. Minister, through you, Mr. President, that if you want to develop capital

markets, your legislation must be of such an order that it will be encouraging and

incentivizing and it must be open door.

I believe that the model that we are using, which is a Canadian model, is a closed-

door model, where you do not allow people to use your system as a conduit, but you

lock people out. And, I would encourage the hon. Minister as he is looking at new ways

to dynamize the capital market through securities legislation, to look at models, and he

might go back to the gold standard and see—if you want to be the conduit, you must be

encouraging. And your legislation must be so, as to ensure that you are the centre

through which money flows, through which capital market flows.

That is not the case now, and until and unless you make those changes to promote

what you want to do, your objective and your goal, it is not going to happen, it is never

going to happen. And I hope that the Minister will take this on board, because I am sure

he wants it to happen, and if you want it to happen there are several things on the

checklist that you must do to ensure that it does.

We will talk about other pieces of legislation, but the securities legislation is most

critical. Other pieces of legislation, for such a long time—I understand the Insurance

Bill is in the Lower House, and we hope to see it come to light, but we have other areas,

in terms of the capital markets, important parts of the capital markets. Pension funds are

still waiting after seven or eight years.

We are waiting on the credit union legislation, which has been crafted over a long

period of time, but I want to assure the Minister that I believe that he will get strong

support, because we do not want, as a nation, to have a repeat of the debacle that has

taken place in parts of the credit union sector and in the insurance sector. So, I am sure

with the right kind of legislation that will take place.

The other area that I wanted to touch base on with the national community is

this notion of building a manufacturing sector, and what is it we have in budget

that is really there to dynamize the manufacturing sector. I have spoken ad

nauseam of building a new manufacturing sector from the energy sector, not

diversifying away, but forward integration straight into manufacturing.

40


I have spoken at length about the need for us to build that bridge, so that we

cannot and we should not say that the local private sector is nascent. Because, the

local private sector, I believe, with some of the advantages that we have in terms

of reliable energy and so on, could do very well and could do exceptionally well,

if we create new raw materials that they can work with. Having these raw

materials in the manufacturing sector, we need markets that we can go to that are

opened.

I come back to the notion that we have all of the building blocks and all of

those building blocks need to be directed. One, in terms of direction, and I think

some work is already going on, as far as that is concerned—the notion of creating

these new materials from ammonia, melamine, a good starting point, a good raw

material in which you can build the manufacturing sector, and I want to commend

officials, of the Government on the other side for seeking to push that.

The next area is plastics: As you know, Mr. President, we have the building

blocks for that raw material, plastics, for Trinidad and Tobago, and that is, it can

go through the route, methanol into olefins and then to polyolefins—meaning that

you can take methanol and you can make propylene and ethylene, and then you

can make polypropylene and polyethylene. Simply put, you have the plastic resin.

That is an area I think Government is looking at, after some—I do not want to use

the word “prodding”—but the Government is looking into that, and I want to

commend the Government, and we hope this area can be driven.

The point is, in terms of building a new manufacturing sector, the capital

capability for such plants, which is the conversion into plastic, might be outside of

the scope—I should say will be outside of the scope—of the private sector, but as

you get to plastics, the private sector can be a very strong player. And, if we want

to talk about public/private participation, this is the area that we can put these raw

material on the ground and we can bring other players. But when we build these

products we need markets, and we need to open up those markets to ensure that

there is that flow.

I will tell you why I say it is out of the scope of the private sector. You might

need $2 billion to convert methanol into plastic resins, but once you get the plastic

resins, there are so many areas that you can produce in that might take $5 million

or $10 million or $20 million to build a reasonable plant for export. When you

build it, you must have a place to sell it to, because that output cannot be absorbed

by the Trinidad and Tobago market. That is clear.

41


So, Mr. President, I have spoken to building a new manufacturing sector.

What do we need to put, in terms of budgeting, to create the policies? Or, should I

turn it the other way around? What are the polices that we have and how should

we translate that into budget resources to ensure that we get to that end point—the

building of a modern economy, the rebalancing of the this economy away from a

single horse that could run lame and, most people say, has run lame for the past

two years?

These are the things that I would want to see in a budget, because I think the

hon. Minister opened the door in his discussion when he started to speak outside

of the arithmetic, into the whole question of the budget as a policy tool, not only

for central government, which is the debit and credit, but also for the public

sector—how do we use the public sector outside of central government to

promote our growth initiatives and then this question of the national economy.

Now, other things that are happening cannot, on their own, create the

conditions for economic growth, Mr. President. For example, the Governor of the

Central Bank spoke, very recently, on the accommodative monetary policy to

ensure the conditions on which economic growth can be built. By that, I mean

interest rates are being kept low, even in a period where you have some inflation.

I will tell you from the point of view that, while that might be a necessary

condition, it is not a sufficient condition for investment activity.

What we have seen, is that in the business sector, in terms of the reports that

have come out in the past year, there has not been any real increase, in terms of

local private sector increased investment. We have seen that. And, it is not

sufficient to have low interest rates only. A firm does not invest, because interest

rates are low. A firm invests because they can make a return on their investment.

So, if interest rates are 3 per cent, 2 per cent, 1 per cent and they cannot make

more than 1 per cent, 2 per cent, 3 per cent, they will not invest. We have had

situations where interest rates might be 16 per cent and 18 per cent. People are

investing, and the reason is they can invest and make more than 18 per cent, cover

their financing cost and make a profit.

I think that the Minister—I know that he recently, if I should say so—may

have chided the private sector that not enough is being done. That might be part of

the equation, but if we talk about public/private participation, what needs to be

done is to bring new materials where lower levels of capital can generate as wide

as possible a participation in the investment area. I repeat, ad nauseam, that when

that happens you need markets. Open up those new markets, hon. Minister.

42


1.30 p.m.

I want to just touch on a couple of other points, beyond the question of double

taxation and beyond the question of capital markets monetary policy. I wanted to

touch on the point that the hon. Minister made. The hon. Minister has spoken to,

that having put this investment guide in the hands of the embassies, that that

would help and go a long way.

As I said, Mr. President, as far as an investment guide is concerned, that may

be a pre-condition—a necessary pre-condition. But for many years, under this

administration and under previous administrations, we have spoken to the

composition of our embassies to promote commerce, to promote investment. We

know that if you take some of the parts, if they are not holistically woven

together, they will not work. So, having the investment guide is one thing, but

having trade agreements would be another, double taxation and reciprocal capital

market agreements. All these things have to come together, and if we were to

mark ourselves today, we have a failing grade in terms of opening up access to

those markets. We have dealt with and have stayed with the traditional areas with

which we have a comfort level: the US, Canada, UK, parts of Europe, but that

hinterland—which is the Latin American space—must be opened up. I really want

to bring it to the attention of the Minister, that if you really want broad-based

development—[Interruption]

Mr. President: Hon. Senators, the speaking time of the hon. Senator has

expired.

Motion made: That the hon. Senator's speaking time be extended by 15

minutes. [Sen. B. Ali]


Mr. President: Sen. Ramkhelawan, before you proceed, I intend to take a

break at this point. We will resume at 2.30 p.m. This Senate is now suspended

until 2.30 p.m.

1.33 p.m.: Sitting suspended.

2.30 p.m.: Sitting resumed.

Mr. President: Senators, before we rose for the break, Sen. Ramkhelawan

was on his legs and the Senate had kindly extended his time for speaking by a

further 15 minutes.

43


Sen. Subhas Ramkhelawan: Thank you, Mr. President. Before my first set of

time was up, I was about to conclude, and I am happy that you have given me—

[Laughter]—and I shall so do now.

Hon. Senator: Nice, nice, nice.

Sen. S. Ramkhelawan: Mr. President, I think all that needs to be said now

that is, until such a time that we see the budget provide for the resources to

achieve some of these areas which would create the economic transformation and

growth that we all seek, we would have to say that the budget and the budgeting

process remains somewhat deficient. As you know, it is the Carnival season, so I

would probably try to use, if I could remember, some of the wise words of

wisdom we have received from the lyrics of some of our calypsonians.

Let me put it this way—until I see in the budget, provisions for trade

agreements in goods and services and moneys assigned in the capital programme

to achieve those ends, with an agenda, maybe in the form that within the next

three years we would have 10 trade agreements with Latin America, it would have

to be a case of “Wait, Dorothy”, “Wait, Dorothy, wait.” Until I see initiatives and

resources in the budget that would provide for double taxation with at least five,

six, seven countries over the period of the next three years, it would have to

continue to be, according to Stalin, “Wait, Dorothy”.

Until I see reciprocal agreements for the capital markets that would allow for

Trinidad and Tobago to be this Regional Capital Centre, not only for the

Caribbean which is already well set in place, but through Central and parts of

Latin America, again Dorothy would have to wait.

Until I see a programme with budgeted resources to ensure that the lands that

we have available for agriculture—50,000 acres, unless we can see some

programme which speaks to using these lands, if even it is 30,000 acres over the

next three years, it is a case of “Wait, Dorothy” again.

Until I see new securities and capital market legislation that would ensure and

provide the legal infrastructure for some of the things that we talk about, being a

regional capital market, et cetera, it is a case of us waiting.

So, while our budget framework, not only in terms of the numbers, continue to

be deficient, the talk that is taking place here, but not the resources to give effect

to the talk—whether it be in the medium-term plan or whether it be in the budget

statement—the resources in the development programme for the achievement of

these goals are not evident.

44


So these are the things, Mr. President, that I would like to see the hon.

Minister take into consideration in his budgeting, over and above the arithmetic,

to ensure that the aspirations of all of our citizens for economic growth and

enhanced wealth would be realized.

I thank you, Mr. President.

The Attorney General (Sen. The Hon. Anand Ramlogan SC): Thank you

very much, Mr. President. Mr. President, permit me to start by expressing New

Year’s Greetings to the Chinese community. Today, January 23, 2012, marks the

first day of the Chinese New Year. [Desk thumping] Chinese people around the

world will welcome the New Year today.

Hon. Senator: [Inaudible]

Sen. The Hon. A. Ramlogan SC: Yes, that explains the dress code and the

dragon. [Desk thumping]

Sen. George: Sartorial elegance in Chinese, man. [Laughter]

Sen. The Hon. A. Ramlogan SC: I know you thought I was the dragon.

[Laughter] But we the Members on this side, members of the Government, would

like to express our gratitude to those past and present, members of the Chinese

community, who would have contributed to the social and economic fabric of our

society, and contributed to the cultural development of our country.

It was on October 12, 1806, that the first ship, the Fortitude, arrived on our

shores with 192 Chinese immigrants. They were put to work on the sugar cane

estates on similar terms and conditions like the indentured labourers that came

after. Since then to now, their diligence, their resilience and their commitment to

nation building has contributed to Trinidad and Tobago in no small way.

The Chinese dragon—this is the Year of the Dragon−is a symbol of power,

strength and good luck. On this day as we join the hon. Prime Minister later this

evening to celebrate for the second time with the Chinese community at the Prime

Minister’s official residence at the Diplomatic Centre, a reception will be hosted

by the Prime Minister herself for the Chinese community.

Mr. President, that is a first for the Partnership Government. It was the

People’s Partnership that introduced that kind of function as part of its inclusion

in our society [Desk thumping] so that we have the Chinese community two years

in a row at the Diplomatic Centre. Prior to that when the Diplomatic Centre was

built there was no such function for the Chinese community, sad to say.

45


Of course, Mr. President, we are in a congratulatory mood and everyone is

happy. Permit me to also say heartiest congratulations to Denesh Ramdin and the

Red Force, the Trinidad and Tobago cricket team. [Desk thumping] for a

comprehensive demolition job of Barbados, firstly, and then Jamaica last night;

fantastic cricket. [Desk thumping] Of course, on that note, coming on the heels of

the mission to India they will also be going to India in a few months’ time. [Desk

thumping]

Of course, one line to recognize and pay tribute to the outgoing captain of the

Trinidad and Tobago cricket team, Mr. Daren Ganga, for his astute leadership and

his contribution to the development of national cricket in Trinidad and Tobago.

Daren Ganga is now an international Sports Ambassador under the People’s

Partnership Government, and alongside Brian Lara we know they will help us to

promote and sell Trinidad and Tobago to the world. [Desk thumping]

Whilst I am in a congratulatory mood, I would also like to congratulate

Members on the Opposition Bench and the Hon. Leader of the Opposition, who

sits in another place, for scoring an important victory at the General Council

meeting whereby they won the right to distance themselves from wearing the

Balisier tie. [Laughter] [Desk thumping]

Sen. Deyalsingh: You only have 30 minutes, ‘eh’. [Laughter]

2.40 p.m.

I make my contribution to this Bill against the backdrop of a lot of

misinformation and mis-education in the country. You see, when you look at the

newspapers and you see headlines like: “Government wants $2.7 billion more”,

“Government looking for more money”, you wonder what is really happening.

Why is there so much misinformation? And why is it that the facts about what is

really a simple legislative measure that has to do with proper governance,

accountability and responsible governance, not coming out?

What are the facts? We are just regularizing the books and records for fiscal

year 2011. It has nothing to do, really, with the budget for fiscal year 2012. In

fact, this is not a request for an increase in total expenditure at all. When one

looks at fiscal year 2011, total expenditure for 2011 was actually $2 billion less

than was projected.

That, by itself, tells a story, because any government that can spend $2 billion

less and demonstrate that kind of fiscal discipline in its management of the

economy deserves credit and praise. [Desk thumping] Because we all know in

46

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. THE HON. A. RAMLOGAN SC.]

years gone by it would be not that they underspent $2 billion but that they

overspent $20 billion, because that is their track record. Likewise, total revenues

for fiscal year 2011 went up. It was $1.9 billion higher than was projected—$1.9

billion! And the net effect of all this was that there was a reduction in the fiscal

deficit for 2011, by $4 billion.

We must spend some time to understand where we are. We inherited a large

ship that was amidst some very choppy, international economic waters, and whilst

the carpet on the floor looked nice and the decorations made the ship look

beautiful, the reality was that when we boarded that ship in May after the general

election, we soon realized that before we could change the direction and course of

that ship, we had to plug leaks, identify rust spots and we had to take stock of the

state of the ship.

I know my learned friends on the opposite side are quick to point out how

much convenient statistics there are in foreign reserves and GDP and so on, but

what they do not tell us is the fiscal coronary bypass operation that they

performed by using special multipurpose companies. Those special purpose

vehicles were to bypass the normal system and process of governance with all its

inherent checks and balances, and this is what they did.

You found that the books of the Government reflected one thing, but when

you factored into the nodes of the system all of the indirect borrowing and all the

liabilities that have cropped up and crept up through these SPVs, well, then, the

picture did not look so rosy at all. Those were the rust spots and the leaks, and the

water was springing. We had to bail out the water first, plug the leaks and then

look at the rust spots before we could change the course and direction.

Take for example, UDeCott borrowed $1billion from Republic Bank for the

Waterfront Project; Petrotrin—if Petrotrin went to the international markets and

borrowed US $750 million—that is US $750 million—for the gas optimization

project, as it did in 2007, do you really think that that is not ultimately a debt to

the people and the Government? Of course, it is. But what happened was that we

had a lot of off-balance-sheet items and these off-balance-sheet items led to an

unrealistic picture of the true health and financial state of the economy. It

appeared somewhere in the footnotes, but you needed a fine-tooth comb to go

through it to pick up on these things. They came in the form of letters of

guarantee, sovereign guarantee, letters of comfort and what have you; but

ultimately, it all came back to the same Treasury and was a drain on the Treasury.

47


When one looks at the debt profile for Trinidad and Tobago, the central

government debt was 52 per cent; contingent liabilities, 26 per cent and

sterilization efforts, 21 per cent. What that meant was that 25 per cent of

government borrowing was done through statutory bodies and state enterprises—

25 per cent. There were letters of comfort totalling $8.23 billion as at the end of

September 2010. Government loans taken by statutory authorities totalled another

$8 billion and government guarantees on loans taken by state enterprises, a further

$6.4 billion, altogether a total of $22.5 billion.

That was the debt obligation, by the central government as at September 2010.

When you add to that the direct borrowing by central government, which was a

further sum of $20 billion during the years 2006 to 2010, what you see is

borrowing to the tune in excess of $40 billion, and that, during a time when the

economy was booming, with oil and gas revenues at its highest. So while we were

earning more, and one would expect that we would be saving more and we would

be spending prudently, what we were doing was spending wildly and borrowing

even more to spend. That is what was taking place.

And it is not just the spending; it is the lack of regulation. When we try to describe

what we have inherited, and when we ask for some patience, I think the population has

come to understand by now what we inherited. Take for example, the Chancery Lane

Project in San Fernando. You had international contractors being awarded large

contracts for mega projects and we give these international contractors, lock, stock and

barrel, hundreds of millions of dollars’ worth of contracts, and then what do they do?

They, in turn, subcontract the work to our own local subcontractors.

Then what has happened when we came into government? We saw the local

contracting industry in a state of depression. They kept coming at us to ask for

assistance, and, as Attorney General, I had to analyze these things. I could not believe

all these claims were coming, but when I looked at it, these subcontractors were left

high and dry by the international primary contractor who was paid off by the

Government, took the money and “buss” it. They took “we” money; they left Trinidad

and Tobago; they gone back to their own country and they left the local subcontractors

whom they owed—for work that the local subcontractors did—and they left them high

and dry.

And no one listened, understood or gave those contractors a hearing. It was the

People’s Partnership Government that had to contend with that. We had to contend

with the fact that this lack of regulation allowed this money to simply leave our shores

and sometimes leave slipshod work behind, and the local subcontractors without

any money.

48


I am pleased to announce that the People’s Partnership Government—I took a

note to Cabinet, and the People’s Partnership Government has taken a decision

that all international contractors who come to our shores to do business, there will

be inserted in their contracts a clause whereby, before they can get payment in

full, they must certify that the local subcontractors whom they hired have been

paid in full. [Desk thumping]

We have also asked that the work be done in phases. Before you can get

payment, at each critical milestone in the contract, once you perform the work,

you must satisfy us that the local subcontractors have been treated well, and we

say that that is progressive leadership in the interest of the people of Trinidad and

Tobago. [Desk thumping]

When one compares that with the kind of money that passed through the

hands: UDeCott, $2.4 billion to design and construct the Government Campus

Plaza—$2.4 billion! I took a tour at the Ministry of Legal Affairs towers recently

and I was appalled by that design. The building looked so imposing and

authoritative from the outside, but when you go in, not only is it a shell, but the

available space is very limited because there is a core that runs straight up from

the ground floor in the centre of that building—straight up—so that when you

enter, you could have office space around that core, but the core of that building,

which takes the elevator shaft up, is so huge that it has eaten and eroded into all of

the office space that could have been available.

I asked the UDeCott people to actually give me the floor space that that takes

up—if you multiply the space per floor by the height of the building—and they

are to get back to me. But I suspect that we would have deprived ourselves of a

number of additional floors. That, in the capital city where we are paying prime

dollars to rent space? How could you design a building like that? It is sheer and

utter madness!

Then you had, of course, US $304.5 million for the Waterfront Project and

$497 million for the Tarouba Stadium. Tidco borrowed US $18.4 million to

charter three cruise ships for the Summit of the Americas and CHOGM—US $18.4

million just to charter these cruise ships. What benefit has Trinidad and Tobago

derived from that? The cruise ships came and they left in a couple of days and

US—not TT—$18.4 million? That is wastage.

Nipdec took a loan of US $7 million to purchase vehicles for the Summit of

the Americas. Nidco borrowed US $52 million and $153.8 million for expenses

relating to the rapid rail project—US $52 million and $153.8 million.

49


E TecK borrowed over $600 million to renovate and remodel the Hilton

Trinidad between 2008—2009. When all that borrowing adds up, what they were

doing and what we met was a situation where the future of our children was

mortgaged away by the wanton and aimless governance that was taking place. All

they cared about was to get the money to spend.

That is why, it is not just the local contracting industry that suffered; it is not

just the off-balance-sheet borrowing that crippled us, we have to work and pay

back all that money that they borrowed, and this Government has to do that! So

we have to find money to pay back and service all those debts, and whilst we are

doing that we have to look at the socio-economic aspect of the local contracting

industry, and we must also now contend with a number of legal disputes, and we

must also contend with a number of corruption probes.

You see, when we look at what took place, the Gas Optimization Project, the

cost overrun was 66 per cent. It was supposed to cost $4.94 billion, and instead it

almost doubled to $8.21 billion. No amount of planning, no amount of variation in

the scope of works can justify 66 per cent increase. The Ultra Low Sulphur Diesel

Project, a cost overrun from $1.08 billion to $2.47 billion, more than doubled

again.

The gas-to-liquid plant was initially estimated to cost $586 million.

Eventually, it cost $2.4 billion. The figures are staggering. And, as if to rub salt in

the wound, whilst we have all that excessive expenditure—we have a claim

brought by GTL against Petrotrin, claiming in excess of $12 billion.

2.55 p.m.

That kind of mismanagement is what has led the People’s Partnership

Government having to take a very disciplined approach to the management of the

economy. Yet, another one—and, we still have to live with these things. The

Scarborough hospital project—we have arbitrations galore against Nipdec arising

out of the Scarborough hospital construction. Those arbitrations and those matters

are ongoing. We have to find money, after we have wasted so much, to actually

manage those arbitrations on a daily basis. I have to keep my finger on the pulse

and manage all these legal disputes to make sure that the interests of the State and

the people are adequately protected.

We must not forget that the Scarborough General Hospital was a 100-room

facility, 100 rooms—and initially meant to cost $132 million. Not bad; $132

million, 100 rooms. You know what is the price tag now? $700 million and

counting, they multiply it by seven—that is where we are at. So, you see, when

50


we now have to analyze—and we are being hit from all different directions—it is

a singular achievement that you could have a Prime Minister, and a Minister of

Finance in the person of Hon. Winston Dookeran, who can get a Standard and

Poor’s rating that actually preserves and maintains this country’s status. [Desk

thumping] Permit me to quote, because in January2012—[Interruption]

Sen. Deyalsingh: That happened for the first time?

Sen. The Hon. A. Ramlogan SC: —The Standard and Poor’s rating

services—you see, they say it is not the first time. The difficulty is this; given

what we inherited they expected this to go over the precipice. [Desk thumping] it

was meant to, but we have held the reins in our hands firmly, and we have pulled

tightly. And this is what, in January 2012, Standard and Poor’s said, and I quote:

“The stable outlook is based on the S&P’s expectations of continued prudent

policymaking, including containing fiscal deficits, promoting economic

growth and diversification policies, and addressing financial risks (including

outstanding clico issues and regulatory deficiencies) in a timely manner.”

At a time when European countries are being downgraded—France, Austria,

Italy, Spain, Portugal, Cyprus, Slovakia—it requires a Herculean effort for a small

open economy such as ours to maintain an even keel and remain afloat, and that is

to our credit. [Desk thumping]

Mr. President, when one looks—I live in south Trinidad and whenever I drive

past the Tarouba Stadium, and I used to take the Tarouba Link Road, the

juxtaposition of the experience. It just never, ever, ceases to amaze me that you

had that Tarouba Link Road, which is a main artery to link you to the highway,

falling apart, and you could not find money to fix that, but your priority was to

build a stadium that we did not need in the first place—which you then said, could

be used as a Tsunami shelter. It is amazing. It really is amazing.

Now, I think the steady hand that has led to words like “stable economy”

being associated with the People’s Partnership Government, has to do with the

Clico fiasco and the Hindu Credit Union fiasco and the way we have managed it.

[Desk thumping] All praise and credit must go to the hon. Minister of Finance in

that regard. Approximately $850 million of the expenditure that we are

accounting to the people for in this Bill relates to the Clico fiasco; it has to do

with money that we have paid out. You see, they had put $5 billion into Clico for

a 49 per cent equity, when the company was bankrupt. They did not negotiate a

proper deal for the country. For the $5 billion they were injecting in Clico. They

failed to do that. We had to consider the interest of the pension holders, the

51


ordinary policyholders, the companies, the regional economies in the Caricom

that were going to be affected and we had to take it one step at a time and manage

it so carefully.

Today, we are pleased to say that this Government has paid out $1.1 billion

Clico and British American EFPA holders; $1.1 billion paid back to the people of

this country. [Desk thumping] That represents payments to 2,177 citizens of this

country. Ninety-three per cent of the EFPA contract holders have applied for the

settlement that we have offered. , Although we have inherited a very melancholic

state of affairs, we managed to achieve a significant reduction in the fiscal debt,

through the prudent management of our finances. Our budget deficit for

2010/2011 was $3.29 billion, as compared with the revised estimates of $7.9

billion, as projected in September 2011. That was $4 billion less than was

projected, and our revenue projections, as indicated before, exceeded by $1.9

billion.

One may ask the question: how is it we were able to get more money without

raising taxes or imposing new taxes at a time of a global economic meltdown that

was, of course, bound, to affect Trinidad and Tobago as well? There are five

reasons for that. The first has to do with higher tax receipts: a more aggressive, a

more efficient and a smarter system of tax collection—and that has to do with the

tax amnesty that we granted. The second one had to do with a bit of luck and the

higher than projected oil and gas prices. The third had to do with the fact that we

were able to contain and keep, within a realistic range, what the country can

afford—the wage demands in the public sector. Fourthly, we managed our

borrowings prudently and our interest payments came in less than anticipated

because we borrowed less through Treasury Notes and Treasury Bills.

Mr. President, the People’s Partnership is charting a new course for this

country. We have taken stock of what is taking place in Europe, and we have also

taken stock of the meltdown in the United States of America. The Standard and

Poor’s rating for even the great almighty United States of America is dipping.

In light of that, we had our first trade mission: recognizing that we can no

longer turn to the north, the Prime Minister, in her vision and her wisdom, as the

political leader and Prime Minister, went South-South; first trade mission to

Brazil. Why Brazil? It is the first letter in the “BRIC” countries. In 2001, it was

Jim O’Neill of Goldman Sachs who coined that acronym BRIC to represent Brazil,

Russia, India and China. That is where the future lies. It was going to be the new

international world economic order, and there was no meaningful attempt to

actually turn in that direction, for the benefit of Trinidad and Tobago. There was

52


no long-term planning. You do not hear BRIC being mentioned as part of the

Vision 2020 Plan. There was no visit planned to Brazil and to India. It simply did

not feature as part of the trade and investment policy of the last administration.

This Government intends to do business differently, and we will not apologize for

the international branding and marketing and the aggressive promotion of

Trinidad and Tobago. We will not apologize for that. [Desk thumping] because

we are operating on the basis of facts. And what are the economic facts? Brazil’s

GDP in 2003, was estimated at US $750 billion. The actual GDP in 2010 was US $2

trillion. India’s GDP, in 2003, was estimated to grow in the vicinity of just over US

$1 trillion; In 2012, the actual GDP was US $1.6 trillion. China’s economy is even

more phenomenal. The 2010 GDP estimates made in 2003 were just over US $3

trillion. The actual GDP, in 2010 was US $6 trillion.

The wisdom of developing linkages with these countries must be self-evident,

and to disregard it makes no economic sense. That is why we are turning to these

countries—because the new world international economic order lies with these

countries. We have to change the way we do business, if we do not change the

way we do business, then the global economic meltdown is going to take root in

Trinidad and Tobago and affect us in the way that we cannot recover. Trying the

same thing over and over, trying the same thing again and again, but expecting

different results is the clearest definition of political insanity that you can find,

and that was what was happening in the past. But, we are not politically insane,

we intend to continue this aggressive march towards seeking out foreign

investments and building new economic linkages and ties with these countries.

In concluding, I wish to highlight the fact that the Governor of the Central

Bank, on Tuesday, January 17, 2012, made the point that the time had come when

he could feel confident enough to say our economy had stabilized—Central Bank

Governor. [Desk thumping] He cited the fact that inflation was fairly under

control and the country had a healthy foreign exchange position in a “strong and

robust” financial system.

Mr. President, it is said that, “the pessimist complains about the wind; the

optimist expects it to change; but the leader climbs up and adjusts the sails.”

Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar is a leader and she has instructed her

Minister of Finance, Hon. Mr. Winston Dookeran, to climb up and adjust those

sails. Trinidad and Tobago will sail in a different direction, and that direction will

be a successful one, for the benefit of Trinidad and Tobago. In line with the new

world economic order, Trinidad and Tobago will take its rightful place there and

be a successful nation, under the People’s Partnership. I thank you, very much.

53


3.10 p.m.

Sen. Faris Al-Rawi: Thank you, Mr. President. I join my colleague, my

learned senior now, Sen. Anand Ramlogan SC [Desk thumping] who I

congratulate on the ascension to silk, albeit that he gave himself. I think he is

deserving of silk, I make no apology for that.

Mr. President, if you will permit me, I know it is unusual to do this, but Sen. Dr.

Tewarie is not with us, and I know that today is the cremation for his father. I want to

offer my sincere condolences to his family, and to the wider community at the loss of

the icon of a man that his father was and will always be known to be. I am sure I say

that on behalf of all of us.

Mr. President, we are here to discuss, as the Sen. Ramkhelawan has put, really

three essential items; that being the approval of appropriation for some $2.7 billion, that

being an adjustment or variation in respect of another $1.7 billion; and then virements

between various Heads of Ministry. This Bill has come upon us very quickly, Mr.

President. It is not one which the Senate is required to vote upon. It deals, in fact—of

the $2.7 billion, some 44.5 per cent in terms of appropriation being to the Ministry of

Finance, and then some 55.5 per cent with respect to the Ministry of Works. In relation

to the variation aspect that we are on today, Mr. President—and that is a variation to

some $1.4 billion—we are here due to the realignment of ministries, and that involves

an increase with respect to 10 ministries and a decrease with respect to 15 ministries.

Mr. President, we are essentially also talking about—we have had commentary in

relation to the arithmetic, in very clear form, from my learned colleague, Sen. Dr.

Henry, in getting to the heart of the true figures behind the arithmetic. So it falls next,

insofar as we are having a rather quick debate, and I will take my lead from my learned

colleague, Sen. The Hon. Ramlogan SC, the Attorney General, in keeping this a tight

debate we are talking, after we have dealt with the arithmetic, really to the issue of how

we move the economy.

I think that this Bill lends itself to an analysis of the movement of the economy in

terms of policy in three aspects. The three aspects which I choose to reflect upon would

include the issue of public procurement, the usage of existing resources and crime and

national security, insofar as all three of these constitute markers of confidence.

Mr. President, before I move on to that substantive position, we heard the hon.

Minister of Finance tell us in his conclusion that he is able to sleep comfortably in

Trinidad and Tobago. He painted a picture of what he called “the financial situation

before us now”, where he chose to give little regard to the effect of what he

admitted to be a 12.5 per cent reduction in terms of the PSIP implementation.

54

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. AL-RAWI]

He chose, Mr. President, also, to state, somewhat curiously for me, that his

Government was able to regularize all financial commitments met, whether they

liked it or not. Almost as if he had a choice, and without regard to the fact that he,

in his statement as well, admitted that loans were put upon our books without the

need for the application of interest. That was a very interesting point because the

interest, in fact, kicks in many years down the line. It is known, and it was stated

in debate previously, that the moratorium which relates in respect of the interest

payments that this Government has signed onto, range to some five years later.

So, it is no simple achievement on his part, or grand achievement even from

either end of the scale, to say that he has made payment to commitments which a

Government of Trinidad and Tobago must adhere to because the next

Government to come—which I am sure will not be a PP Government or a UNC

Government—is, in fact, going to have to do the same thing. [Desk thumping]

We have heard a lot to do between the hon. Minister of Finance and the hon.

Attorney General, with an allegation of a lack of regulation. My learned friend,

the hon. Attorney General, was at pains to demonstrate, in a manner which he

thought was convincing, that the hiring of foreign entities to conduct work

through state enterprises was a mischief upon the people of Trinidad and Tobago,

and he drew his example by saying essentially that the local contractors were left

crying on the side. He said that no one listened and no one understood, and that

his Government, he alleged, was a progressive one with progressive leadership,

and that they would, in fact, take that clarion cry into consideration.

But, Mr. President, I think those words rather disingenuous, and if I should

say, the hon. Attorney General seems inebriated by the exuberance of his own

advocacy.

Hon. Senator: Oh!

Sen. F. Al-Rawi: I have said it in a complicated way because, really, he is

convincing himself, he is imbibing his own rhetoric. Because, if we were to have

regard to the concept of public procurement, Mr. President—because public

procurement is that very concept by which state enterprises and the Government

of Trinidad and Tobago engage in prudent fiscal management and prudent

delivery of things promised in budget statements, which this appropriation relates

to. In procuring services and goods and in procuring investments, I agree with the

learned Attorney General that we must have transparency through the system, but

regrettably, the inebriation that the hon. Attorney General suffers, in imbibing his

own rhetoric, is that he seems almost to believe the things which he is saying.

55


How could that in fact be the case if one were to have immediate regard to the

public procurement as it relates to the Invaders Bay project? Let me in answer to

the hon. Attorney General put squarely on the table the Invaders Bay project. If I

were to refresh the memories of the hon. Senators sitting here, and by extension

and through you, Mr. President, the national community, we would recall that the

budget statement in 2012, at page 15, dealt with the concept of urban

development. At page 15, Mr. President, if you will permit me to quote, under

Urban Development, under the heading “Invaders Bay”, it says:

“Mr. Speaker, significant interest has been expressed in the transformation of

the waterfront along Invaders Bay. This development has great potential for

promoting commercial activities in the services sector and will benefit the

country significantly. Such projects are meant to be private sector initiatives,

utilizing green building technologies and will assist in making Trinidad and

Tobago an attractive destination for new investment.”

That is what the budget has to say.

Mr. President, in dealing with the procurement of that private investment—

that private sector investment—the Government went out to secure investment by

way of a request for proposals. The reason I am raising this whole issue is that

somehow this Government does not seem to understand that what is missing in

this economy, the reason this economy has not had traction, is that there is an

essential lack of confidence in the economy. There is a lack of confidence because

there has been no discernible policy statements which when interrogated have any

substance.

I say that because if you were to look at the public procurement in the context

of the Invaders Bay project alone, in answer to my learned friend, the hon.

Attorney General, you would see the following: The Attorney General’s statement

that private contractors were not listened to and that procurement was terrible

under the People’s National Movement in his opinion. Yet, you would see that the

Ministry of Planning and the Economy puts out a request for proposals for the

Invaders Bay project, somewhere around the end of August 2011, and gives in

that request for proposal, a return date six weeks later. I believe it is on October 6,

if I am not mistaken.

Mr. President, the public procurement in that request for proposals—and I

think it is useful if we were to have a look at the request for proposals itself—for

Invaders Bay development which is a design and built RFP. In that RFP, the

Ministry of Planning and the Economy sets out the background and nature of the

56


project and says that it is a development of 28 hectares or 70 acres of land located

just opposite the Hasely Crawford Stadium, and that it would be one of the most

significant urban development projects to be undertaken in this period. It sets out

an association with major waterfront transformation. It says, Mr. President, at

page 3 of the proposal, that the proposed developer would be chosen via this RFP

process and shall then enter into a memorandum of understanding with the

Government of Trinidad and Tobago for an agreed lease rent. It is expected that

this activity would be finalized within one month of the submissions of the said

RFP.

Under the heading, “Status of approvals”, the RFP specifically states:

“The reclamation license and approval for the subdivision to create the parcel

of land for commercial and recreational uses have all been granted. The Head

Lease for the lands rest with the State. The lands are therefore development

ready.”

They then go on to Project Assessment and say, at heading 3.5 at page 4, that:

“Whilst there is no prescribed format, Developer must submit “Design and

Build Proposals” which at a minimum to address the requirements listed

below.”

Mr. President, the requirement says that the developer is to provide preliminary

budget; identification of source of required equity; financing that has to be

sourced; must submit a letter of guarantee from the financiers; timetable;

summary of economic impact, and that through the RFP. A rational

comprehensive guide to the area must be stated; it must promote sustainable

development; it must include a realistic execution strategy and it is expected that

the submissions would be on par with current global standards. So that is the

request for proposals.

What are we met with then? We are met in the public domain—if we were to

answer the theory of the hon. Attorney General—with an outcry from the JCC.

The JCC, in association with the Trinidad and Tobago Chamber of Industry and

Commerce, the Trinidad and Tobago Manufacturers Association, the Trinidad and

Tobago Transparency Institute—all come together and tell this Government that

that procurement which is sought by the Ministry of Planning, has critical and

fatal errors.

They say, in summary, that the scope of work relative to its timetable—this is

from the website of the JCC—if you would permit me, Mr. President:

57


“The proposals are to be submitted by 4th October and that is an

unrealistically short timescale for such a huge development. In addition, its

definition of scope is far too generalized, which leaves the evaluation and

selection process open to potential abuse or the whims and fancies of personal

preference.”

They say next:

Development Within a Proper Planned Context - The RFP makes the point

that the MPE…”

The Ministry of Planning and the Economy—

“…is responsible for land-use planning ensuring balanced development and

restoration…There are various strategic developments for Port of Spain which

have been prepared for the Government and those have been ignored in the

RFP.”

Relative to the next point:

Transparency and the Creation of a Level Playing Field - The Government

must ensure that a transparent process is followed in the granting of any

exclusive rights to private developers to develop these publicly-owned and

extremely valuable property rights, conservatively estimated to be worth

in excess of $1.0Bn.”

—even at depressed market rates. And they go on to say:

“As far as we are aware, there has been no stakeholder participation in the

development process. None whatsoever. That is unacceptable by modern

norms not to mention several key sections of the People's Partnership

Manifesto.”

They then go on to note that it is curious that the Movie Towne Complex “must

be complimentary to the existing development” and that the RFP must anchor and

hinge itself there. Next, they go on to say that it ignores the local content.

The next point is that:

The RFP is silent as to the requirement for an Environmental Impact

Assessment;

58


3.25 p.m.

And the last thing that they point out is, Mr. President, that the:

Scale of Development, that the spoils go to one Developer.

So what is the relevance of this? If this debate is only about appropriation and

not about the effect upon the budget, then the next argument which comes from

the Government is that really and truly they are doing such a grand job, in such a

better fashion than the People’s National Movement did, particularly as it relates

to procurement. You heard the hit list by my learned friend the Attorney General.

Why then are they engaging in a process for the disposition of nearly $1 billion

worth of land in Trinidad and Tobago, with a checklist of woes as pronounced,

not by the Opposition alone, Mr. President, but by the Joint Select Committee

(JCC), the Trinidad and Tobago Chamber of Industry of Commerce, the Trinidad

and Tobago Manufacturers’ Association and, the Trinidad and Tobago

Transparency Institute. How could that be? Are we to take this Government

seriously?

But, Mr. President, lest you think that I am on a frolic of my own, and that I

am repeating only those words on a website, let me point you to the fact that we

could perhaps skip past the very many letters written by the JCC. I must state for

the record, for clarity, in fairness to the hon. Minister of Planning and the

Economy, who is not with us, that he has responded to concerns of the JCC in

writing, basically stating that he is not in agreement, that he is committed to

transparency, and that the Government is committed to transparency. I would say

that he has put that on the public record, but regrettably the project marches on.

Ten proposals were received, Mr. President, the publication of those interested

should have happened already; that has not happened. But there is something

which burns even stronger in the pot of mischief that this brings for us, Mr.

President. Let me tell you what that is. What burns for me is that whilst we are

engaged in the concept of revising public procurement as a Joint Select

Committee of Parliament, it is conspicuous to note that the rules still apply. And

what are the rules? The rules are the Central Tenders Board.

My learned friend, the hon. Attorney General, went on a tirade a short while

ago to tell us that it was the use of state enterprises which caused a mischief to

Trinidad and Tobago. He said that that way there was a subvention of positions,

and debts were put on to the books which could not be factored.

59


But, Mr. President, in this very project which I brought by way of example to

challenge the Attorney General’s allegations, I want to point out that the Central

Tenders Board Act applies to Government’s disposition of lands. Yet this

Government is engaged in a process where the Ministry of Planning and the

Economy is putting out an RFP for lands which were developed by UdeCott and

not through the Central Tenders Board.

Mr. President, I want to refer you to the Central Tenders Board Act, Chap. 71: 91.

That Act which stands on the books of Trinidad and Tobago has been amended on

several occasions, but specifically in 1997, I believe it was, there was a very strong

amendment put in by way of Order. In fact, it is to be found in the subsidiary legislation

as Act No. 179 of 1997. With your permission I wish to read it. It is entitled Central

Tenders Board Functions and Duties Order made under section 4(2). Section 2 of the

Order says:

“The functions and duties of the Central Tenders Board are hereby extended to

include the authority to act for, in the name and on behalf of the Government to

dispose of real property owned by the Government in such manner as the

Government may consider appropriate and desirable.”

You heard in the RFP that the State owns the land. If you read the numerous articles

which appear in relation to this issue, Mr. President, you would see statements that the

land is vested in the State. We have the Central Tenders Board Act, and we have this

Government on a frolic of its own, perhaps unlawfully, ignoring the Central Tenders

Board Act when the RFP, Mr. President, really ought to come from the Central Tenders

Board. You have the private sector, the leaders who move this economy if they have

confidence in it—the Chamber of Commerce, the Trinidad and Tobago Manufacturers’

Association and the JCC—telling you to withdraw your RFP.

Then we have to listen to the Attorney General, honourable as he is, telling us that

he is doing something different, and that it is the grand leadership of the Prime Minister

that we must admire, and that they are inviting the nation tomorrow in an adoration of

an election of two years of the leader of the UNC. Mr. President, not even the party, but

the leader of the party. Are we to listen to the hon. Attorney General?

Mr. President, when you look at the Central Tenders Board information booklet,

which is to be gleaned as a PDF off their website, you would note that it says

specifically at page 1 that the Central Tenders Board Ordinance, now Act, applies in

respect of:

to dispose of surplus or unserviceable articles and real estate property;

60


Not only is this in the Act, it is in the Manual. So we are talking about public

procurement, we are talking about confidence in the economy, but really and truly

all that we are receiving is rhetoric from the Government. If there was any

discernible truth, the fact is that we ought to at the very least have an explanation

from the Government as to why it is not using the Central Tenders Board and the

Act in relation to the disposal of nearly $1 billion worth of our assets.

In a time frame where they permit only six weeks for RFPs to come back,

which are stated in the RFP as, must meet international standards. So, Mr.

President, if there is an explanation, and perhaps there is, the nation deserves to

hear it, because justice, and in this case transparency, ought not only to be done,

but must also be seen to be done, Mr. President.

I will raise a second point in this truncated form of debate that we are doing.

We have heard, Mr. President, in the nine minutes I have left by agreement, that

this Government has gone off to deal with the BRICs, the B-R-I-C countries, and

that by this engagement they are going to bring results for Trinidad and Tobago,

and kick-start the economy. Lots of words which are colourful, but what about the

very projects which we have here?

Let me take you to one example of a project, and I am talking specifically now

in relation to the Alutec project, Mr. President. The Alutec project, which, is not

the Alutrint project, which does not concern the smelter, is here in Trinidad and

Tobago from a South-South partner, the same South-South that the hon. Attorney

General asked us to take seriously. It is a Venezuelan company with global

connections, a leading entrepreneur and manufacturer of aluminium in the world

with plants around the world. Alutec is here.

What has this Government done in relation to a project on the table, Mr.

President? You know what it has done? Nothing. It has done nothing, Mr.

President. Alutec was stopped midstream. If you drive down to the plant you will

see steel up in the air, foundation cast, a statement that all of the equipment or

most of it is being stored in warehouses, two of them specifically, at a cost of

$100,000 a month, where the project is one which is 60 per cent the Sural Group

of Venezuela and 40 per cent the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, where that

project will yield 150 persons to be employed indirectly; and 48 persons directly.

But what happens? That equipment sits in a warehouse rotting. And do you know

what else happens? If we are to take the hon. Attorney General seriously, what

else happens? Is it that the Government just does not know that this is happening?

No, Mr. President.

61


I have in my possession a string of correspondence written to the hon. Carolyn

Seepersad-Bachan, when she was the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs, to

my learned friend, Sen. Kevin Ramnarine, and the hon. Minister of Trade and

Industry, Stephen Cadiz, begging and imploring this Government to put into

effect not only its agreement, Mr. President—because be they PNM or UNC there

is a continuity of governments—but begging them to bring to the table a project

which stands separate and distinct from the Alutrint project, which is able to start

immediately and one which may be expanded to include wire-rod processing of the

billets which they would produce at that plant, and other downstream industries.

Aluminium wheels, Mr. President, rims for cars, there is an immediate position. All of

the information resides in the hands of the Government, and what do we see? Precious

little.

The last point I would make, and that I know my learned colleague, Sen.

Deyalsingh, would take forward, is that there is a lot of devilling in the details of the

position given here. We must pay attention under the national security footing of

investigating why this Government is proud to have abandoned the Special Anti-Crime

Unit and, specifically, to have under-financed the Strategic Services Agency (SSA), as

could be seen in the information that came forward in the package which we received.

Mr. President, basically we have had a state of emergency which had been

launched and that brought no bearing in terms of real arresting of those who commit

crimes, because we have seen that the “dose of salts” that my learned friend, the

Attorney General, prescribed has worked on his own Government. I want hon.

Senators to pay attention to page 33 of the information provided to us, where the

Government is proud to say as a result of restructuring the SSA, that the agency did not

operate at full capacity, and that it saved $91 million in relation to the cessation of the

Special Anti-Crime Unit.

I say this in short summary conclusion that, had this Government kept the Special

Anti-Crime Unit, Mr. President, they would have had the brains and resources available

to work in coordination with the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service and with the

defence force to ensure that we had value for money, one; and that we actually had

success in stopping criminal activity in this country. Something which would have been

emboldened by the use of Offshore Patrol Vessels (OPVs), which were to come into

effect by February 2011, but for this Government’s action, Mr. President, and

something which would have worked in tandem with the helicopters, which my learned

friend, the Attorney General, ought to have recognized, are now the sole bastion of the

hon. Prime Minister, as her sole means of conveyance in Trinidad and Tobago,

they, in fact, forming a part of her Ministry.

62


Mr. President, by agreement in terms of keeping this debate tight, I ask that

these comments be noted by my learned colleagues; there would be a lot to be

said by my other colleagues.

I thank you. [Desk thumping]

Sen. Basharat Ali: Thank you, Mr. President. This being our first sitting in

this calendar year, I would like, on behalf of my colleagues, to extend to all the

Members of this Senate, best wishes for 2012 and hope that we see 2013 coming

up probably in better conditions than we are today.

I would also like, Mr. President, on behalf of myself and Members on my

Bench, to extend condolences to Sen. Dr. Bhoendradatt Tewarie and his family on

the passing of his father.

Mr. President, I plan to deal with a bit of arithmetic. I think we have done a lot

of economics and philosophy and everything else. I want to deal with two items,

in fact, which come out of the 2011 fiscal year budget.

3.40 p.m.

The first item is really the appropriation, the supplementation or the transfer,

if you wish, of the sum of $354,105,100, as requested by Trinidad Generation

Unlimited, as quoted in the document, to meet costs associated with the scheduled

takeover of the plant.

My problem, Mr. President, is one of identity—and I do not mean my own

identity. [Laughter] I mean, who is Trinidad Generation Unlimited? I have asked

some of my colleagues here and no one seems to know exactly who the entity is.

It should be well known because we know they have entered into a contract with

Ferrostaal and that comes even from the Ferrostaal website, which gives the

project, Natural Gas Combined Cycle Power Station, TGU; the plant capacity, 765

megawatts. That is more or less what we have here.

The configuration is six GE gas turbines and two GE steam turbines. The

company is Trinidad Generation Unlimited. It says “volume” here, but I think it is

the “value” of the contract that is US $705 million; completion date scheduled

2011. So, it is more or less as given in the Ministry’s statement. If I take those

numbers as given in our documentation, the cost of this contract—US $708

million—is really TT $4.5 billion.

Mr. President, I cannot vouch for the owners’ cost of approximately US $77

million, which is TT $485 million. So, overall, this is a large project in terms of

63


the capacity, 720 megawatts. It is well over what was required for one smelter and

I will come back to that.

Mr. President, in September 2011, the chairman of T&TEC—he is also well

known as the manager of the cricket team Red Force, Mr. Omar Khan—gave a

statement on the commissioning and bringing into operation of the Trinidad

Generation Unit Plant. He gave some numbers here about the 720-megawatt

capacity and he was saying here that 450 megawatts would have been used to

supply power to the proposed Alcoa aluminium smelter plant, which was

scrapped when the People’s Partnership took power last year. Only the 270

megawatts, the excess of the power supply, would have gone to the T&TEC

project.

I query that Mr. President, and the people who should have known about this

project would have been T&TEC because T&TEC, by a Presidential Order granting

exemption from duties and taxes—this Order dated January 30, 2009—in its

“whereases” says:

“…whereas Trinidad Generation Unlimited was declared to be an approved

generator of electricity by the Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission…

And whereas the Trinidad and Tobago Electricity Commission shall enter into a

Power Purchase Agreement with Trinidad Generation Unlimited:”

And it goes on to say what concession has been granted. So this has been there

since 2009, but I still do not know who TGU is. Who does? We will find out

sometime.

In Mr. Omar Khan’s, the chairman’s, statement or press release on this date,

September 13, 2011, he did say that there were three phases and that the first was

the 225 megawatts and I believe that may be what we call the Phase #1A. I see my

friend is nodding.

In the other place, the Member for Diego Martin North/East gave a figure of

450 megawatts in service and that would imply to me that all the gas generation

units have been commissioned and operational. There are six of those: three

would have given 225; the second three would have given 225, which would take

you to 450; and the only thing left is the final stage, which is the steam turbine

stage, which will take you up to 720 megawatts.

Still, I do not know who TGU is. I am surprised at the hon. Minister of Energy

and Energy Affairs because I got an excerpt from the website of the Ministry in a

copyrighted statement on independent power producers. It says:

64

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. ALI]

“Union Estate Power Station

Ownership: Trinidad Generation Unlimited (TGU), a locally registered

subsidiary of AES Global Inc.”

I have been to the website of AES Global Inc —I believe that is a company in

Arlington, Virginia, but there is no mention of anything related to this.

Continuing this same statement from the Ministry of Energy and Energy

Affairs:

“Capacity: 720MW”—we have heard that before—“combined cycle power

generation…

The Union Estate Power Station…will generate electricity to supply 240 MW

to the Alutrint Aluminium Complex…through two dedicated transmission

lines and a sub-station to be owned and operated by TTEC, with the extra

480MW going into the national grid.”

That is what we were looking at. Two hundred and forty megawatts was the

first requirement for 125,000-tonne-a-year smelter. I am left to surmise that the

decision must have been taken to put in a power plant which will double up the

capacity of this smelter. That is the only way I could have seen that size power

plant going into Union Estate without really all the distribution system. There is a

new substation there which is in service and I do not agree with some of the

comments I heard in the other place about the number of power failures, et cetera,

because, as far as I am aware, there were two failures. This is a new facility, so

the question then is really that there needs to be rationalization. If we do not have

that, then we have no smelter.

I do not know what the take-or-pay contract will be between T&TEC and TGU.

You may be able to help, hon. Minister, on that one. It could become a huge

burden, but, as I said, you can also look at rationalization. We have an old power

station very close to us here, Power Station B which could probably be phased

out. The original intent when they were talking smelter was to phase it out and get

another power station in the Sea Lots or Barataria area. I think that is one of the

tasks to be done.

This is one for the hon. Minister there. Is this still a local subsidiary of AES

Global Inc.? If it is, why are we providing Ministry of Finance funds to them? It

gets worse because, as I go along, the energy chamber on June 04, 2009 was

speaking of, “state company Trinidad Generation Unlimited”.

65


“State company…officially launched its combined cycle power plant at Union

Industrial Estate, La Brea.”

I even go further. There is a National Workers Union and at about the same

time—probably somewhere in 2009 also—and this union was one which was

representing the workers who were building the smelter at that time. They

claimed:

“The natural gas-fired power plant, which is 90% owned by the government,

is budgeted to cost US $708 million, of which US$400 million have already

been expended. The power plant is scheduled to be completed in July 2011.”

This is a union statement also; all this from various googling of websites.

I would like very dearly to know exactly who TGU is. Is there any

Government connection to it? Hon. Minister of Finance, you have given them

$354 million, but the bigger item is the total cost. The total cost of that project is

$708 million plus. So we are talking over $5 billion and I do not know how much

has been paid already. This here really is peanuts—the amount you have given

them there. Is it then a project signed with Ferrostaal, a very reputable company?

They have worked in Trinidad on many, many occasions on the Point Lisas

Industrial Estate. It may be that this is on the basis of supplier credit or such like

borrowing, but it is a big debt and how are we going to manage that debt and who

is the debtor?

If it is TGU, I think someone should tell us who TGU is. I would like to know

as soon as possible. I was of the opinion that this was a situation where we started

off with a smaller power plant. In fact, PowerGen was supposed to be the original

one to build a power plant to feed the 125,000-tonne-a-year smelter and they

would have installed something like a 500-megawatt unit. We have ended up with

a huge plant there now and we do not have any demand for it except that we can

phase out units.

There seems to be, and I appeal to the hon. Minister of Public Utilities to have

a really close look at that. Whoever it is, if it is government-to-government, it is

one thing; but if it is some other party, it is another matter. That is one of the areas

that I still feel very uncertain about and everybody gives me a different story.

3.55 p.m.

Mr. President, we are due just about now to complete the Tobago pipeline and

that was really a 2011 project, and quite a bit of finance was put into it. I

remember from the budget papers last year—not for this 2012, but for 2011—

66


there was mention of a company called Beowulf who would have been interested

in taking equity in a pipeline to go to Barbados in the first instance. The pipeline

from Cove to Barbados is a long pipeline, and I would give you the story of it.

I am thankful to the “Energy Insider” journalist, Mr. David Renwick, for

bringing to my attention in last week’s Business Express and the headline says,

“Second chance for Caribbean gas pipeline”. He has gone through the whole

story, but what really came out was that there was a press release from Eastern

Caribbean Gas Pipeline Company Limited, and they were announcing new

majority sponsors. That is the heading, and this is a press release from ECGPC.

May I read part of this, Mr. President? It says:

“Eastern Caribbean Gas Pipeline Company Limited (‘ECGPC’) is pleased to

announce that Beowulf Energy LLC...of New York and First Reserve Energy

Infrastructure Fund (‘FREIF’), with offices in Greenwich, Houston, Hong

Kong and London, have acquired a majority ownership interest in the

company which is developing a natural gas export pipeline from Trinidad and

Tobago to islands in the Eastern Caribbean.

In Phase I of the project, ECGPC will construct and operate a 300 kilometer

natural gas pipeline from the Cove Point Estate in Tobago to Barbados. Phase

II of the project will involve extending the pipeline from Barbados to other

Eastern Caribbean islands.”

That is about what I would read from this press release from ECGPC.

Mr. President, I had a fair idea of what that original project was because one

of the original investors was AIC Finance Limited, and I happened to be, in fact, a

member of the board of AIC Finance Limited at the time, and was overseeing

some of the work on the Caribbean pipeline system.

Mr. Renwick has a lot of details in this article with respect to the equity

sharing of the projects. I do not know whether this has happened already. In fact,

let me say what he said. He said that the original shareholding was 9 per cent of

the founder company ECGPC, and then I think it was 40.5 per cent to Guardian

Holdings, 40.5 to the Unit Trust Corporation, a State entity, that took over the

shareholding of AIC and, finally, our friend NGC was persuaded to take a 10 per

cent in the project.

So, according to Mr. Renwick, the shareholding now reads that Beowulf and

FREIF have 60 per cent shareholding by the divestment of GHL, UTC and NGC

shares. So there are just three shareholders, if there is an agreement, but I do not

67


know if that was finally agreed. I would expect the Minister of Finance, the

Minister of Public Utilities or the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs to be

able to say, because they are all involved.

My concern is that pipeline from NEO to Tobago was really anticipating the

extra Caribbean project, because in the budget document for 2012, it says:

“Tobago Pipeline Project—in support of initiative by GORTT to develop an

industrial estate in Tobago, NGC is constructing a 12-inch...diameter...54

km…subsea pipeline from the BHP Billiton’s Central Processing Platform...to

Cove Estate and related infrastructure to supply gas to meet the island’s long-

term domestic needs and to provide additional transportation capacity for third

parties.”

I go on to read another part:

“A natural gas supply was required by the end of 2010 with an overall likely

initial gas demand of 13mmscfd increasing over time to a maximum of 150

mmscfd...”

So what this is really saying is, that NGC installed a 12-inch pipeline, a 54-

kilometre pipeline, at a cost of $1.145 billion. As far as I can see from this

document that is another 80:20 debt-equity ratio as given in this state enterprises

document last year. So, once again, we have entered into this, and I would like

some confirmation as to whether that divestment of shares has taken place to give

Beowulf and the other partner this, and what would happen.

Mr. Renwick has quite a long article on it, and I do not doubt that he has got

all these figures right, but if this project is to go on—and I still have my doubts as

to whether it will go—he says that US $320 million or so is required to complete

the line. From my recollection though, in 2005 that project was supposed to be

somewhere around US $500 million by submarine line estimate, but it was going

to Guadalupe and Martinique. I doubt very much that US $320 million is still

correct, and I do not know whether this is now going to be treated as a project

with foreign partners. So, that is all I have to say on this matter. I do not know

whether the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs or the Minister of Public

Utilities will eventually make a comment on ECGPC and this Tobago gas pipeline,

because we have already put quite a bit of money into it.

If we are looking at our equity contribution with any other partners, then they

should take into account that we have really spent money because 13 mmscfd is

all that is required to run the gas engines in Tobago to generate electricity, and the

68


pipeline capacity is 150 mmscfd, and that is 13 times as much—12 times as much

as is required. I would like us to look at that matter very carefully and to let us

know what is happening.

There is one final item, and this is for the Minister of Energy and Energy

Affairs. I see from the variation of appropriation the Ministry, in fact, had an item

under “Head 40” for a shortfall in subsidy. I got frightened when I first saw it,

because I thought it was billions of dollars, but it was really millions of dollars—

an appropriation of $7,000,867 and it says a shortfall in subsidy raise sale of

petroleum products. Now, this is LPG, okay. It is LPG sales.

It is an anomalist situation. If you get your LPG from Petrotrin, it is at a

subsidized price. If you buy it from Phoenix Gas Processors Limited where the

Government owns 51 per cent, you are paying the market price. The reason is, I

think in the Levy and Subsidy Act it says that the gross margin is based on an ex-

refinery price plus. There are two manufacturing facilities: one is a refinery and

the other is a gas processor, but the gas processor can charge the market price and

Petrotrin has to do a subsidy. I think we need to look at that, because right now I

believe they might still be in that position where they have some offtake from

ECGPL. If the cat cracker is shut down that is what will be happening. So, I would

like the hon. Minister to look at that, because it is an odd situation where the same

product is being sold by two manufacturing facilities at different prices and it

means less subsidy, which is $7.9 million in subsidy, which is being appropriated

for the Ministry.

Those are the items I think I would like to speak to. I am asking questions, I

do not have any answer. I thank you very much. [Desk thumping]

The Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs (Sen. The Hon. Kevin

Ramnarine): Thank you very much, Mr. President. It is always a pleasure to

come after my senior. I am not a lawyer, we do not have senior counsels in the

energy sector.

Sen. Hinds: You must touch his foot. [Laughter]

Sen. The Hon. K. Ramnarine: A sign of respect for elders. First of all, I

want to start off, of course, by congratulating the Minister of Finance for, again,

coming to the Senate and bringing this Bill to us today. I also want to congratulate

the Trinidad and Tobago Cricket Team like everybody else. They put a great

smile on all our faces last night. [Desk thumping] I must specifically single out

the great joy that was brought to me by one Kieron Pollard, in the last over of that

game last night.

69


Of course, we must congratulate the Chinese community for the Chinese New

Year, the year of the dragon. [Desk thumping]

Mr. President, I would start off as I usually do, with a global snapshot. I know

there is a gentleman’s agreement here today that we do not exceed a certain time

limit, but it would be remiss of me as Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs if I

do not give a snapshot of what is happening in the world. From a scan of all the

recent literature, the world continues as it was when we read the budget three or

four months ago with a crisis in Europe. There is an economic slowdown in the

United States of America, and it is expected that several major economies of the

developing world will grow at very slow rates in the year 2012.

4.10 p.m.

In our own Caribbean region, our Caricom neighbours, their economies continue to

be typified by very sluggish growth, heavy debt burdens, and serious issues when it

comes to balance of payments, related to, of course, the fact that they are dependent on

the importation of oil to support their needs for power and transport. But, there is a

bright light in the Caribbean which I want to mention, and this is the economies of

Guyana and Suriname, which are growing by around four per cent to five per cent,

respectively, and that has a lot to do with the extractive industries in those countries. In

the case of Guyana, it is gold, and, of course you know the price of gold has been very

high, and this has led to exploration for gold in Guyana. In the case of Suriname, this is

related to their oil industry which has been doing very well in recent years.

Mr. President, when we look at a snapshot—there was a poll done today by

Reuters, which polled 600 of the leading economists in the world, with regard to their

views of the world economy. The poll came up with a number of 3.7 per cent for

economic growth for the entire world in 2012, which is a bit more optimistic than the

World Bank, which forecast 2.5 per cent. I just want to go through some of the growth

rates that Reuters put out today: Australia, 3.4 per cent; Brazil, 3.3 per cent—Australia

is a country that does not get much mention because it is not a BRIC country, but

Australia is a country with a very strong economy, it has been growing constantly for

the last 20 years—China, of course, 8.4 per cent; India, 7 per cent: Japan is now

recovering from a lost decade, as it is referred to, it is expected to grow by a rate of 1.8

per cent; and the world’s largest economy, still the United States, is expected to grow at

a rate of 2.2 per cent, but there is a caveat to that, and the caveat is that if the US House

and the US Senate do not get their act together, it could be as low as 0.3 per cent. I say

all this because Trinidad and Tobago is a small open economy that does not exist in a

bubble, but is interconnected with the global economy, and what happens at one

end of the planet affects us here in this country.

70

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. THE HON. K. RAMNARINE]

On a political front, I would mention that the Economist magazine has noted

that it is also a year of global political change. There are several major elections

taking place in the world this year. The United States expects to have a general

election this year for the election of a President, and we are already seeing how

that is heating up on the T.V. In China, they expect that the President would

change this year. President Hu Jintao would be stepping down, and in his place

the likely successor is the Vice-President, Xi Jinping.

In France, of course, this year, in the month of May, President Sarkozy is

facing a serious challenge for the presidency of that country. And not too far from

us, right next door, in the month of October, we have an election in our

neighbouring country, Venezuela, where President Chavez would be facing a

challenge to his leadership. He has been leading that country since 1999.

[Interruption]

Sen. Hinds: Who will challenge him?

Sen. the Hon. K. Ramnarine: Well, thus far, no challenger has emerged to

challenge the President, so—[Interruption]

Sen. Hinds: How unfortunate. [Laughter]

Sen. the Hon. K. Ramnarine: Mr. President, I want to deal quickly with a

matter which was raised by Sen. Basharat Ali. He asked several times: “Who is

TGU?”, I want to address that very early in my contribution. TGU stands for

Trinidad Generation Unlimited—I think he knows that. It is a 720-megawatt

power plant in La Brea, and it is broken up into three phases. Phase 1A is 225

megawatts of power, which is three gas turbines, each one doing 75 megawatts—

75x3=225. Phase 1A, was completed in August 2011. Phase 1B, which is another

three gas turbines, was completed in December 2011, and that is an additional 225

megawatts of power. So collectively, Phase 1A and Phase 1B, as the Senator

pointed out—450 megawatts of power.

Phase 2, which is the combined cycle phase, will bring on an additional 270

megawatts of power, bringing the grand total for TGU to 720 megawatts of power.

The Senator’s question really is: “Who is TGU?” He went to various websites and

so on, some of them outdated, but I will say who TGU is. TGU is owned by a

company called Union Estate Electrical Generating Company Limited. They hold

90 per cent of the shareholding in TGU, and that company is owned by the

Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. Ten per cent of the

71


shareholding is owned by a company called AES, which you mentioned in your

contribution. So, by and large, TGU’s, majority shareholder is the Government of

the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. To date, 450 megawatts of power are

available for domestic consumption in Trinidad and Tobago. I hope that answers

the question, Sen. Ali, as to: “Who is TGU”?

The other issue which he raised was the issue of the Eastern Caribbean gas

pipeline. The first leg of the NEO pipeline, as you mentioned, which goes from the

Angostura Field to Cove Estate in Tobago, has been completed. What has not

been completed is the receiving terminal for the natural gas in Cove Estate, and

that we estimate will be finished by April 2012, and once that is finished, the NGC

would be in a position to supply Tobago with natural gas for its power plant, and

the entire country, Trinidad and Tobago, will be getting all its power from natural

gas. At present, the power plant in Tobago is operating on diesel, which has to be

shipped to the island by maritime routes. So, I think that answers the question.

The question with respect to the Eastern Caribbean gas pipeline, you are

correct, the shareholding has changed. The founding shareholders have sold down

and a company called Beowulf Energy LLC/First Reserve Energy, are now the

majority shareholders with about 60 per cent of the shareholding. But, the salient

point with respect to the Eastern Caribbean Gas Pipeline Company, is that by and

large that project is a private sector venture, and the risk, therefore, is being borne

largely by private sector companies.

The Government of Trinidad and Tobago would be represented indirectly

through the Unit Trust Corporation, which I think has 15 per cent, and the NGC,

which I am sure, I think, has 10 per cent or 15 per cent.

Sen. Ali: Ten per cent.

Sen. The Hon. K. Ramnarine: Mr. President, the Senator is correct that they

have sold down and Beowulf, a private investor, is now the majority shareholder.

I just wanted to speak on the whole issue of the energy sector and plans for the

year 2012. As you know, it is always good in a debate like this to paint a picture

for the energy sector in any particular year. What we have been doing at the

Ministry of Energy and Energy Affairs is really trying to forecast activity in the

sector, and our research has indicated that in the year 2012, we expect that there

would be 95 wells drilled in Trinidad and Tobago, of which 15—Mr. President, I

know you are a man who is familiar with this industry, so you would understand

the jargon—of those 95 wells are exploration wells and 80 of them are what they

call development wells.

72


In the oil and gas business, exploration wells are really what you want to get

because these are the wells that find new reserves and new resources.

Development wells are simply drilled where you already know what you have,

but you want to produce more from it; you want to produce more from the oil

field or the existing gas field.

I want to give you some numbers because it is important to understand that the

economy is beginning to come back to life in 2012, after being stabilized very

successfully by the Minister of Finance in 2010 and 2011. Mr. President, in the

year 2009, not a very good year for the world economy, there was one exploration

well drilled in Trinidad and Tobago. In the year 2010, they were two exploration

wells drilled in Trinidad and Tobago. In the year 2011, we had six exploration

wells drilled in Trinidad and Tobago, and we expect that in 2012, 15 exploration

wells will be drilled in this country. [Desk thumping] So, that speaks volumes

about the level of activity taking place in the country.

When the Minister of Finance presented his budget last October, he said that

US $2.5 billion would be spent in the energy sector in the year 2012. We all know

that that—and I had mentioned in my contribution—was a conservative number

because we had not collected data from the smaller companies, and we expect that

it could range between US $2.5 billion to US $3 billion in the year 2012. And that

does not include investments in the downstream sector. So, it is a very

conservative number, but it speaks volumes for confidence in the economy and

activity in the energy sector.

Of course, in the year 2012, there are six separate seismic programmes taking

place in the country. Seismic is the precursor to exploration drilling. And those

six seismic programmes are taking place on the north coast or the north coast

marine area, by BP in the greater Cassia area, in Guayaguayare, in the Central

Range on land, and there are two other blocks that we expect would have seismic

work taking place this year. So, there is a tremendous amount of activity taking

place in the upstream sector.

I just wanted to highlight some of the companies because there are some very

good companies in Trinidad that have been working very hard to help us get our

reserves up. The majority of that exploration drilling will be done, in large part,

by three companies, and these three companies are: Parex Resources, together

with their partner Primera Energy Resources; Bayfield Energy Resources, a

company from Canada which is called Niko, and they have a subsidiary call

Voyager.

73


Bayfield is expected to drill three exploration wells in the year 2012, in a field

called Trinity Field, which was long abandoned. Sen. Ali would probably

remember that because it was a field that was developed in the 1960s. They are

bringing this oilfield back to life. And, we expect that Parex Resources, together

with their partner Primera, will drill six exploration wells in 2012, and Niko

would drill two exploration wells. So, Mr. President, that is the level of activity

taking place in the upstream sector.

In the month of October, I toured the Westshire Rig, which was a

semi-submersible rig that came to Trinidad to work on behalf of its client bpTT,

and bpTT intends to use the Westshire Rig this year to drill a total of six wells in

the Serrette, Savonnette and Immortelle fields. So, bpTT is going to have a very

busy year in 2012.

Mr. President, when we look at the level of interest—the Attorney General

spoke about a new world economic order. There is a new world economic order,

whether we like it or not. It is a natural feature of the evolution of economies that

the industrialized economies of the west are becoming very mature and are

moving towards more service type economies, while the economies of the

developing world—like Brazil, China, India and Russia—are becoming more

industrialized.

Mr. President, a couple hours ago, while we had lunch, I went to the Hyatt

next door, and I was able to meet with some investors who were here. They are

from a company called Severstal. Severstal is the eighth largest iron and steel

company in the world. It is a Russian company, and they are partnering with a

company called Metaldom, which is a Dominican Republic company. The other

partner in that equation is our very own Neal and Massy Energy.

I was able to meet with them briefly during our lunch hour and just hear their

plans. They have signed a memorandum of understanding with the National

Energy Corporation for the construction of a direct reduced iron, hot briquetted

iron plant in La Brea. So, this is a show of confidence in the economy. But, when

I met with Severstal in July 2011, upon becoming Minister of Energy and Energy

Affairs, I asked Severstal whether the decision of the Government to waive the

visa requirement for Russian citizens had anything to do with their interest and

their appetite for investment in Trinidad and Tobago, and the answer was, yes. So,

that is a policy of this Government that has reaped rewards for the people of

Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk thumping] I want to put on record, our appreciation

for the hard work that is being done by the Minister of Foreign Affairs and

Communication. He was in the Senate earlier today.

74


We have also, at the level of the NGC—and this is a company-to-company

MOU—a signed memorandum of understanding with the Tanzanian Petroleum

Company. This is an extremely historic memorandum of understanding. It is the

first MOU being signed by a Trinidad and Tobago company with a company in

Africa. Tanzania, like other countries in Africa like Ghana and countries like

Liberia are becoming oil and gas-producing nations. Tanzania has had significant

discoveries of natural gas, and quite naturally they are looking at Trinidad and Tobago

for guidance and direction because they see us as a country to emulate. And therefore,

as the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs, I totally support the move by the

National Energy Corporation and the NGC to enter into this memorandum of

understanding with the Tanzanian Petroleum Company.

4.25 p.m.

So, one of the mandates, Mr. President, that the National Gas Company (NGC) has

been given by the Ministry of Energy and Energy Affairs is to go global, because the

time has come for the NGC to spread its wings outside of Trinidad and Tobago. NGC is

probably our most lucrative state enterprise, with some of our most qualified citizens

running the company, and working for that company, and the NGC has been looking at

possible business ventures in Africa, in Latin America, and they have even gone to

India with us, but I will talk a bit more about India as we move on.

With respect to projects, there is quite a long list of projects which will be executed

and completed in the year 2012. We expect to complete a fish-landing facility in

Guayaguayare. You may ask what does a fish-landing facility have to do with the

energy sector? Well, this fish-landing facility is being built by the National Energy

Corporation for the people of Mayaro, Guayaguayare, free of charge. It is a state-of-

the-art fish-landing facility, and it is really a corporate, social responsibility intervention

by the NEC in that community. We expect that project to be finished in March 2012.

I also want to report that work has started, Mr. President, on the Galeota Port. The

Galeota Port was a project that was conceptualized by the previous administration, but

because of a land dispute, they were not able to start the project. We have dealt with

that whole issue of the land dispute, and the construction work on the Galeota Port

commenced in November 2011, and is expected to be completed by early 2014.

So, whereas that project had lingered and languished for three years, we have been

able to get the Galeota Port going. And why is that important? It is important

because those of you who know Chaguaramas would find it very strange that

when you go to Chaguaramas you see the logistics bases for all the major

upstream companies there. And you ask yourselves the question, why are they

75


there and not on the east coast, where the majority of business are? There is great

cost associated with having to move equipment from Chaguaramas all the way

down to the east coast, and that is because we never had a proper port facility on

the east coast to support the upstream oil and gas sector.

So, this is what this Galeota Port has done. And my vision, Mr. President, for

Galeota is that Galeota would become to Trinidad and Tobago what Aberdeen,

Scotland is to the North Sea in the United Kingdom. What could possibly come

out of this is the development of a new city in the eastern part of Trinidad and

Tobago.

This year, too, we also expect to complete the gasoline optimization

programme—and the Attorney General spoke quite a lot about the cost overruns

on the gasoline optimization programme—we expect to complete that project by

the middle of the year 2012. We also expect, by the end of this year, December

2012, we would have completed the ultra low sulphur diesel plant, which is

another project which had experienced some schedule slippages on the Pointe-a-

Pierre Refinery.

We also expect that the multifuel pipeline and the gantry at Caroni, which

many of you all see, those large white tanks, would be completed by April 2012.

And as I mentioned before, we expect to formally commission Phase 1, which is

Phase 1A and Phase 1B of TGU, sometime in February of 2012.

The NGC also expects to complete this year, Mr. President, its work on the

Phoenix Park Valve Station. As I mentioned, we also expect to complete the gas-

receiving facility in Tobago to receive natural gas from the Angostura Field.

With respect to CNG, work is going on in two new industry sites as we

speak—one is at Brentwood in Chaguanas and the other one is in Tacarigua, and

the CNG initiative continues. I do not want to pre-empt my colleague, the Minister

of Transport, but the Minister of Transport and I have been working very closely

together with respect to the CNG initiative, and one of our objectives this year is to

convert the PTSC fleet from diesel powered to CNG powered. So, the CNG

initiative continues in the year 2012.

Mr. President, a few weeks ago, I was very privileged to be a part of the Prime

Minister’s delegation to India. I was accompanied by my ministerial colleagues in

the Senate, Sen. The Hon. Emmanuel George, Minister of Public Utilities, Sen.

The Hon. Fazal Karim, Minister of Science, Technology and Tertiary Education,

and Sen. The Hon. Devant Maharaj, the Minister of Transport. And I can only

report that it was an extremely humbling experience, for me personally, to see the

76


level to which the Indian Government went out of its way to roll out the red carpet

for the Trinidad and Tobago delegation. And speaking as a Minister from a

country of 1.2 million people to a Minister of Energy of a country of 1.2 billion

people, was a very humbling experience.

While we were in India, the energy delegation—which comprised persons

from the National Energy Corporation, the NGC, Petrotrin and Lake Asphalt—met

with some of the largest companies in India in the energy sector. We met with

GAIL, the Gas Authority of India Limited. We met with Engineers India Limited,

which is India’s largest EPC contractor, engineering procurement and

construction. We met with ONGC Videsh, which is India’s largest upstream oil

and gas company, and a Fortune 500 company, and we met with Essar, and we

met with Reliance. In total, we met with the eight largest energy companies in

India.

The interest in Trinidad and Tobago is significant. ONGC Videsh had an

interest in Trinidad and Tobago in 2006, and they had actually bid on a block and

they had won the block. Then, the world economy went south and they withdrew

their interest from Trinidad and Tobago. We were able to get them to renew their

interest in this country, to the point that they have already contacted the Ministry

of Energy and Energy Affairs for information with relation to the upcoming deep

water bid round.

So, Mr. President, I want to put on record my appreciation for the work that

was done by the Indian Government, and, indeed, by our High Commission in

New Delhi. We believe that there would be tangible rewards and tangible benefits

coming out of our trip to India.

Mr. President, there is one issue—I know that we are constrained for time. In

the debate in the other place that happened on Friday, there was constant

reference by Members of the Opposition, in particular, the Leader of the

Opposition—I listened to his contribution, and the contribution of the Member of

Parliament for Diego Martin North/East. There was constant reference to the

Henry Hub price, and they sought to paint the picture that we should be alarmed

that the Henry Hub has now dipped below $3 per MMBtu.

Mr. President, on that day, while listening to them, I issued a press release

from the Ministry of Energy and Energy Affairs, which was carried in the

Guardian over the weekend. What this press release essentially says, is that there

is no need to worry about the Henry Hub price in Trinidad and Tobago anymore.

77


In the year 2005, according to this press release, Mr. President, 89 per cent of

our LNG went to the United States. And, of course, the Henry Hub is the price

marker in the United States. This situation, Mr. President, I wish to report to the

Senate, the Parliament and to the people of Trinidad and Tobago, has been

dramatically reversed—in 2011, only 19 per cent of our LNG went to the United

States of America. So, Trinidad and Tobago is, therefore, no longer a prisoner of

the Henry Hub price. So, when you see the Henry Hub price and you see stories

on the Internet that the Henry Hub is at record lows, this is not something to be

overly worried about. Yes, some of our gas still goes to the United States but, by

and large, the majority of our gas, 81 per cent of our gas, goes to South America,

Europe and Asia.

Right now, the price of gas in Europe, in mid-January—the spot and the marker in

Europe is called the National Balancing Point in the UK. The price in the UK right

now—and this is not the net back price, and I wish I had more time to explain this, the

price which is used in the budget, the US $2.75, is a combination of the net back price

and the domestic price. Sixty per cent of our gas is exported and, therefore, that is the

net back price, and 40 per cent is domestic sales, which are sales that the NGC makes,

and that is how we come up with the price of US $2.75.

But, the point that I want to close with is that Trinidad and Tobago’s LNG business

has changed, we are no longer beholden to the United States as our main market. In

fact, in 2011, 21 per cent of our LNG cargoes found their way to Asia. When we met

with the Indian Government, they pointed out to us that six of our cargoes had come to

India in the year 2011, and that they would like to have more LNG from Trinidad

coming to that country, given that they generate most of their power from coal. Coal, of

course, as you know, is not the cleanest burning fuel in the world.

So, these are some of the discussions that we had in India, and I just wanted to put

on record this issue of the gas price and the Henry Hub. One of the things that I will be

doing is to communicate with the media houses in Trinidad and try to enlighten them a

bit about how the LNG market has changed in Trinidad and Tobago. So, Mr. President,

with those few words, I thank you very much.

Sen. Terrence Deyalsingh: I thank you, Mr. President, for the opportunity to

speak on the Finance (Supplementation and Variation of Appropriation) (Financial

Year 2011) Bill, 2012.

First of all, let me join with everyone else in congratulating the Chinese on their

New Year, the Year of the Dragon. Let me also congratulate Sen. David Abdulah

on his appointment as political Leader of the Movement for Social Justice (MSJ),

78

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. DEYALSINGH]

and also congratulate the hon. Attorney General on his attainment of silk, and also

express my condolences on the Tewarie family on the passing of Sen. The Hon.

Tewarie’s father whom I knew very well. Both Sen. Faris Al-Rawi and myself

visited Sen. The Hon. Tewarie at his home, at the wake last Thursday, and we

expressed our condolences on behalf of the People’s National Movement.

Sen. The Hon. Tewarie’s father and my father were quite close. We lived on

Southern Main Road, Curepe together, and I have very fond memories of visiting

Mr. Tewarie’s shop. After my father would pay me for working in the hardware,

with about $1, I was able to walk down to Mr. Tewarie’s shop and buy a little tub

of Canning’s ice cream, chocolate, and a Mandrake comic book [Interruption]

Hon. Senator: With a $1.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: Yes, with $1. You would get a little tub of ice cream and

a Mandrake comic book from Mr. Tewarie’s shop. [Interruption]

Sen. Beckles: What year is that?

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: That is 1966/1967, around there.

Sen. Al-Rawi: The year of the Cortina. Watch your time.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: The year of the Cortina. So, I press on. Mr. President, it is the

habit of the Hon. Attorney General to aspire to be a boxer like Muhammeed Ali, “float

like a butterfly and sting like a bee”. He floats into the Parliament, he floats into the

Senate, makes his claims in the most volcanic manner and then leaves, so we cannot

rebut. He made certain allegations about UdeCott, Calder Hart and so on, and while

some of those allegations may be true, it was the subject of the Uff Commission. There

is an Uff Report.

I want to pick up on a point my colleague, Sen. Al-Rawi spoke about, which is the

Invaders Bay project. This Government talks about transparency and accountability.

The requests for proposals went out in August 2011. Mr. President, I read from an

article:

‘“Movie Towne’s Derek Chin to open T&T to the world.’”

Published in July of 2011, before the RFPs went out. And I want any Government

Senator on that side to tell me that this does not smack of the potential for corruption.

He goes on to say—this is before the RFPs.

“I met 19 Cabinet ministers over the last six months. The next minister I am

meeting is Bhoe Tewarie, Minister of Planning. He wants to see me. I also

met with Jearlean John, UdeCott chairman. She also loves it,…”

79


And it goes on. You have a man here, who has an inside track with 19

Government Ministers, and then two weeks later you announce a request for

proposal in the newspaper giving new people six weeks to put together a request

for proposal. Is that accountability and transparency? I say, no. Can anyone on

that side rebut this; that the Invaders Bay project is ripe for corruption to the tune

of over TT $1 billion?

4.40 p.m.

Mr. President, this allocation that the hon. Minister of Finance seeks, a further

issue of $2.7 billion from the Consolidated Fund, I want to put this in the context

of what has transpired in this Parliament in the recent past. Notwithstanding the

fact that the hon. Minister of Finance had originally predicted growth of I think

2.7 per cent for 2011, then had to be revised downwards, I want to put that in the

context of what transpired in this Parliament on Friday, September 08, 2011, a

mere one month before the 2012 budget. A one-month period before the 2012

budget, we had three Motions debated here:

Motion No.1, to increase the guarantee of loans under the Companies Act,

from $9 billion to $25 billion.

Motion No. 2, to increase the legal limit for borrowing under Development

Loans Act, from $20 billion to $30 billion.

Motion No. 3, to increase borrowings under the External Loans Act, from $9

billion to $15 billion.

This is before the 2012 budget. And we posed the question on this side, if you

have a budget in one month, why are you coming with this now? The 2012 budget

was passed I believe on October 10, 2011, in the Lower House. And here we are

again, three months later, looking for another $2.7 billion from the Consolidated

Fund.

What budgeting process is this Government using to come up with their

budgets? You have a budget in October, but you come a month before to increase

the debt ceiling. You got that. You brought the biggest budget ever in October

2011, third year of consecutive budget deficits, then we come back three months

later to allocate another $2.7 billion from the Consolidated Fund.

I want to pose some pointed questions to the Government. Would the

Government have been asking for another $2.7 billion from the Consolidated

Fund if people were paying their property taxes since 2011? Political careers have

been resurrected and made on the bandwagon of “Axe the Tax”. Woodford

80


Square was ablaze with the white of the COP. But yet, three years later for the

third consecutive year, no one in Trinidad is paying their land and building taxes.

[Desk thumping] People want to pay their taxes, because they want the goods and

services, especially the services that those land and building taxes bring about.

Sen. Ali: You like to pay taxes?

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: I like to pay my fair share of taxes Sen. Ali. [Desk

thumping] and I want to pay my land and building taxes. I will tell you the land

and building taxes I pay are woefully inadequate. Would we be here today, hon.

Minister, if the Point Fortin Highway, the financing for the Point Fortin Highway,

was well thought out? And I go back to the Commonwealth Parliamentary

Association Meeting/Conference being held at the Hyatt. During that conference,

on the second day, the Reshmi Ramnarine affair was the news of the day, the

“Reshmi-gate”. I have put it here before, and I put it again, there was no intention

to start that highway. When “Reshmi-gate” broke they had to change the

headlines and change the news. So what did we do? Well in those days the

helicopter was not being used. We drove down to Point Fortin and we announced

a highway.

I say that because the documents provided—the Senate documents— and the

Minister speaks about, working for a mechanism, financial discipline, that Nidco

be authorized to source funds in the sum of $7.5 billion on the local and

international market for the project. Do you start the project and then look for

financing? Or do you look for financing and then start the project?

Originally it was said the finances would have come from the IADB. No such

thing ever existed. But here we are, the project has been started to change the

headlines from Reshmi Ramnarine; and Reshmi Ramnarine’s name must go down

in the annals of this country as one of the most despicable acts ever perpetrated on

this country by any Government.

So you start the highway, you do not have financing in place and then you

come now to look for financing; you now authorize Nidco to look for financing.

Is this financial discipline? Is this fiscal conservatism that we come to expect? I

say no. Would we be seeking an extra $2.7 billion if there was not alleged

corruption at the PURE Programme, which has been the subject of reams of

newspaper articles? Reams! I think not.

So that is not financial discipline. Because under financial discipline of this

Government—and I am glad the Minister of Energy just spoke: he spoke about

converting the buses to diesel, from diesel to CNG, I agree. And all Government

81


vehicles should be converted because when you use Government vehicles for

improper uses, it is a drain on the economy. And I make reference to a UNC

parade in Debe, led by a blue Nissan TIDA. I have the licence plate number, but I

would not repeat it a UNC motorcade in Debe/Penal where you have two Regional

Corporation vehicles, a 12-seater van and a pickup, using the country’s gas in a

UNC motorcade. The distinction between State and Government is becoming

blurred by the day.

Mr. President, the Government pats itself on the back over the Clico issue, and

I warn the Government if it continues to pat its back as often as it does, they will

suffer from rotator cuff syndrome—you know when you do that too much, your

rotator cuff is going to go. They celebrate themselves too often. And after the

rotator cuff goes from patting their backs, they might have to pat their back like

this (Showing gesture) then they will get tennis elbow. Be careful. As they

continue to pat themselves on the back, they might get their paid bloggers from

UWI to write articles. Then they might get carpal tunnel-syndrome. Then when

that fails, they will get people to phone in to CNC 3 and TV6 and press the phone

to corrupt the surveys, then their fingertips will bleed and they will get whitlows

in their fingers, and I say this over the Clico issue. I know the matter is sub judice;

I will not say anything that may prejudice the proceedings, but it is public

knowledge. There are three matters before the high courts, one being a class

action suit.

We on this side have warned the Government that what they were doing with

the Central Bank (Amdt.) Bill could potentially be illegal. Do not celebrate the

Clico issue too much. Do not give yourself silk, taffeta and cotton too soon. The

champagne you want to pop on the Clico issue, send it back to France. The cotton

you want to give yourself, send it back to Louisiana. The taffeta, send it back to

the mill, and the silk you want to give yourself, send, it back to the silk worms

because this Clico issue is not dead.

Mr. Dookeran: You wish.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: I wish? You will hear what the courts say, hon. Minister,

you will hear what the courts say.

I turn to energy. The hon. Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs, bright

young man that he is, mentioned the fact that whilst we used to be the major

supplier of gas to the Eastern seaboard—he then fast-forwarded to 2011, saying

that we are no longer so. May I remind the hon. Minister, who is now absent, it

was the last administration that took the decision, around 2007/2008, to move

82


away from being a dominant player on the US seaboard to sending gas to Europe,

South America and Puerto Rico. But the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs

conveniently forgets that.

Sen. Al-Rawi: It is in the Hansard.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: Because nothing that PNM does is right. It is PNM policy

to divest away from being a monopoly supplier to the Eastern seaboard that has

this country afloat today. [Desk thumping] But I congratulate the UNC for

following through on that. So just to fill in that lacuna in Sen. Ramnarine’s

presentation that the reason why this economy is afloat today is because of that

policy. And he is right. Because, we no longer have to depend on and be held

prisoner, as he says, to Henry Hub. Because the price we get for gas on the

international market is higher than the Henry Hub price. But what I would like the

Minister of Finance or the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs to say is what

really is the net back price we are getting even considering transportation and

regasification cost? What is the extra profit we are making on gas exports over the

$2.75 Henry Hub price? It will be interesting to find out that.

Mr. Dookeran: Two dollars and ninety-three cents.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: Two dollars and ninety-three cents? Excellent. But PNM

is good for nothing. It is PNM policy to divest away from bringing a monopolistic

supplier to the Eastern seaboard that is giving you hon. Minister the breathing

room that you have today. Would you admit that sir?

Mr. Dookeran: [Nods head].

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: Thank you. Thank you. Mr. President, Sen. Ramnarine

spoke about exploratory wells. When does he plan to increase gas exploration?

Could Sen. Ramnarine have said, is it true that one successful bidder on the last

rounds has reneged on their contracts? He did not say. I would love to know.

Sen. Ramnarine also spoke about agreements. Did this Government consider it

appropriate to honour the agreement we have with the Shinar Group, which

became one of the world’s foremost experts in gas? We had an opportunity to

enter the Ghanaian Market in our hands under the last administration. This

administration changed that policy; changed it, threw it out, and today, it just

languished on the desks of the UNC. Today, Shinar is one of the major players in

gas. The same thing has to go with the Alutech Plant. Why was the Alutech not—

not the Alutrint—the Alutech Plant a joint venture with the Sural Group

continued? Questions need to be answered.

83


Mr. President, honouring the gentleman's agreement we have, the hon.

Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs did not elaborate on the involvement of

the Reliance Group in Petrotrin. I read an article from the Business Guardian of

Saturday January 21, 2012. On Tuesday, Roget told the Guardian:

“We are radically opposed to privatization of Petrotrin’s assets, whether it is to a

local or foreign company.”

Referring to the Reliance Group of India.

From the Reliance Group’s website:

“The Reliance Group…is India’s largest private sector enterprise…it has revenues

in excess of US $58 billion.”

Our budget is TT $54 billion. This company is 6.3 times bigger than Trinidad and

Tobago. The reason I raised private sector equity by Reliance into Petrotrin is this: I am

not debating the pros and cons of Reliance buying into Petrotrin; that is for the

Government to decide. But I raised this because—Sen. Abdulah is here, and I am glad

he is here—under the last administration when the Royal Bank of Canada was buying

out Royal Bank of Trinidad and Tobago there was a hue and cry from the labour

movement, and Sen. Abdulah marched and spoke, asking the PNM Government to

intervene and to block the sale because he was philosophically opposed to foreign

investors buying over local assets.

4.55 p.m.

I want to know, because I want the labour movement to have some comfort that

Petrotrin’s assets are not being sold out to the Reliance Group, a company which is six

times larger than the economy of Trinidad and Tobago. What is the philosophy behind

the Reliance Group coming into Petrotrin, coming into Trinidad? We need a statement.

I neither support the move nor speak against the move. That is your business. But I

want comfort for Mr. Roget and comfort for those who are philosophically opposed to

the selling out of State assets to foreign companies. [Desk thumping]

I now go to fiscal policy. The Minister of Finance has spoken loosely about review

of the tax regime. While I have no problem with a review, the question is—under the

People’s National Movement, both corporate taxes and individual taxes are at record

low levels—is this review to look at more tiers, less tiers? I want to pose the question:

Can you promise me, or tell this country in your wrap-up, there will be no new taxes?

Because, you see, just this review raises questions. What does a review mean? So I

think the airy-fairy notion of a review has to be addressed, especially if

corporation tax is to be increased, because if corporation tax is increased, we

know what that does to employment and unemployment.

84


Does a review of the tax system mean you are reviewing our tax collection?

Because, when you came into office you ditched everything for the Revenue

Authority. My understanding is that the transfer pricing policy which was

mentioned in the 2012 budget—I support it; it is a good idea; it is something that

needs to be done, but my information is that the Board of Inland Revenue does

not have the personnel or the systems to implement transfer pricing. I would like a

statement telling me and telling the country what is the position of the Board of

Inland Revenue to make it a better tax collection agency, and if the Board of

Inland Revenue is or is not capable of implementing the transfer pricing policy.

The Minister of Finance, when he was winding up his original debate, spoke about

a safe country. Crime is one of our major concerns. And if you will forgive me, when

Mr. Martin Joseph was being beaten like a Good Friday “bobolee” all over Trinidad

and Tobago—I have some newspapers clippings from when Mr. Martin Joseph was the

Minister of National Security. “Six killed over holy weekend”. “Four homes robbed in

three days”. “Twenty murders in 14 days”. “Eight killed over holiday weekend”.

Sorry, Mr. President, these newspaper clippings were not when Martin Joseph

was—these are actually December last year and January this year. I am sorry. I do

apologize. These are newspapers headlines: “Twenty murders in 14 days”—after the

UNC Manifesto, written by Dr. Bhoe Tewarie as one of the major authors, said there

will be a 100-day plan to deal with crime. This is after a state of emergency—

Sen. George: On a point of order, Mr. President—35(1).

Mr. President: The Member may continue his contribution. [Desk thumping]

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: Thank you, Mr. President. Because, you see, the Schedule on

page 10, under heading 22, talks about the Ministry of National Security. Am I not

allowed to talk about crime under this heading? Thank you.

So those are headlines in January 2012 after we were told after a state of

emergency there will be a long-term plan to deal with crime. Martin Joseph was the

Good Friday “bobolee”. There were calls for his resignation by the fathers and

forefathers of people sitting opposite. But what has happened is simple. The

Government is no longer responsible for crime. Do you know that? Under the PNM it

was the Government’s fault, but under this administration it is not the Government’s

fault. Do you know how I know? Because on CNC 3, Minister of Planning and the

Economy, Bhoe Tewarie—and I am sorry he is not here—gave an interview, and this is

what he said, verbatim—and I have the recording at home and CNC 3 has the

recording, so no need to send 24 police officers to my home or to CNC 3. We will

give it to you voluntarily, hon. Minister. [Desk thumping]

85


This is what your Cabinet colleague said: Government should not bear the

burden. He does not know if blame can be ascribed to the Government. We must

look at the problem systematically. Trinidad and Tobago is a drug trans-shipment

point and he is not being diplomatic when he said the forces, that is, the police,

the military, customs and immigration, are complicit. All of a sudden it is not the

Government’s fault. Hon. Minister of National Security, Brig. John Sandy, is

included in this. Did Sen. Tewarie, when he knew all this, pass this information

on to the Minister of National Security or the Prime Minister? I think not.

On the issue of being prudent with finance, one must now turn to an article in the

Trinidad and Tobago Express of September 07, 2011 by Ria Taitt. I am quoting Mr.

Dookeran.

“$11.5 million for the acquisition of a helicopter.”

`Now, former Prime Minister, Mr. Patrick Manning, like Mr. Martin Joseph, was

beaten like a Good Friday “bobolee” over talk about a plane—never bought it. But now

we have a Prime Minister who uses a helicopter for internal transport within Trinidad

and Tobago. No wonder she cannot see the Tarouba Road that the Attorney General

speaks about. It is my information—and I want somebody to explain to me why it takes

three helicopters to transport one person; the lead helicopter in front and two forming a

“V” behind. But yet we want to buy a plane to look for squatters. Is it not better to use a

helicopter that can hover to look for squatters, than a plane which just flies over? .

Where is the financial prudence in this? Where is the fiscal conservatism in buying

an extra plane when you have helicopters, which should be patrolling our coastlines?

We have no OPVs, but we have three helicopters. Do not forget the helicopter unit was

taken away from the hon. Minister of National Security, in addition to the dogs. Could

anybody tell me why a Prime Minister’s Office wants to have control over the canine

unit and the helicopters? Why does that not reside in the hands of the Minister of

National Security? Somebody needs to explain that to me; a Prime Minister using three

helicopters for internal travel within Trinidad and Tobago.

Ms. Beckles: We are a big country.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: We “ain’t” that big. Not one, not two, but three helicopters. I

suppose we could blame the PNM as usual. The mantra is: Blame the PNM.

So I know we have a gentleman’s agreement to keep things short and I intend to

stick to it. On the issue of crime, I just leave with a saying. The hon. Prime

Minister said crime can be fought on the streets, not on the seas. Does anybody

remember that claim? Cancel the OPVs; “we will fight crime on the streets.” Now

86


we are hearing we are going to buy OPVs, the same OPVs that are in arbitration,

spending millions of dollars with basically the same specs, which are sold to

Brazil. Fiscal conservatism: “we will now fight crime not on the seas but on the

streets.”

We fought crime on the streets with the state of emergency; we were promised

a crime plan to make the gains made under the state of emergency to be a

permanent thing, but the headlines are saying if this murder rate continues, we

end up in 2012 with over 500 murders at the current rate. Where is the crime

plan? Martin Joseph was beaten like a Good Friday “bobolee”.

Hon. Senator: We hear that four times already, boy.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: And I will say it again. Martin Joseph was beaten like a

Good Friday “bobolee”.

Hon. Senator: One more time.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: And I could say it again. Mr. Patrick Manning was

beaten like a Good Friday “bobolee” over crime. Where is the plan? We are going

to have over 500 murders—

Mr. President: Senator, you are straying from the debate. I allowed you some

amount of latitude, but I do not see the connection with the present matter to the

debate.

Sen. T. Deyalsingh: And I fully agree with you, Mr. President; fully agree

with you. So I close by saying, what is the crime plan? How are we going to

decrease this murder rate and make sure we do not end up with more blood on our

hands?

Mr. President, I thank you.

Sen. Helen Drayton: Thank you, Mr. President. I will be very brief. I want to

address just a few matters and, through you, to the Minister, and this has to do

with the supplementation of the appropriation for fiscal year 2011, under heading

18: Colonial Life Insurance Company, $748.2 million, and the Hindu Credit

Union, $100 million, which accounts for roughly nearly 70 per cent or 60 per

cent, or whatever it is, of the appropriation.

There are several important matters which are outstanding. We can pay these

funds out now, simply because it was the Senate that passed or approved the Bills

with respect to the purchase of certain rights and validation, and also the Central

Bank Bill. These matters that are outstanding, one had to do with an independent

87


risk assessment committee to give an oversight of the regulatory system; that was

a matter raised because we were very concerned that some of the institutions that

may have been responsible for the Clico debacle were the very institutions we

were entrusting to oversee the restructure. At the time the Minister mentioned that

some work had been done, and as months move on there will be some report. So I

am asking the Minister to give us an update in his wrap-up of this session.

The second item had to do with a report with respect to the restructuring and

systemic risk exposure. It was agreed—a commitment was made by the

Government that a report will be submitted every three months to the court.

Again, that was because of the concern expressed by Members of this House with

respect to oversight of the restructure. The Government also agreed that the report

would be laid simultaneously in Parliament. It is now more than three months

and, therefore, I am asking the Government to account for this report.

The third has to do with the fact that we were very concerned with respect to

removal of citizens’ rights with access to judicial process. It was agreed that the

statute of limitations will be amended and that that particular legislation would be

laid in Parliament—I remember the month of January was mentioned—also with

the Finance Bill, 2011.

So, I am asking the Minister to advise this Senate whether the Finance Bill

would be laid this month, January, and whether the legislation that they

committed to would be brought to the Senate.

5.10 p.m.

The fourth: moneys are being paid out, but it was agreed again, because of

serious concerns that were raised—the question was asked, whether or not the

offer or payout will be an offer without some kind of vetting and scrutiny by the

Board of Inland Revenue and by the institutions that deal with financial integrity.

The Minister then said that it ought to be given consideration and that he would

undertake to discuss it with the relevant bodies before any conclusion as to how it

could work, if it could work—of course, he expressed the fact that we would not

want to deny another right.

So therefore I am asking the Government to account to us now. These were

very important commitments, and the commitments were made on the basis, that

the Bills at the time would have been approved. I thank you, Mr. President.

88


Senator David Abdulah: Thank you very much, Mr. President. I too, wish—

as we are having the first Sitting for 2012—to all Members of this honourable

Senate the very best for 2012. I also wish to express my own condolences to

Minister of Planning and the Economy, Sen. The Hon. Dr. Bhoendradatt Tewarie,

and his family, on the untimely passing of his father. I join with others in terms of

congratulations for our cricket team on their performance last night in winning the

Caribbean T20 Championship [Desk thumping] And if I may, Mr. President,

make a small plug for my own village—the village which I have been living in

now for more than 25 years— the village of Preysal. Of course, Denesh Ramdin,

the captain of the Trinidad and Tobago cricket team, is from Preysal, as is Ravi

Rampaul and a number of outstanding young cricketers. Preysal has done very

well indeed. [Desk thumping]

Mr. President, the specific piece of legislation that we are considering is really quite

simple, as was explained by the Minister and repeated by a number of colleagues. It

really seeks to address the 2011 fiscal year and to ensure that all the i’s are dotted and

the t’s are crossed, so to speak—with respect to that fiscal year. Of course, given the

fact that it is a Bill that deals with the finances and the budget of the country, it gives

the opportunity for everyone to engage in a mini-budget debate. It is good, however,

that we are keeping our comments quite short this afternoon because we really do not

need to repeat all that was said in the budget debate not too long ago.

There are a number of issues that are being addressed by this particular piece of

legislation, as has been said. One, of course, is simply varying several Heads of

expenditure from one Ministry to the other, as the Minister of Finance so carefully and

aptly explained, given the changes in portfolios that took place with Cabinet portfolio

realignments. That is very, very simple, so that one column increases for some

Ministries and another decreases, and those two balance out. What therefore is the

subject of greater import is the issue of appropriating with respect to some additional

expenditure as identified. One is the Point Fortin Highway; another one, the issue of

beginning to settle those claimants with Colonial Life Insurance Company (Clico)—

who had various kinds of policies with Clico, the Hindu Credit Union (HCU), and of

course, the Trinidad Generation Unlimited, which is the generating plant in La Brea.

I just briefly want to comment on some of these matters. Let me deal firstly with

the last that I mentioned, that of the Trinidad Generation Unlimited (TGU). One of the

unfortunate things about TGU—and the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs

explained exactly how many megawatts of power are going to be generated at the

various stages of the implementation of that particular project. It is already up and

running, but there are still some aspects of it to be fully implemented.

89


What is unfortunate is that the power plant was originally designed to provide

power for the aluminium smelter—the famous Alutrint smelter or the infamous

smelter in La Brea. Even though the smelter itself was not approved in the sense

that there was a judicial process, reviewing the certificate of environmental

clearance that had been received for the smelter from the Environmental

Management Authority (EMA), the government went ahead with the

implementation of the power plant, and in that regard, in a sense, put the cart

before the horse.

In the absence of the smelter we have the situation as has been explained,

where, whether the power is being used or not the Government is obligated to pay

for that power. So, expenditure is taking place without necessarily a concomitant

return, in terms of utilization of the power coming out of TGU. And that was a

classic case of the last administration, in somewhat of an obstinate manner—a

very obstinate manner, taking the position that come hell or high water, the

smelter would be built. Trying to demonstrate, in that show of bravado, that they

would get their way one way or the other, building the power station before the

smelter went up.

It is well known that in terms of timelines, assuming that the go-ahead was

given for the smelter from the courts, the power station could have been built well

before the smelter was completed. Of course, there was no approval for that, and

therefore, what we have now are significant costs to the Minister of Finance, to

the Treasury, to the people of Trinidad and Tobago, some of which could well

have been obviated had there been a different approach to the whole question of

planning and organizing around the energy resources of Trinidad and Tobago.

So it was a bit of a chest-beating, chest-thumping, ego approach: I am going to

show you that regardless of whether there is an issue with the smelter, we are

going to go ahead and put something down there at Union Estate to demonstrate

who is boss. That kind of approach now leaves the Minister of Finance with a

significant sum to pay. I just wanted to make that point, we should not forget—to

all those who have positions of responsibility—we have to ensure that the resources of

this country, which are limited and finite— substantial yes, given the size of our

population—we need to treat with those resources carefully, and ensure that we use

them constantly in the best interest of all citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. The TGU

figure was $354,105,000 which is a substantial amount of money.

The second issue is that of making payments to several policyholders who had

policies with Clico. We are talking about $748, 200,000 in this particular

legislation that is before us and then another $100 million in terms of the HCU.

90

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. ABDULAH]

Mr. President, I do know if you had the opportunity during the parliamentary

break, just after Christmas, to take a look at some of the live hearings of the

Commissions of Enquiry into Clico and the HCU. I certainly did avail myself of a

few days and looked at those enquiries, either in the morning or when they

repeated them late into the night. It was quite interesting and fascinating. I would

not necessarily comment or say all of what I thought about the enquiry, but one

thing I thought was that citizens did get an insight into how the corporate world,

or at least a very important and larger powerful part of the corporate world,

functioned during that period. I think we need to record congratulations to this

Government—the People’s Partnership Government for setting up that

Commission of Enquiry so that ordinary people, the citizens, could see and hear

for themselves what had been taking place.

I wonder, when we hear some of the Members opposite speak, whether they are

saying that the action by this Government to address the situation with Clico, and to

ensure that to the best extent possible, given the resources, that as many policyholders

as possible, their interest has been secured. In the case of the EFPAs—yes, it is known

they are not going to get 100 per cent, but they are going to get a very substantial part

of their savings and investments returned to them, through the two tranches of bonds

that we ourselves debated and approved late last year. The other policyholders, the

ordinary policyholders, those who have normal annuities, insurance policies, medical

plans, and pension plans within Clico, have now have been ring-fenced, and their

savings and investments have been guaranteed in that regard as being safe.

When we hear statements making criticisms of what has been brought here this

afternoon by the Minister of Finance, what we are really doing indirectly or perhaps

even explicitly and directly, is to criticize the securing of thousands of policyholders’

benefits. I think that really is very unfortunate that what we are doing here this

afternoon, by considering what the House approved—looking at what the House

approved—is saying that the Government is acting in a responsible manner or has

acted in a responsible manner to ensure the security of the financial sector, and

therefore, by extension the stability of the economy.

We are all well aware of what is happening globally, and we see it continually. It is

not something that stopped post-2008, when major financial institutions collapsed in

various parts of the world. We have been seeing it continuing in Europe, more

particularly, where the financial services sector continues to be under great pressure,

and a number of banks finding it extremely difficult to survive the implication of that in

terms of contagion. I think that certainly we are trying to ensure that that does not

happen and has not happened in Trinidad and Tobago.

91


The Commission of Enquiry has been very useful in terms of understanding

what takes place and the interest of some people that were being protected, as it

were, as they sought their individual self-interest rather than seeking the interest

of those who put their trust and confidence in them by investing in that financial

institution.

One certainly hopes in this regard, that ultimately, either by way of

recommendations of the Commission of Enquiry and whatever subsequently

emerges from that and other processes of investigation, that may be on the way,

that somebody or bodies are not just held to account, but really brought to justice

in a significant way for what they presided over, in terms of the abuse of their

authority and power, and therefore the abuse of the trust and confidence that was

reposed in them as senior company officials. So I just want to place that on

record.

5.25 p.m.

Mr. President, of course, the highway to Point Fortin is an important project,

and I am not getting into the details of the route and all of that, but just the need

for the relief of horrendous traffic between Point Fortin and San Fernando is very,

very clear. Anyone who has to travel in and out of any point further south than

San Fernando, will be well aware of the great difficulties that citizens, and as a

result, business people and so on, face in terms of transport. And therefore, this

project is a necessary project and I do not think anybody can deny that. It is a

project, therefore, quite apart from its benefit to individual commuters and

therefore, making the lives of citizens much easier.

I should also record, you know, Mr. President, the fact that the recent adding

of a third lane between Chaguanas and just south of the Blue River has made a

tremendous difference—to somebody who lives in central and also has to come to

Port of Spain—in terms of the commute in the mornings coming north. I was able

to leave one hour later than normal to come into Port of Spain. Regardless of the

time that one has to leave; you could now leave one hour later. Before, something

that took two and a half hours, you can now do in 45 minutes, and so that is a

major advance undertaken by this particular Government.

But, coming back to the issue of Point Fortin, there is no doubt that that

highway to Point Fortin will not only benefit individual citizens and commuters

but will also have a significant impact in terms of economic activity. It will

certainly facilitate economic activity. I know the Minister of Finance, in his early

academic career, taught transport economics at the University of the West Indies,

92


St. Augustine. I was a student in those days, I did not do transport economics but I

know that he taught transport economics. I am sure that if he had the time, he

would be able to give us a very erudite lecture on the relationship between

transportation and economic growth, and development and so on.

So, the highway to Point Fortin is a necessary project and one that was

promised for, I do not know, “donkey’s years” is perhaps too short, aeons

perhaps, by the Members opposite—the People’s National Movement

Government—but never delivered. And as soon as it is now being delivered, they

are “getting horrors” that something will be delivered that they could not deliver

and it is really quite unnecessary. [Desk thumping]

I want to just briefly—because a number of persons have spoken about growth and

the Minister of Finance quite candidly said that the growth for 2011 was not what was,

either forecasted or what was wished for or hoped for. I think we all agree that if

growth was either flat or negative—and of course, I see Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon as a

scientist; negative growth is not a concept that, I am sure, scientists and mathematicians

would like; it is an economist’s term which is one way for economists to describe

things in a way that, perhaps, other people do not catch on to what is taking place quite

as quickly. But certainly, Mr. President, the issue of economic growth is important.

I just want to make two or three points with respect to growth. Firstly, the growth

that we had between 2002—2008, as we know, was driven primarily by the energy

sector, and in this regard, by two factors in the energy sector. One was the absolute

increase in output particularly of natural gas, and secondly, by price increases. Now,

given the fact that natural gas is a finite resource, one cannot predicate continued

sustainable economic growth on the basis that you are going to get new reserves of gas

every year or every five years and so on, and therefore, add to your national income

simply by adding new gas in production and so on. That is not going to happen. That is

an error. Nor should one predicate sustainable growth and continued growth on the

basis of increased commodity prices—price of oil, gas, methanol, ammonia, steel, LNG

and whatever have you. That is not wise.

What unfortunately happened is that during that period, up to 2010, certainly, the

last administration really focused their attention in terms of growth virtually only on the

basis that we would get either continued increased prices or increased output of natural

gas in particular. That really was the underpinning thinking. This is as distinct from say,

the earlier boom of ’72 to ’80 when there were significant investments in productive

capacity—Point Lisas, that we used surpluses from the oil boom—it was not a gas

boom, it was oil at the time—and there were investments in tangible economic

assets.

93


Now, one could debate whether they were the best ones to invest in; one could

debate whether we got the best value for money; whether there was corruption

involved—all of those things one could debate. But the fact of the matter is and to

their credit—we make this point to their credit—there were tangible economic

assets at the end of that boom period, which assets then, were partly responsible

for enabling us to take advantage of new gas finds in the mid-1990s and onwards.

So, the model of development was set in terms of monetizing gas by the

investments that took place in the 1970s, using the surpluses of the first boom.

When you look at the last one—this last period of 2002—2010—you did not see

tangible capacity, new capacity being built in terms of the economy. One did not see

new productive assets that were established using the surpluses that came from the

windfall in, more particularly, the gas sector and so on. And therefore, since the

international economy crashed in 2008, we have been put in a situation where

economic growth is very slow in coming because there has been nothing there to

substitute for that oil and gas that ballooned us up between 2008—2010, and tripled our

GDP and tripled Government revenue in six or seven short years—there was nothing

there subsequent to that to sustain growth.

We have to make the point, Mr. President, and Lloyd Best was very correct. I

remember him doing a lecture for us in the union quite some years ago, and he was

making the point that there is this false dichotomy between the short term and the long

term. He was saying that we often mystify things by talking about short-term planning

and long-term planning as if the two are not related; and Sen. Dr. Armstrong, of course,

is a planner so I know he is going to, perhaps, debate this. But the point that Lloyd Best

was making, and it is a correct point, is that what you do in the short term impacts your

long term. The sum total of your short-term decisions impact in the long term.

So, Mr. President, if I could use an acceptable example. If one—and medical

persons like Dr. Wheeler and others will support this—smokes 10 packs of cigarettes a

day, those things are short-term decisions, but the implication of that is that your

long-term health situation is going to be impacted upon either by heart disease or

cancer or some other critical illness. In addition to that, of course, your short-term

decision to smoke 10 packs of cigarettes a day will impact your long-term economic

benefit because if you were to add up the cost of 10 packs of cigarettes, then over the

long term, you could very well have bought a house rather than smoking away your

life.

So, the point I want to make is that economic growth is not a short-term thing to

fix—this is the essential point I am coming at. It is not something that can be fixed

immediately in the short term, it is really something that one has to organize and

94


plan for by short decisions that you implement in the short term but the benefits

are to be derived over the longer term. And if you do it right in the short term

then, over the long term, the chances of having sustained economic growth are

greater.

In that regard, we really—I was trying to avoid the bashing and the pointing

of fingers and who is responsible and so on, although Sen. Deyalsingh really

degenerated in that regard. But the point I want to make is that in debating these

issues, Mr. President, we really do have to look backwards at the decisions that

were taken over a period of time before to see the implications of those for what is

happening now. I think that when the Minister of Finance presented the budget—

and the theme of the budget was “From Steady Foundation to Economic

Transformation”—the key for us now, at this point in time, is really to have a

debate. One was hoping that we would have had that debate, perhaps today in the

Senate or it could be held elsewhere, to really have the debate in this country

about what are those decisions that we have to take now—both in the short term

but looking forward long term—that would result in the sustainable economic

development that we require.

So that is what we really need to be hearing: what are the things that we need to do

now to ensure the future is secured. And certainly, it requires making decisions that will

transform the very nature and structure of the economy in some important ways

because if we continue to have dependence on one or two commodities which we

export and therefore, are subject to the vagaries of the international market—both in

terms of price and quantity demanded and so on—then we are going to be reactive all

the time, having to react to what is taking place outside, and trying to wet our house

after the fire has already begun to consume us. So, these are the kinds of debates and

discussions, Mr. President, that we need to have. What are the things we need to be

doing now to bring about that transformation to result in growth?

In that regard, I want to just refer to two other things. One is the question of savings

and that we do have a real discussion about increasing savings in Trinidad and Tobago.

We have a culture of consumption and it is fuelled, more particularly now, by all kinds

of brands and so on, but we do have a culture of consumption. I think we do need to

begin to shift our culture from simply consumption to one of savings. The culture of

consumption, Mr. President, has its long historical roots; in consuming saltfish that we

did not produce here, that came from Canada with the Caribbean Atlantic trade and a

whole series of things like that. So we have to begin to address those matters of

consumption. We need to look at the issue of investing in productive activity that

would create sustainable economic activity going forward.

95


This is not just about Government, this is really about all of us; all citizens

have to be involved in this. We all have responsibility for the economic well-

being of Trinidad and Tobago, though the Government has, of course, the central

responsibility but we all have to be involved in this, because it is about the

collective use of our resources. Are we going to simply waste the resources that

we have now and there will be weeping and wailing and gnashing of teeth later

on?

I just want to say that growth by itself is not enough. Growth is a necessary

condition for the kind of improvement to the economic well-being of citizens and

so on, but it is not a sufficient condition. The sufficient condition has to be the

issue of growth with equity. In other words, it makes no sense to triple the pie as

we did between 2002—2008, and at the end of 2008, we had 20 per cent of the

population under the poverty line. That is not acceptable.

So, as the economy grows, we also have to address the question of equity and

the question of justice because unless we do that, we have what we see manifest

in other parts of the world, the 1 per cent versus the 99 per cent or the 99 per cent

versus the 1 per cent and so on. So I wanted to make that point. It is very

important that we look at the issue, not only of growth, but the issue of equity and

justice. In that regard, we need to look at creating jobs that are decent work and

that are sustainable.

5.40 p.m.

Recently, there was a very important document produced by one of the United

Nations bodies looking at the global social situation—I am sorry I do not have it with

me—where they gave some very useful data and analysis about the fact that globally

what has been happening is that there has been greater inequality as a result of the kinds

of economic policies that had been pursued in most parts of the world, and that is an

issue which must not happen here. Therefore, we need to have decent jobs, which will

ensure that the majority of our citizens have decent incomes, and that they are secure.

Mr. President, I just want to close with one comment. Sen. Deyalsingh likes to talk

about Members on this side who are not present, but he is very noticeably absent now.

But something which he had said and I am sure his colleagues will tell him exactly

what I am saying now. He quoted from a newspaper article, quoted the President

General of the Oilfields Workers’ Trade Union (OWTU). Of course, Members know

that I am also the General Secretary of that union. The union has a very clear position,

and has had a very clear position historically on the issue of privatization, and

everyone is well aware of that position.

96


What I do want to say, however, is that we really do not need Sen. Deyalsingh

to give us any comfort in the Oilfields Workers’ Trade Union, we do not need that

at all. [Desk thumping] We are quite capable in the union, if I can say that, Mr.

President, quite capable of taking care of ourselves. He mentioned RBC, and I do

not know why he wanted to mention RBC as a reference point, because it was

quite horrendous that the Government at the time refused—well let me put it the

other way around—took a policy position to allow RBTT to be sold to RBC. They

took a clear policy position, because we are well aware that it came down from

the Government that State companies that had pension funds, which pension

funds owned shares in RBTT were instructed to vote for the sale of RBTT to RBC. I

say so without fear of contradiction.

I do not know why he is now concerned about the loss of national assets and

privatization, when they did everything possible to ensure the sale, and I want to

say that, Mr. President. The last Government did everything possible to ensure the

sale of RBTT to RBC; including one Mr. Calder Hart—infamous name—being then

Chairman of the NIB, ensuring that the NIB also voted for the sale of RBTT to RBC.

So we really do not need any comfort from those who supported the sale of

national assets, and opposed us in the past. The policy debate will continue about

what is the most appropriate balance with respect to national ownership, private

ownership, national investment, national savings, and foreign-direct investment

using foreign savings; that policy debate needs to take place in the national

domain, Mr. President, because that is healthy, we would get a better

understanding of how we are going to ensure economic transformation of this

country and creating sustainable jobs and sustainable livelihoods for all.

Thank you very much. [Desk thumping]

Mr. President: Hon. Senators, I propose to take the tea break at this point.

We will suspend the house until 6.15 p.m. when we will resume the sitting.

5.43 p.m.: Sitting suspended.

6.15p.m.: Sitting resumed.

Sen. Dr. Rolph Balgobin: Right. Thank you very much, Mr. President, for

the opportunity to speak on what is put forward before us with regards to the

Supplementation and Variation of Appropriation for fiscal year 2011. I have just a

few comments that I would like to make on the matter.

Before I begin in earnest I will like to extend condolences to the Tewarie

family on the loss of Dr. Tewarie’s father, I believe his name was Dabiedatt, an

97


active Rotarian. From the time I met him he seemed to be a very decent and good

gentleman who was trying to make a contribution to his society.

I would also like to, of course, join in congratulating the T&T Red Force, as

well as the Attorney General on his elevation, and as well to recognize Sen.

Abdulah on his ascension to leadership in the Movement for Social Justice (MSJ).

Now, having said that, Mr. President, and, of course, to welcome you and

everyone else back for 2012. I would like to thank the Minister and the Ministry

of Health for the contribution and for the clarity afforded in what has been put

forward and what had been said. I would like to make some observations just to

clarify for the public at large on what is put forward to us here, and I would like to

begin by asking the question, what is in a word? And the word for today I guess

would be savings. What does savings mean? The documentation put forward to us

speaks of savings. But, of course, the general public may or may not be aware that

when we speak of savings in terms of a national budget, when we talk about

expenditure, we very often are talking about moneys which have been unspent,

but which are nevertheless committed.

So if I am going to buy a car or buy a book on Amazon.com or something like

that, and it says this is the retail price, but this is what you will pay; the retail price

is $20, you pay $15, so you save $5. I do not expect when I receive the book to

have to pay $5 next year, that is the difference here. The general public needs to

understand that many of the things that are put forward here as savings are, in

fact, going to have to be spent at some future point, in some future period of time.

There are some notable exceptions, for example, the Ministry of the Attorney

General now providing legal advice to the Public Service Commission at a

savings of $1 million a year is quite notable. But more often than not when one

studies the document, the savings that are put forward speak as much about

execution problems, or inefficiencies or other forms of delay. This is not the

creation of any government or anyone populating a government at a particular

point in time. I think that this says much about the machinery of the State, and

about our capacity to get things done in an expeditious and efficient way.

So a number of things, for example, under the Head of the Ministry of

Finance:

Administrative arrangements to enable subsidy payments to be made to

the Trinidad and Tobago Mortgage Finance Company (TTMF), not

finalized, $42 million;

98

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. DR. BALGOBIN]

Ministry of National Security, the SSA is not operating at full capacity,

saved, $8 million;

Tender documents for Fire Service, Regiment and Coast Guard not being

able to award contracts for vehicles, we saved $35 million;

Qualified persons under the Ministry of Health to fill vacant contract

positions on the Ministry’s establishment, $64 million;

Insufficient places at tertiary institutions prevented the Ministry from

maximizing funding provided for training, $10 million.

Much of the things that are being put forward as savings, in fact, speak to some

bottlenecking, some challenges that we would have had in the system that we are

operating within for executing against plan.

The Chancery Lane project, under the Ministry of Public Administration,

Head 31, the loan financing arrangements not finalized we saved $45

million;

Works on the Basildon and California Youth facilities not completed in

fiscal 2011, this is under the Ministry of Sport and Youth Affairs, we

saved $3 million.

But, of course, the social cost would probably be greater than that.

The Ministry of Foreign Affairs we cannot afford to buy a residence for

someone in Brussels, so we saved $20 million.

But if we are going to buy it next year, of course, then we have to pay it again.

So I think that there is a real opportunity—and as I will come to in my short

contribution—for us to confront the society and to confront ourselves not just

about frugality and efficiency, but also about effectiveness, execution and about—

well, what is it about ourselves that prevent us from doing what we are setting out

to do? What are the conditions that are so powerful that when they intervene

prevent us from accomplishing what we set out to accomplish? There are, of

course, several examples of that.

But something else, I suppose, troubled me just a bit about what was

presented. It is not just that actually, because I would say this represents to the

extent that it represents a problem or problems; I would say a problem because it

appears to be systemic, I would say that it is ours as a society to resolve. I would

not lay this at the feet of any particular person or group.

99


What I would say that would cause me a bit of concern is when I position

Trinidad and Tobago in the context of what is happening everywhere else. I have

a little doubt about what is being said and what I am hearing and perhaps my

hearing is selective. If I juxtapose the Trinidad and Tobago situation against what

is happening in the rest of the world. I would say that the world is facing an

unprecedented economic and financial crisis. It started in September of 2008 with

a small financial slip and it spun out of control by 2009, the world economy was

in recession. Despite many, many Ministers of Finance both here and abroad,

persons from everywhere trying to talk economies up, and saying that we have

now recovered and we have rebounded, in fact, that is not the case at all. So big

economies everywhere have stagnated or are in recession.

When I look at the Trinidad and Tobago reality, I get the sense that through its

approach we are insulating our citizens from the reality of that. It has been

difficult for me to get a sense that we are saying to the country, hey, “tighten your

belt”, hey, we need to get more productive, or citizens this is the truth of what is

happening out there, we are trying to shield you from that but really all we can do

is give you enough cover, so that you can reorient yourself for the new reality

which must come. It is unavoidable.

6.25 p.m.

In 2011, the Trinidad and Tobago Stock Exchange was one of the world’s

highest performing. For the life of me, I cannot imagine why someone would

want to mention that. Here is why. The number one performing stock market in

the world in 2011—ours grew by a composite of 19.3 per cent—was Caracas at

80.8 per cent growth. Then came Mongolia, at 32.6 per cent; then Panama, 29.2

per cent; and the fourth one, as I see Sen. Al-Rawi coming in, is Tehran in Iran,

29.1 per cent. I like fifth. We are fifth.

When I look at those countries, where would I want to live? I am quite happy

here. Which of these countries we want to be like, I am not quite sure, but these

statistics do not tell the full story because if you put your money into a company

on the Caracas Stock Exchange, how would you get it out? No idea! I think that

what that performance tells us is not how good we are or how well our economy

has performed; it just tells us how bad the rest of the world has been.

To be fair, the Minister of Finance and the Government have clearly made an

effort to halt the slide, but they have had to juxtapose those efforts with a very

significant demand for the retention of public services, and particularly social

services. That is always a very difficult balance to strike, but I would encourage

100


the Minister and the Government to confront the citizenry and to encourage all of

the key stakeholders in the society to speak more about what we can do for our

country to make it better, to make it more productive, to make it safer.

It is too easy to come here and beat up on people over there and say, “Well,

you eh doing anything.” It is too easy for us to blame Ministers for security, for

the economy, for unemployment, for education or for transport. It is too easy. It is

just too easy to do. What we have not yet managed to do is to recognize that

governments, any government is a reflection of ourselves as citizens who vote;

and, to the extent that we see things that we do not like, we must be prepared to

accept that it is, even in part, a reflection of ourselves.

I am not interested in blaming anybody. I am interested in fixing a problem

and our problem is that we do not yet have a solution to the economic challenges

that face us. This gives rise to something that in—

PROCEDURAL MOTION

The Minister of Public Utilities (Sen. The Hon. Emmanuel George): Mr.

President, I beg to move that this Senate do sit until the conclusion of this debate.


FINANCE (SUPPLEMENTATION AND VARIATION

OF APPROPRIATION) (FINANCIAL YEAR 2011)

BILL, 2012

Sen. Dr. R. Balgobin: Thank you, Mr. President. I was saying that this notion

that a government is supposed to fix everything; that a government is supposed to

handle everything; a government is supposed to make everything okay, is

something the Government itself should do its best to disavow people of. It should

really do its best to encourage people to think more independently.

If we continue to encourage tacitly or explicitly the notion that the

Government will handle this, do not worry, we are playing directly into the hands

of the redistribution logic that has plagued us for so long. It has dominated our

thinking ever since Independence. We did not just get Independence to go it

alone. We got Independence so that we can share the spoils of the nation and the

society. So governments’ work might have been seen in the past as chiefly about

redistribution—I do not know—but certainly now it has to be about productivity

and the reality gap is that we can borrow to continue spending at our current level,

but we can only do that for so long.

101


We can only shield people from reality for so long, after which time the

reality gap will become untenable, where what people think it is and what it

actually is becomes canyonesque in terms of gap and, when it comes together, it

comes together quite violently. That has all sorts of implications then for a

society. This is not, from my admittedly uneducated read of what is happening in

the global economic space—something we can wait out. So I would say, in my

humble opinion, that perhaps more energy can be put into defining the future;

perhaps more energy can be put into investigating and encouraging—seeding the

future.

We have had diversification talks for decades and I almost feel ill when

someone comes up to me now or sends me a note about the plantation economy. I

have grown weary of hearing about it, but we are short on prescriptions other than

we need a sustainable economy. Where that particular statement takes us, I do not

know, but it has not taken us anywhere for 20 or 25 years or more. So, at best, it is

a diagnostic label that we just lick and paste on our economy like a stamp.

We have real difficult challenges here and we need to join with the Minister of

Finance. We need to join with all the stakeholders in the society, even the

Opposition, NGOs and everybody, to try to figure out where we go from here,

collectively. Whatever we do from this point on—and only time will prove me

right or wrong—I bet that whatever we do from here on in, if we succeed, it will

be everybody’s success; and if we fail, it will be everybody’s failure. [Desk

thumping]

So I would have liked to have seen, not just in this particular presentation put

forward to us but more generally, what we are doing about diversification. I have

looked carefully at the medium-term policy framework. It is not a plan. It does not

tell us how we are going to accomplish diversification. So I think we must seize

the opportunity while we have the time; while we have the borrowing capacity to

really engage about where we take the economy, where we take the society.

We are not talking enough about competitiveness. I have done the

competitiveness research or been involved in it. In fact, it was the good

Minister—and people do not know that—but it was the Minister of Finance who

introduced me to the people at Harvard to start the competitiveness research for

Trinidad and Tobago. He put Trinidad and Tobago on the map for

competitiveness [Desk thumping] and he should be recognized for that. [Desk

thumping] I did not know anything about it. I went to see him and he introduced

me to it.

102


Every year, when we get the results, the results are challenged and people talk

about the methodology and who filled out the survey forms and all of that. The

funny thing is that whoever filled out the survey forms for the last seven or eight

years, the results have been exactly the same. They have been consistent.

Sen. Hinds: [Inaudible]

Sen. Dr. R. Balgobin: I am well within my time, Sir. [Laughter]


Sen. Dr. R. Balgobin: You have 10 minutes to so do. So although every year the

results have been the same, what I have noted now with some consternation is that

some government officers will call me now and say, “We want to increase our ranking

by X.” The tail is wagging the dog. The global education system has gone through that

with accreditation to its extreme cost. The people who develop rankings cannot be

allowed to determine what we do in our own economy and particularly in our own

socioeconomic space. We are supposed to be masters of our own fate and captains of

the national soul; to paraphrase from the Invictus poem.

So, I would caution against that type of thinking because the methodology for the

computation of competitiveness ranking changes practically every year. What do you

do when the methodology changes? I think that we must chart our own course, Mr.

President. I think that as a society we are still very far from understanding that

manufacturing and adding value are critical and I would encourage the Government to

talk about that.

What value do you add even to citizens? What value does a citizen add to the

Republic of Trinidad and Tobago? Instead of just talking about what that citizen can

get, what services we must provide and what we must give them, how is the society

enriched by you standing up there? How is the society better off?

We have not talked about manufacturing, about adding value. Everybody has a

prescription, but you know what? In the last 10 years, everyone thought that the global

economy was moving into services. Everybody thought that, with a globalized

economy, agriculture did not matter. We would go to the impoverished places in the

world and they would make food for everybody. Guess what? Now, we cannot feed

ourselves and our entire economic reality is being determined—at least significantly

influenced—by the cost of something as simple as food.

This cannot be a service economy here. What service? We must find ways to add

value to whatever we do and we must understand how to translate the creation of

value into something globally competitive and the only way to do that is through

productivity.

103


6.40 p.m.

Mr. President, I think our capacity for self-deception is significant; our

capacity for self-deception is great. I watched during the break—from when we

last met here to now—this country contort itself about whether a Prime Minister

should go to India or not, to bow or not to bow, [Laughter] to drive a Porsche or

not. I think well, how does the resolution of these questions help us to answer the

more fundamental issue of where do we take our economy, because wherever we

take our economy, there is where we take our society.

The biggest one I saw actually had to do with that tremendous tragedy in Trou

Macaque in Laventille. I looked and listened to that whole national discussion, and saw

the relevant people properly dressed down—the instructions were given to put up fire

escapes everywhere and so on—and nowhere in the national conversation—everybody

talked about the HDC and its shortcomings and why they did not do this and the people

were asking for this all the time—did we engage the question of, how as a society we

are capable of producing a human being that could set fire to a room or an apartment on

the fifth floor of a building knowing that women and children are inside. We have not

engaged that question at all. Instead, we have no fire escapes.

So, our capacity for self-deception is significant [Desk thumping] and we almost

always get caught up looking at the wrong things and, in so doing, we lose the

opportunity to interrogate the Government about the things that a government should

be interrogated about [Desk thumping ] because he is the Government.

So, I have a difficulty with some of those things. For example, I hear the concerns

about the Invaders Bay land grant or call it whatever you will. I am of the view, as a

citizen that that cannot stand and that something ought to be done about that, but that is

just my view. That is something that I would want to interrogate the Government

about, not about what car somebody is driving or if you bow or you did not bow or

what you wore while you were bowing. To me, these things are less relevant.

For example, I would like to know, where the census results are. The census was

due constitutionally in 2010. [Desk thumping] Where are the census results? [Desk

thumping] So, I would like to know where the census results are. I would like to know

when we are going to see the promised changes to Limitation of Certain Actions Act.

You know what? That is the first time I ever made a mental note to keep track of

whether somebody or a government kept its promise for something done inside of here,

otherwise I would have forgotten completely.

Sen. Deyalsingh: No unemployment figures.

Sen. Dr. R. Balgobin: I made a mental note of it. I am asking, because it is the

23rd, so we have seven days. I may yet see it.

104


I think, Mr. President, that investor confidence is down, and we have not

confronted ourselves on the economy, and I think that we should. We should

support the Minister of Finance, because he has to do that. He has to confront the

society on the state of the economy. He has to do it. He has to face the society and

say, “Listen, there are certain things going forward and you can and you cannot

have, and this is why. I am going to have to borrow money to give it to you. I

cannot do that.” The people who are supposed to confront the Government—the

chambers are quite sycophantic. I listened to the Chambers of Commence speak

and so on, and they are sycophantic. They have lost their independence. They just

feel so happy to be in the presence of a Minister and to clink a glass and attend a

cocktail.

Sen. Hinds: Or go India!

Sen. Dr. R. Balgobin: And then turn around and everything negative they

have to say. They would not say it to the face of the Government, but they have to say

it behind its back in a small society where the Government will hear about it anyway.

You know this kind of easy diplomacy while Rome burns—we are not burning, yet—

but if we have things to talk about let us talk about them; let us talk to the Government;

and let us engage the Government.

I do not think that politicians are entirely to blame. I have come to a startling

conclusion during the break and my view is that the intelligence of this country and the

monied class have this country the way it is. Any problems that we have in this society,

the intelligence and the monied class have to answer. The politicians just play along.

Politicians are just the merest reflection of what we put—who we vote for, who we

support and who we give money to.

Do you know what formed my view? I looked at the Clico and the HCU

Commission of Enquiry and the Commission of Enquiry into 1990 and so on with a

sense of dread. Every time I see it, I am drawn to it like a moth to a flame, because I

just feel like, “Wow, how did we ever survive that then, because it almost seems like by

accident?” It is so sad to see our best and brightest sitting there or standing there and

acting as if we are all powerless pawns. Well, Mr. President, you see the man who is

outside walking on the pavement now, he might be a powerless pawn, but we are not.

And so, to a great extent, we have a significant burden of responsibility, and we should

feel ashamed when we look at the failings of the society and we blame somebody else.

That cannot stand.

Do you know why it stands? It stands because I think there is a conspiracy of

silence in this society. There is conspiracy of silence here. There is! Nobody says

anything and if you do—how could you pause long enough to extract that tuna

105


puff that you are eating to say something critical about the man who put it in

there? If we are going to carry this society forward, it cannot be this way. That

conspiracy of silence where nobody says anything except behind closed doors

where we just axe away at everybody else’s vulnerabilities. How do we build a

nation like that?

I am fine with what is proposed here, Mr. President, but in being fine with it, I wish

to extend my best wishes to the Minister, and to encourage the Minister to press on

with courage and to confront society and tell the society the things that it does not want

to hear, but that it needs to hear. [Desk thumping]

We need to move forward together, Mr. President. We could have every

multilateral institution in the world here, but we are still going to have to find solutions

that are of our own making. [Desk thumping] I wish the Minister of Finance the best

for 2012, the rest of the Government and the Opposition, and good luck as you

continue to try to find a solution on the way forward for the economy. Thank you, Mr.

President.

Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds: Thank you very much, Mr. President and my colleagues. I

am sure that everyone in this Chamber must be aware that I wish each and every one of

you the very best for this New Year and so on, and same to your families.

Mr. President, I found many platforms of agreement with the last speaker in this

Senate; in particular, his expressed and implied suggestion that this is not a very serious

country sometimes, and that we are still grappling to work out the way forward. That is

the word in the town and everybody understands that, and it is matter that comes to the

fore more and more as we proceed.

I think it is well known—everyone in this Chamber knows and the members of the

society listening, it must be said for their reminder, benefit or recall—that we are

talking about the economy; we are talking about the Government coming today to

appropriate for moneys utilized in the last fiscal year in certain ways.

It is important to state, therefore, that this economy was in a very strong and

buoyant position as at May 2010. That is a fact! I do not have to go into the details

about the ratings; I do not have to go into the details about the unemployment figure as

it then was; and I do not have to deal too much with the foreign reserves and the

Heritage and Stabilization Fund.

Notwithstanding the global meltdown, it is a fact that this economy was strong,

buoyant and healthy in May 2010. [Desk thumping] That is a fact! Today, the

economy is stagnant! If the Minister does not want to accept that from me, he can

consult with every businessman across Trinidad and Tobago or most of them, and

106

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. HINDS]

the Central Bank documents and reports. The economy is stagnant, and yet I hear

the Minister say today that when he goes to bed he sleeps comfortably. Well, I am

not surprised, because as the last speaker indicated, this is not a serious country,

and it is easy to be a hero in Trinidad and Tobago.

I know the Minister of Finance is a hero among his colleagues. I know that. It

is easy to be a hero here. The economy is stagnant. In fact, it is reported that we

may even expect shrinkage in the activities at the Point Lisas Industrial Estate in

this fiscal year. Things are not going well. A few months ago, the Minister told us

about blue skies. He has dropped that now, and he is telling us now that he is

sleeping comfortably.

We heard the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs who spoke earlier today,

telling us about bid rounds, but the Central Bank documents show that the bid

rounds of the recent months did not go too well, leaving many of the blocks up for

auction later. Things have not gone well in that respect. Someone earlier made the

point that all our grandiose plans—budgeting here and budgeting there; and

moving money here and moving there—it depends on having money; it depends

on revenue. While the Minister sleeps comfortably, we pine on the fact that we

are seeing no major activity to generate revenue to manage this country, a country

that has grown accustomed to a very high standard of living.

I heard businessmen who returned recently from India, all 160 of them—well

no, about 150—because the Government’s delegation was a mere 11—I heard

them say, “Thank God for Trinidad and Tobago.” Thank God their ancestors,

their forebears, as it were, left India and came to Trinidad. Life could never be as

good for them in India, as it is in Trinidad and Tobago. Fact! All of this depends

on revenue. Our tastes are very high. Even the poorest in our society are not

hungry, haggard and miserable and in a state of unrest.

6.55 p.m.

The energy sector is in shambles; no real prospects or clear route ahead. I do

not make any comment on the young Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs; he

has been put in that position, and he continues—I wish him well. But the Minister

of Finance sleeps comfortably. Well I want to suggest, respectfully, and I am not

an economist, I am a lawyer by profession, but I think I can say, that in my view,

the Minister must be suffering from acute clinical financial “impopolitis”.

Sen. Deyalsingh: What! What is that?

107


Sen. F. Hinds: That, for those who do not understand, is a very advanced

state of financial discombobulation. [Desk thumping and laughter] The Minister,

like the Commissioner of Police in security matters, does not appear to have a

clue 20 months later. Three deficit budgets! The Central Bank reporting that the

deficit financing strategy of the Government is failing—not achieving.

When we were talking about deficit financing here last year, we were told the

debt was not the problem, it was how you used it. How are you using it? He

“boldfacedly” gets out of his comfortable sleep and tells us in the other place that

the economy is better in 2011. By what standards? The Minister says that:

“The economy has performed better in 2011 than anticipated, since the

Government did not spend some $2 billion which was expected to have been

spent,”—

and you heard it from Sen. Dr. Henry, an economist like yourself; you heard it

from other speakers here. Not spending money that you budgeted to spend is not

something to boast about.

Sen. Deyalsingh: That is not saving.

Sen. F. Hinds: That is not a saving, that is a high mark of inefficiency, bad

budgeting. “Everything wrong” about that, especially since spending in the

economy, as the IMF reported—and let me just run to that for a brief moment. I

will get back to it. The IMF reported that one of the things that the Minister must

do is to ensure that there is some capital development, capital investment within

the economy, as one of the strategies to take the thing forward, to kick—start it.

He did not spend $2 billion, and he comes here and boasts. That is why I agree

with the last speaker and others, this is not a serious country. Because your

colleagues on the other side would be very impressed with your logic, illogical as

it is. That is why I have said, respectfully, that you must be suffering from acute

financial “impopolitis”. Nothing to boast about; it is something to be ashamed

about. He also comes here, after he got out of his comfortable sleep, to boast

about the fact that his revenues were much greater than expected, because he was

able to collect close to $2 billion, I think it was $1.9 or something, from his tax

amnesty.

Getting people to pay taxes they did not pay before, without the interest and

the penalties. Okay, that is a good thing, but you cannot do that every year, we

were told so by the economist, Sen. Dr. Henry. If you did, you would create a

climate for delinquency, people would know the next one is coming and they

108


would just wait. You cannot do that. You also cannot continue to run a deficit

financing project for very long again. What are you doing when you get out of

your comfortable sleep? Yes, make notes. I am not the economist. I speak on

behalf of the many people out there who depend on professionals like you and

Government officials like you to get the thing right. [Desk thumping]

I told a young lady yesterday, who earns under $5,000 a month, that the

Government since 2007 or 2008, removed the need to pay one cent income tax once

your income was $5,000 and less. She did not even know that. She was shocked. She

did not realize she was not paying income tax—did not even have to file a return, and I

had to tell her that meant more money in your pocket. She may have been one of those

who was taken in by your grandiose promises and voted for you in the last elections.

But after the conversation I had with her yesterday, and given the pain that business

people are feeling in this country today, they are unlikely to vote for you again.

You could whisper all you want, my friend, these are the facts. You have foregone

land and building tax. Sen. Deyalsingh detailed on that today, so I do not have to do

that. You criticized the property tax. I heard a businessman from Penal call in to a radio

station last week and made the point that he was one of those who not only voted

against the last government, but mobilized his business colleagues in Penal, and all his

family, and all who would listen to vote against the last government, on the basis of the

property tax. Now he realizes that they might have paid $400 to $1,800 property tax per

year on their homes, but they would still have been far better off. But he was impressed

with the “axe the tax ol’ talk”, which brought you and your colleagues of the COP into

government.

So I agree with all who have suggested that this thing is not serious, and I do not

know where we are going. You are talking about tax review. You scuttled any idea of

making revenue collection more efficient. You dismantled the prospects of a revenue

authority, and now, same old, same old. You have to rely on an amnesty to collect it,

and you cannot do that all the time, as I have pointed out.

So after telling us that he did not spend $2 billion last year, and that he got $1.92

billion from revenues based on the tax amnesty he tells us, and I quote:

“So we end 2011 with a solid central government balance sheet,”—and he was

applauded by his colleagues on the other side.

Are we serious? Are we building a nation or are we building a hut? That is the

question. I want to thank my colleague, the economist, Sen. Dr. Lester Henry—[Desk

thumping]—for bringing to my attention, the fact that you have been disguising the

figures very skillfully to fool the little people of Trinidad and Tobago.

109


I want to quote from the Monetary Policy Report of November, 2011, out of

the Central Bank, and I quote at page 51, under the heading or the rubric Public

Debt:

“Despite the deficit of $5,058 million in FY2010/2011 there was not a large

increase in the debt stock due to the central government drawing down on its

balances held at the Central Bank.”

I want the little people in Trinidad and Tobago, who are not here, but on whose

behalf I speak, to understand that that fancy language means that if you have

some savings in the bank and you lose your work, and you are not earning any

money, instead of borrowing, you use up your saving. That does not make you

any better. You are reducing your accumulation, your savings, and there is no

revenue.

So while you do not have a loan from the credit union or from the bank, or

from the “fella” down the road who selling it at 25 per cent interest, the fact is

what savings you had are being depleted. I pointed out to you earlier when you

came in to government in May 2010, the savings accounts and balances of the

Government of the people of Trinidad and Tobago were strong and solid. [Desk

thumping] Without new revenue streams you are spending out our savings and

borrowing at the same time—borrowing to live. That is a dangerous position. You

could sleep comfortably, but I cannot!

There was negative growth in 2011. In other words, the economy did not

grow, it shrunk by 1.4 per cent, and as the economist told us today that would not

be the final figure, because all the figures have not yet come in. The financial

report also pointed out—I had the benefit of reading it on the weekend—that

whatever prospects for growth that the economy saw around the middle of 2011,

it was dashed, destroyed, by your ill-fated Prime Minister’s decision to host for us

a state of emergency—locked down the country, locked down the economy,

switched off everything.

Therefore, the Central Bank—not Fitzgerald Hinds, not the PNM—is saying

whatever prospects, whatever signs, whatever green shoots of recovery we saw in

the economy, your political decision to have a state of emergency in this country,

which failed—in fact, the last 25 days in this country we had more murders than

any other time in the nation’s history. Eleven murders you had in a week and you

went into a panic, and shut down the whole country and now the Central Bank is

reporting that that foolish action has had an impact on the economy and that we

are all feeling the pain today.

110


As Sen. Dr. Henry so appositely stated, that is what happens when you lock

up the country and the economy, rather than the criminals—[Desk thumping]—

because the 466 you picked up, are all back on the run. Half of them without

charge, released, and the other half the DPP and the courts released too.

Approximately 8,000 people were arrested during those three months, as if we

were living in a dictatorship in a police state. They used the police service—8,000

people arrested. We see it in the figures here. Mr. President, they spent $50

million to buy and refurbish a building for a jail, in anticipation of, in preparation

for the state of emergency.

At the end of the day it may be just a matter of fate and irony. You would be

surprised to know that it is empty today. God knows who would occupy it, the

rate you all are going, and “it leaking”. Waste of money! Waste of time! And you

destroyed many young lives and families in the process. Some of the youngsters

arrested were criminals misbehaving in the society, no doubt, but some innocent

ones were picked up too as you swooped down like a mighty force doing damage.

I suspect your intention is to do permanent damage to some sections of the

national community.

The Central Bank also reported that there was evidence during the last fiscal

year of wanton waste, unforgivable inefficiency and flawed policy. That is what

the Central Bank is saying, not Fitzgerald Hinds. Central Bank “saying that”, all

resulting in deepening the recession—and we are in recession, based on the

economist’s description of that term. Three quarters of negative growth, am I

correct?

Hon. Senator: Correct.

Sen. F. Hinds: Well, they said two; we must have seen about four, so we

must be in a double recession. Vicious you know—dangerous to the people of

Trinidad and Tobago—this Government. Are we serious? People are so easy to be

fooled in this country. Let me put this country on notice: what we are doing here

today is approving appropriations for things that we did not appropriate for when

we were here last in the budget, a mere three months later.

7.10 p.m.

So the economists out there are saying, this is bad planning, bad budgeting. If

a mere three months after you budgeted you have to come back, they are saying

that, but I want to put the country on notice. What we are doing today, is adjusting

figures for things that took place before today, that we did not plan for.

111


The Minister tells us that the Clico scenario, the Point Fortin Highway—I

heard the Minister of Housing saying that he wants to purchase a fixed wing

aircraft to do surveillance for squatting, and there is already a debate in the

national community as to whether that is necessary because there is already

equipment for doing that in the country. Do we need it? But you know, if we do

not put them on notice now and maybe get them to stop, we could be here three

months after the next budget to approve for the Minister’s purchase of a fixed

wing aircraft to monitor squatting on the ground.

Sen. Al-Rawi: The Air Guard could do that right now.

Sen. F. Hinds: You understand.

Sen. Al-Rawi: C26 aircraft.

Sen. F. Hinds: And I heard Sen. Brig. Sandy, as Minister of National

Security, I heard the Deputy Commissioner, Mr. Ewatski saying he too, they are

looking at buying a fixed wing aircraft for the Trinidad and Tobago Police

Service to be engaged in monitoring crime on the ground; heard that too. And

there are also serious issues around that and whether it is necessary, and whether

that is how you intend to spend the little money.

When you accused the PNM of “squandermania” for years, the records would

show that we were, according to you, squandering in time of plenty, and we have

plenty to show for it. From the Hochoy Highway to the Hall of Justice, to the

Claude Noel in Tobago, to the Twin Towers in Port of Spain, all over Trinidad

and Tobago we have things to show for the “squandermania” you accused us of.

Sen. Deyalsingh: Mount Hope.

Sen. F. Hinds: Mount Hope; secondary schools up and down this country. I

heard the Chief Secretary in Tobago saying on the weekend, there is no space, no

geographic space within Trinidad and Tobago with so many educational

institutions; secondary schools.

Sen. Deyalsingh: We waste money on CDAP.

Sen. F. Hinds: You accused us of squandering, at least that was at a time of

plenty; today, “the cow half-dead and you only milking it.” “Is” SUV, “is” trip to

India, trip to Brazil, trip to Australia, all over this country you all are bleeding this

country, reminding me of something that I saw in Guyana two years ago.

112


It was reported that a cow was struck by a vehicle and fell down on the

ground, and while the animal beating up before it was dead, persons in the

neighbourhood came with hatchets and knives, “man cut off leg,” “man cut off

shoulder,” cow “eh” dead yet! You all are massacring the Trinidad and Tobago

cow, callously. And for me it is particularly upsetting as a vegetarian. [Laughter]

Hideous!

We had problems with one state entity—if you took UDeCott out of the

equation in the last election, we had no problem—one! Today, oh “goud”, up and

down this country the UNC and their friends having a ball! And I heard the

Senator who spoke earlier, Independent Senator Balgobin, telling us that “they

silent.” Well, I think that the silence is self-imposed because all the voices that

were loud in protest, from the NJAC, from the MSJ, from the COP, now that their

“mouth full” they “cyar” talk, because the old people use to say, “doh” talk when

you eating; “they eating plenty, nobody saying nothing”.

“Brutality taking place,” “murder taking place,” economic discombobulation,

and everybody is silent. [Interruption] Yes. Good. So there we go.

I want to say this before we get further, Mr. President. I see national security

in this appropriation, Head 22. Right. Savings, according to them as a result of the

restructuring of the SSA the agency did not operate at full capacity. They are

admitting in their documents—

Sen. Al-Rawi: Labelled savings.

Sen. F. Hinds: They are calling it a savings that the Security Services Agency

did not operate at full capacity in 2011. “Look it here!” In addition to that, Mr.

President, you will remember that they took an untrained rookie and put her from

27, from the lowest rung in the organization to the very top and up to now we do

not know the Prime Minister’s role in that. She has gone as far as to say it was a

mistake. I am not sure it was a mistake, it may have been deliberate! And I want

to know whether it was corruption, whether it was nepotism, whether it was

stupidity, whether it was inefficiency. I want an explanation because we are

seeing here, that the SSA is saving money because that important agency did not

operate at full capacity.

In addition, Mr. President, operations of the Special Anti-crime Unit of

Trinidad and Tobago was terminated with effect from the August 31, in

accordance with Cabinet Minute 373 dated February, and therefore, they saved

$91 million. So, now Trinidad and Tobago could understand why crime is getting

on top of us. [Interruption]

113


Hon. Member: What crime?

Sen. F. Hinds: Now they could understand, nobody out there to deal with

gangs, to deal with the drug dealers, to deal with the gun runners.

Sen. Al-Rawi: Drugs from the port.

Sen. F. Hinds: We are naked and unprotected. I have seen SAUTT officers,

highly skilled, highly trained, at home and abroad, doing ordinary regular patrol

in the streets.

Sen. Al-Rawi: Investigation Task Force. Gone.

Sen. F. Hinds: Right. In terms of the Augusta Westland helicopters, we

ordered four of them, two were delivered, Mr. President, two more expected, to

deal with crime. We, the last administration dealt with that.

They scrapped the OPVs, and those were to go along with the OPVs. And of the

two that are here, I am instructed and verily believe that the Prime Minister of

Trinidad and Tobago is making absolute and total and comprehensive use of one.

And the other one, the engine is burnt, it is out of service, and it would require

some $3 million to repair it.

So while we are having a problem with crime, the Minister of Housing wants

to get a plane, the Commissioner of Police wants to get a plane, and the Prime

Minister always up in the helicopter, using that one, and the SAUTT helicopters. It

is as if the whole Government always wants to be high, while we suffer on the

ground at the hands of criminals.

Mr. President, further, I want people of this country to understand, that rather

than do good—I told you earlier, we avoided, we stopped, we made it law,

persons earning $5,000 and less, $60,000 a year, paid no tax, we put CDAP in

place.

Sen. Al-Rawi: Two more minutes.

Sen. F. Hinds: We did a number of things, today, in the last fiscal and the one

before, this Government accounted for the jobs of about 5,000 people, contract

workers in the public service. And last week a group of young professionals came

to see me, and they are fearful, they are contract positions, they told me in no

uncertain manner, they are being harassed in their workplaces, tormented,

elbowed out as it were, and if they managed to hold on they are almost certain by

the time the contract ends, as is the fate of so many other people who got

contracts when you were in Opposition, or got job opportunities, they are

114


callously butchering them out of the jobs, and creating opportunities for friends

and family, whether it is in PTSC or otherwise. All over the place, in termitic

fashion. Cannot govern this country equitably, cannot govern fairly; failing with

the economy, failing with crime.

Even in education, Mr. President, as we come to a conclusion because we

have a bit of a gentleman’s agreement, this Government was able to persuade its

friends in Caribbean Airlines to send a pundit to join the Prime Minister in India,

at a cost of about $385,000.

Sen. Deyalsingh: Serious?

Sen. F. Hinds: Yes.

Sen. Deyalsingh: State funds?

Sen. F. Hinds: Yes. CAL did that! The CAL that this Government is supporting

with millions of dollars a month, cannot find a way to pay its own bills.

Sen. Al-Rawi: $84.5 million.

Sen. F. Hinds: $84.5 million in subsidy, but that same CAL was able to just

“ups” according to the people on the street, they just “ups”, and sent a pundit to

meet the Prime Minister.

Sen. Cudjoe: And his wife!

Sen. F. Hinds: And his wife! All expenses paid, first-class travel to meet the

Prime Minister. And as my leader pointed out, I mean, if you really needed a

pundit, it should not be too difficult to find many of them in that part of the world,

obviously.

Nobody has a problem with prayer, nobody has a problem with your religion,

this is dignified, this is fine, but does this make sense? That is the question. Does

it make sense? And at the same time, Mr. President, about a year and a half ago, I

went into the Tranquility Government Secondary—we are doing an appropriation

here for education as well, where they are supposed to be saving money, spending

less—about $8 million in education.

At the same time, I went into Tranquility about a year and a half ago, when I

would learn—I do not represent any constituency again, I am a Senator—I do not

have a constituency, but I am a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago with concerns for

all of us. I went into Tranquility, the students there are suffering over a period of

time. The school was being repaired. The Minister of Education, as soon as he

came in to Government in May 2010 because he believed that all the persons who

115


had contracts for the school repair programme were PNM or got contracts under

the PNM, he shut down all, without considering the effect that that would have on

the education system because repairs of the plant are necessary. So Tranquility in

particular, suffered as a result, and the children in that school are suffering. They

got results recently and in all subjects less than 50 per cent successful. I think it is

deliberate, callous and heartless on the part of this Government, and coming to

tell us about savings in the Ministry of Education.

And you know what? Only last week a photograph on the front page of the

Newsday, an angry parent, children out of school with placards by the Ministry of

Education saying, we want our schools. There are electrical problems here,

problems with the buildings, and you coming to tell us about you saved and the

Minister of Finance told us we did better last year because we did not spend $2

billion! Well, it includes money that ought to have been spent on the Tranquility

Government School. [Desk thumping].

So, in keeping with the gentleman’s agreement—there is much more to be said—

but time has run, and you know I am a very perfect gentleman, Mr. President,

[Laughter] and while I am tempted to say more, I should abide by the agreement that

we have arrived at, and I should curtail my further comments because there will indeed

be time enough. I would conclude, however, by simply saying, that I pray, Mr. Minister

of Finance, that first of all you recover from that acute bout of clinical, financial

“impopolitis”. I also pray that you would come out of snug and comfortable sleep and

recognize that the people of Trinidad and Tobago have, for the time being, placed in

your hands, the responsibility to grow this economy, to stimulate this economy and do

something with all of the professional and other skills and acumen that you now hold,

at the behest of the people of Trinidad and Tobago, do that for and on behalf of the

people of Trinidad and Tobago.

But I also know as I make those two recommendations, that in some ways you and

your Government are, if you would permit me gentlemanly to say, hopeless! I do not

expect very much of you. I get the impression that you recognize that you are a one-

term Government, and you are, if I may use the metaphor of the supermarket, you are

engaged in what they call the supermarket “snatch and grab”. You know that there is a

competition from time to time, where you get an empty basket in the front and you are

supposed to run down the aisles in the supermarket and get as much as you can get, that

is how you are behaving. I see you even grabbed a “silk’ and ran off to India, but, Mr.

President, I do wish you the very best, Trinidad and Tobago, and may I thank you for

the opportunity to have said these few words.

116


7.25 p.m.

Sen. Rabindra Moonan: Thank you very much, Mr. President, for this

opportunity to contribute to The Finance (Supplementation and Variation of the

Appropriation) (Financial Year 2011) Bill, 2012. Mr. President, it is always a

delight on my part to speak after former junior Minister in the Ministry of

National Security, Fitzgerald Hinds.

Hon. Senator: A national security apprentice.

Sen. R. Moonan: Yeah, former junior Minister Fitzgerald Hinds.

Sen. George: I would not have thought about it at all.

Sen. R. Moonan: Patrick Manning did not think about it too. [Laughter]. But,

as I start, Mr. President, let me take this opportunity to express my condolence to

the family of—[Interruption]

Sen. Hinds: Mr. President, the Member—point of order. He is calling

Members of this honourable Senate by their names. That is contrary to the

Standing Orders, Mr. President, and I urge that he correct himself.

Mr. President: I did not understand him to do that, but if you have, you will

have to refer to them as Senators.

Sen. Hinds: It is the hon. Member for San Fernando East. He is out of place.

Teach the young to do the right thing.

Sen. R. Moonan: Mr. President, it was the former Prime Minister, the

Member of Parliament for San Fernando East, who truncated the tenure of former

junior Minister of National Security Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds. [Desk thumping]

[Laughter] Are you satisfied now, Sir?

Sen. Hinds: Well “putted” man, well “putted”.

Sen. R. Moonan: As I was saying, Mr. President, I want to take the

opportunity to condole with the family of Sen. Bhoendradatt Tewarie on the

passing of his father. I know it is a stressful time for the family, and Dr. Tewarie’s

son, Nirad, he has been very close to me, so I extend to the entire family my

condolence.

But, as I do that, I too want to congratulate the Red Force cricket team on their

victory last night [Desk thumping] bringing once more that title to Trinidad and

Tobago, and ensuring that the team will once more go to India following the

illustrious Government visit to India last year and this year. I also want to take the

117


opportunity to congratulate Sen. David Abdulah, who is not here right now, on his

ascension to political leader of the MSJ. I say it in the context, Mr. President, that

this honourable Senate never had a political leader sitting here; it may be the first

time. But, when I notice what is happening on the other side, it may not last for

too long. We may have a political leader from a next party sitting in that Senate,

because you know there are six pretenders or contenders across there.

Mr. President, I want to congratulate the Minister of Finance on the tutorial he

delivered here this afternoon, outlining why we had to have this variation. And it

really confused me when I listened to some Members of the Opposition that they

did not know what we came here to debate. It is a very simple Bill and it is really

about bookkeeping; it is tidying the books at the end of a financial year. Sen.

Deyalsingh said, “We are going to ask for $2.7 billion”. The non-economist Sen.

Hinds, had to correct him and say “listen, this is really bookkeeping”. At least he

made one good point for the evening.

But, Mr. President, when we speak of what the Minister of Finance has given

us here this afternoon, we have to note the type of person who is in charge of

finance in this economy. I want to refer you to a speech the Minister of Finance

made on December 15, 2011, believe it or not in India. He went to India last year

and it was at the Delhi Economic Conclave held on December 15, and it was

hosted by the Indian Ministry of Finance, a National Institute of Public Finance

and Policy and the confederation of Indian industries at the Delhi School of

Economics and the Indian Statistical Institute. The address entitled: “A New

Leadership Challenge”, was given to an audience on economic policies for

emerging economies, which included a broad cross section of 700 international

trade and industry representatives, economists, academics and financial experts.

Mr. President, three people spoke at that conference: the Minister of Finance

from India, the Minister of Finance from Israel and the Minister of Finance from

Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk thumping] And it tells you the calibre of person we

have on the international sphere, as a Minister of Finance and as an economist. He

spoke on the challenges in Trinidad and Tobago to redesign budgetary planning

and the delivery process. He spoke of getting the politics of development right,

and that requires the alignment of the gap between the logic of politics and the

logic of economics.

You see, Mr. President, in the planning of this Minister, it takes deep thought

to have a policy framework from within which we operate. And when we listened

to the budget last year and we listened to his presentation today and we see the

state of the economy, we know that it is deep thought which went in there. It is

118

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. MOONAN]

not simplistic. You see, Sen. Dr. Balgobin made the point that this country may

not be serious and he is correct to some extent. This country cannot be serious,

when we have a Minister of Finance of international repute addressing a world

forum and then when we have local debates in this country, people speak about

bowing at a pair of feet; whether you wore a sari or you should not wear a sari.

Whether you bought or a Ministry bought a car or did not buy a car. That was

said—and that car was discovered at the funeral of the late Sir Ellis Clarke. The

Leader of the Opposition went to the funeral and instead of paying homage and

respect to the departed he was looking to see what car somebody was driving.

And then people must say this is not a serious country. It cannot be serious when

the Opposition—well half of them here, will get up and speak about what the PNM

did during their reign. We must recognize that in the 40 or 50 years, the PNM did

good. What we are doing is to make that good, better. When we recognized that

they did not do something correct, we let them know that they did not do

something correct.

They spoke about the state of the economy before May, 2010—a robust

economy, spending. And I ask the question or they wanted to find out, why the

spending did not continue? That is the problem we face. The problem we face is

that the PNM’s policy or philosophy of late is: have money, will spend. As soon as

you have money we will spend it. What they did, and why the figures may have

reflected what they did, was that there was an overheating of the economy.

Money was spending as if it was—I think it was the Prime Minister of Jamaica or

was it Lee Kuan Yew—“a dose of salts”. The PNM spent money as “a dose of

salts”. They overheated the economy. The levels of expectation got so high that

when the economic crash came we could not sustain it. The PNM reminded me of

an old cassava thief, not saying that they are an old cassava thief. I just want to

remind you, Mr. President. A cassava thief will go and pull out the root of

cassava—[Interruption]

Sen. Deyalsingh: Just take out cassava.

Sen. R. Moonan: —and then put back the stalk. So everybody passing and

seeing this cassava stalk and they say, “The tree bearing well”, and then it will dry

and there is nothing underneath that. And this is what the PNM did in the last

couple of years of their regime. They took the cassava and ran and when the

economy started to wither, we had to come in, realized that there was nothing

there, had to dig a new hole, plant a new seed and now we are waiting for it to

grow and flourish. That is where we are today.

119


Mr. President, the state of the economy we have found ourselves in today—I

think it was reflected when the former Minister of Finance Karen Nunez-Tesheira

spoke at the Commission of Enquiry into the Clico issue, and she admitted that

Clico gave the Government wrong information. And based on that wrong

information, they made certain decisions. We are saying that if a Government

could be so gullible, they would not check and double-check the information they

have—no wonder we found ourselves where we did.

When this Government came into office and the Minister of Finance took his

time to investigate the situation to see where we are and how we could go

forward, people were saying, “But the last Government promise everybody the

money”. Pay them now! And it is this degree of recklessness, Mr. President,

which nearly derailed this entire economy. So once more we must congratulate

the Minister of Finance on the manner in which he handled the Clico affair. [Desk

thumping] At least financial stability and confidence has come back to this

country. It is reflected in the last report of Standard and Poor’s, where I think it

was in December 2011, when they reaffirmed the credit rating of this country.

The PNM and Sen. Hinds I think, said, “But the PNM had a good credit rating”, and

we agree. We agree until they took the cassava and went and everything fell after.

We had an economy in shambles, we had an overheated economy, an overweight

economy, but you know what they say: spend, spend, spend.

Today, Mr. President, we are all very health conscious and we know that

when we are overweight what is likely to happen. Sen. Al-Rawi should know that;

I saw the type of food you ate this evening. You are very conscious not to get

overweight. The PNM—if you had followed the PNM in the last four or five years

as they tried to build this economy by overeating and overheating, we are in

problems. It is because of this Minister of Finance and this People’s Partnership

Government that we are now seeing some clear waters.

Sen. Hinds spoke about spending money, build; build everything. Where we

stand today is a product of building and spending. The Uff Commission Report

has spoken about this. The cost overruns that we have found earlier on, I think it

was one of my colleagues Sen. Ramlogan who spoke about the Chancery Lane

Project—cost overruns. That is what we did. We overspent and they said that was

development. Now that we have taken the “bull by the horns”, Sen. Hinds spoke

about something about some cow or something, he said we might “massacre” the

cow. I thought he was talking about a bull.

Mr. President, this Government—we had to step back, look at what is

happening and reintroduce stability into the country.

120


Sen. Hinds spoke of the tax amnesty. He said we cannot depend on a tax

amnesty as a source of revenue. The tax amnesty was successful, $1.9 billion I

think it was, because this Government recognized that they had to take some

measures to encourage people who felt they did not have to pay and they could

have gone on forever and the books were building all the time.

7.40 p.m.

The moneys were outstanding. We took the decision where people felt they

were comfortable to spend the money. Because, when they pay their taxes they

knew it was a responsible Government which would have planned that way

forward. I do not think it is a policy decision of any government or this

Government to have tax amnesty on an ongoing basis. That was a one/off. We

have put things in place where people would pay their taxes on a daily basis, a

yearly basis, quarterly basis.

Hon. Senator: Like?

Sen. R. Moonan: Like? It is because of the efficiency which we are now

introducing into the Ministry of Finance and to all the other ministries.

Sen. Hinds spoke, giving the impression that everybody “does talk to he, yuh

know”. “He say he talk” to some businessman; “he listen” to some businessman

from Penal who wanted to pay tax and “he say he get off.” “He say he listen” to

some students, “some kinda ting”. “He listen” to people coming back from India.

He is not an economist; he is a lawyer, but where is he finding all this time to

speak to people, to listen to the radio and so on? But he got me a little worried

when he said he spoke to people from India and they said they were happy not to

be living there and to be living here. I wonder—

Sen. Hinds: Mr. President, I never said that! Correct yourself!

Sen. R. Moonan: I wonder if he was trying to imply something when he

spoke about an economy in shambles and people in a state of undress. What did

he mean by that? Was he implying something? Was he trying to be Winston

Churchill when he referred to Mahatma Gandhi as a half-naked fakir? I do not

know; I just enquire, because you know, he could be philosophical when he is

ready.

Sen. Hinds: Nasty!

Hon. Senator: That is nasty.

Sen. R. Moonan: That is what he said, Mr. President.

121


Hon. Senator: Who said that?

Sen. R. Moonan: People in shambles and a state of undress.

Hon. Senator: Who said that here?

Sen. R. Moonan: Go and ask for the Hansard. “Doh waste meh time with that.”

[Crosstalk]

Mr. President, you see, all the time they were happy, going along saying what they

want, because one of the things we have found in this country is that the PNM now feels

that there is some opening and they are bombarding the airwaves. They speak about

people writing on blogs and whatnot. I want to know who writes on these online

comments in some of the newspapers. I write letters from time to time, and every time I

write a letter there are one or two people who will come on and say, “Mr. Moonan is an

old PNM.” That is all they say.

So the point about it is that they try to give misinformation and create mischief in

the country, to make you feel that the sky is falling in. They come here and they tell

you it is a one-term government. Where have they gotten that impression from? Who

gave them that impression? Who are they talking to? It is only the people who Sen.

Hinds is talking to.

It is only today at the south NAPA—we call it SAPA—that this Government gave

out keys to 500 housing units. [Desk thumping] And do you know why it took us so

long to give it out? I visited some of those homes. Those homes were built under the

PNM, and I went into one of them. Somebody who expected one “tell meh come and

take a visit”, and there was the bathroom and toilet, and the door was pulling and

hitting the bowl and could not open out, so to get in there you had to wriggle in. The

bathroom, the shower rose was here, the waste was there, and it was facing so—the

shower. [Demonstrates with hands] So the water was not going in the waste.

This Government had to spend hundreds of millions of dollars repairing those

homes but they are happy here to ask, “who build them”? “Is all yuh build them.” We

had to fix them. [Desk thumping] And we have given them out and we will continue to

repair the homes; we will continue to repair the economy and we will continue to make

the people in this country feel free and proud.

It was only on Sunday, I think it was, that more than 500 plots were given out to

ex-Caroni workers, after how many years—

Hon. Senator: Eight years.

Sen. R. Moonan: Eight years people were waiting under the PNM for what

was agreed to, to give these housing plots. It was only this weekend that this

People’s Partnership gave out 500 housing plots. [Desk thumping]

122


Somebody spoke earlier about what is happening to agriculture. I think it was

my dear friend, Sen. Dr. Henry. They did not see anything for agriculture. People

are now being given plots of land where they could plant. That is what we do!

And they ask, “Who built the houses?” “All yuh build the house.” We agree, and

I want to repeat: we had to fix it and we will give it out. We will fix the economy

and we will keep this economy floating.

So when we listen to the noises on the other side, we step back and we look

with calm serenity because we know this country is in good, capable hands. [Desk

thumping] I just want to end on two notes. Sen. Deyalsingh, who has moved

away from a yellow Cortina to a good car now, spoke about Henry Hub on the

price of gas, and he said it was the PNM government who moved the marketing

away from the States to other areas, and we congratulate you and your then

government for that. But I want to ask the question: If you did that and it moved

away from the Henry Hub pricing, why does your leader go to the other place and

ask about pricing and Henry Hub—as the learned Minister of Energy and Energy

Industries told you, accounts for less than 19 per cent of the gas? [Interruption]

Bait? Baiter? Wait! [Laughter] [Desk thumping] You see, Mr. President, it is the

mischief which they come here to perpetrate. We accept that they have moved.

But do you know what? We will fix it, and we will move on. As I end, I want to

tell you something. The country is better off today with the People’s Partnership

with efficiency. Only last year, I think it was, when the Minister of Public

Utilities opened the new Navet Trunk Main which was done at a savings of over

$100 million—Minister?

Sen. George: One hundred and eighty-six million.

Sen. R. Moonan: One hundred and eight-six million dollars. [Desk thumping]

That is efficiency. And you all question who is the CEO of WASA. The present

CEO of WASA is Ganga Singh and, if I recall, “Ganga” in Hindi means “water”

and, if I remember correctly, there was a CEO of WASA under the past

administration and I wondered whether you could have gotten clean water when

his name was “Grimes”.

I want to tell you that this Government, under the Minister of Finance who

spoke on this particular Bill this evening, has given hope, courage and stability,

not only to Trinidad and Tobago but to the Caribbean and, as a world-renowned

and respected economist we thank him for what he has done for us.

I thank you very much, Mr. President. [Desk thumping]

123


Sen. Shamfa Cudjoe: Thank you, Mr. President, for the opportunity to

contribute on this Bill, on the Finance (Supplementation and Variation of

Appropriation) Bill.

When the last speaker began contributing, I took my notepad and I said, let me

take some notes and try to respond to some of his points, but in the interest of

time—we have 30 minutes to make a contribution, and if my contribution

contains as much content as the last speaker, I might as well sit down.

Hon. Senators: Ohh! [Desk thumping]

Sen. S. Cudjoe: That contribution was, according to Basdeo Panday, a former

Prime Minister, filled with so many half-truths and innuendoes that it does not

merit my respect or my attention or my response. [Desk thumping]

The Senator himself does not even believe half the things he just said, neither

does the national community, so I would not even waste my time to respond, but I

must say, the truth must always prevail and anything that happens in the dark will

come to light, and the truth is something that this bunch has a problem with. I

know this; the national community knows this, and they know this too, so I will

move on.

But he made a comment that Clico collapsed because the previous

government did not take time to look into Clico. I am wondering if this Senator

knows anything at all as to how these kinds of collapses work. For instance, Bear

Stearns in the USA collapsed in one night, losing billions and billions of dollars

because the US delayed in seeing about that situation. They always want to

analyze stuff and look at things for a long time, trying to get it right, and because

they spent too long to treat with that situation they lost billions and billions of

dollars. So the goodly Senator probably is not aware of that, and I guess that is

why he is still a temporary Senator. Hopefully, one day when he gets to that level

he will become permanent.

Moving right along. I want to comment on one more thing that he said. “PNM

means if you have money you will spend money.” But when the People’s

National Movement was in government, we took the time to spend money—we

took a strategized position to spend the money on things that mattered to help

improve the quality of life for the citizens of this nation.

Now, we could go on and on to say the PNM contributed to profligate spending

and we wasted and so forth, but as much as you “bad talk” the Waterfront project,

as much as you “bad talk” this building that we are standing in right now, we

124

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. CUDJOE]

spent the money on things that the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago can come back

and use. As he rightfully said, if we did not build any houses, you think he

“coulda be” boasting here, talking “bout” he has keys to give away?

Hon. Senator: Good point. Good point. [Desk thumping]

Sen. S. Cudjoe: If we did not build this Waterfront project, where would we

be right now? Probably at Rienzi Plaza. If we did not build NAPA, where would

all these Government functions be held? If it was not for that Waterfront

project—tourists come in here day and night to spend time at the Hyatt and so

forth—how could the—What is this here?—the Tourism Development Company

ran this ad in Caribbean Airlines. What is this called? Caribbean Beat,

November—December 2011. Every time I travel on the plane I take one of these,

so I have a lot. I do not know if it is right or if it is not. Maybe the flight attendant

would keep a special eye on me, but I take one every time. I love this magazine.

But anyway, it says: “True Caribbean Diversity”. And it says:

“Trinidad and Tobago was the successful host of two world class events last

year, the Fifth Summit of the Americas and the Commonwealth Heads of

Government Meeting 2009. The capital city of Port of Spain with its developed

infrastructure, state of the art meeting facilities and over 700 new and

contemporary hotel rooms, including international brands Hyatt, Hilton and

Holiday Inn, is fast becoming the meeting and conference capital of the southern

Caribbean.” [Desk thumping]

And they go on to say:

“Our booming economy is driven by real GDP growth of more than 7 % over

the last decade.”

The same decade of PNM leadership that they get in here and “bad talk” but

they go out to the world and tell them a different story.

“This is all tastefully complemented by sun, sea...”

This is, “Where the World Meets”.

So, as I said before—

Sen. Beckles: Sen. Cudjoe, they just want to know what year.

Sen. Hinds: What series? When was that published?

Sen. S. Cudjoe: This is November—December 2011.

Sen. Hinds: Oh, I see. [Desk thumping]

125


Sen. S. Cudjoe: I became a Senator when the People’s Partnership took

government, so every time that I travel to come to Parliament, every month they

put a new one of this out, and it is in my handbag when I come here.

Hon. Senator: 1A.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: No, I am not in 1A. Actually, I am supposed to be in 1A, but

several times when I sit there, somebody comes to ask me: “Can you move so that

the Minister can sit there, please?” [Laughter] And I move.

Anyway, we could go on and on. I have to comment on one more person’s

contribution. It was Sen. Anand Ramlogan SC, and I am sorry that he is not here

to hear the response. But he went on; he belaboured the point that they had to

spend so much money on arbitration, and went into the Scarborough General

Hospital arbitration. But I think that when you tell a story you either tell all or do

not tell it at all.

Now, the planning for the Scarborough General Hospital, the design and

everything, was done under the UNC.

Hon. Senator: No, no, no!

Sen. S. Cudjoe: I am telling you, the initial designs were done under the UNC;

the feasibility tests and so forth, and they hired the first contracting company. I

think it was called NH Construction. And when NH started building, they started

having slip-aways and found out that they needed a brace wall, and every time

parliamentarians come to this Parliament and say, the Scarborough hospital—the

new one that they are building does not have this unit, and that important unit, and

this unit is critical, they are talking about the old designs. Because when the

People’s National Movement came into power, we said if we are going to give

Tobago a hospital, we are going to give them something good.

You see there is no half-stepping in the People’s National Movement, it is

either “we doing it all, or we ain’t doing it at all.” [Desk thumping]

7.55 p.m.

That is when we went to NH Construction and we said you know what, we

cannot have this; if we are giving a hospital to Tobago we are going to be giving

them the best. We started saying, change this, change that, and NH said you

cannot have all these changes at the same price. We ended up having to go to

court and the Tobago House of Assembly won, and we had to change the

construction company to China Railways. So if you are telling the story, tell it all.

126


You have to come back and pay that arbitration; it is because of your mistake and

the poor feasibility tests, and so forth that you did when you were busy giving

your friends contracts in Tobago.

The same goes for that Magdalena today. When this People’s Partnership came

into Government, I remember MP for Tobago West Delmon Baker came into this

Parliament and said“in fine PNM fashion they built that hotel on the wrong side of the

island, causing the hotel to break down fast”. And nobody told him when they came to

their little retreat, when they sat around the camp fire, that that was their work—that

was their project. The same for Ishwar Galbaransingh—[Desk thumping] But in the

interest of time, let me go on to what I had planned to say today.

Now we can talk all day about the amount of money being requested by the

Government. I think in reality we all know that in order to provide goods and services

for our communities, for our people, you have to spend money. While in the last

administration we were criticized for spending too much, too many social programmes,

at the end of the day we had something to show for it. I think this whole issue of this

bookkeeping, this request to update the books to get $2.7 billion more, it is not so much

about the financing or funding for me. I am no hardcore economist like Sen. Dr.

Henry, and I heard the others, like Sen. Ramkhelawan and Sen. Dr. Balgobin, deal with

the hardcore economic issues. But I want to address this issue from a different

perspective. I wrote down the little quote that the Minister of Finance gave us at the

beginning. He said, “the arithmetic by itself does not tell the story,” and it is on that one

comment that I prepared my contribution today.

Now, the arithmetic by itself does not tell the whole story; at the end of the day it is

about delivery. It is about your perception to deliver, it is about the public perception as

to whether or not you are delivering. So at the end of the day the average Joe or Jane—

like Sen. Hinds said, he met this lady and she was working for $5,000 and did know

that she was not paying tax—the average Joe is not concerned about that. Some people

do not know how much in expenditure we spend. They do not know about gross

domestic product (GDP), they do not know about inflation. At the end of the day, it is a

whole feeling of whether or not you are being served, and whether or not this whole

“serve the people, serve the people,” mantra is real. Do people on the ground really feel

served? It is about the bread and butter issues.

Now, we can talk about how in the last year the Government carried the

borrowing limit up to $32 billion. Again, for me at the end of day it is about the

Government’s capacity and its capability to really govern and to lead this country;

to make people feel and realize that we have a Government that can run a country,

that can manage an economy that could take us through trying times.

127


On January 17, I think that was last Monday, the World Bank issued a

warning to countries in the Caribbean. They asked us to brace and prepare for a

double-dip recession. They said that this time it is going to be longer than the last

one, and it is going to be harder for people to survive. It asked that countries,

especially the developing countries, make moves to diversify their economy, to

extend their social safety net and to prioritize their expenditure.

Now it made me think, do we trust this People’s Partnership Government to

do that for us? Do we trust this People’s Partnership Government to take us

through the storm? As we like to say in this Parliament, I am sitting in your car

and we have to trust you to take us to the destination, safe—or a better place,

safely. Now, before May 24, when they were in Opposition they had the answers

for everything; when they looked at the People’s National Movement everything

was doom and gloom. They had the answer for crime, the economy, Trinidad’s

relationship with Tobago and they promised to do everything better than the

People’s National Movement. Till the Prime Minister went as far as to say “if we

lose, blood will flow in the streets.” They won and “blood flowing” in the streets.

[Desk thumping] It made me take a look at this Government, they “mamaguy” us,

they promise us all kinds of things. Now that they have won and they have gotten

their votes all we have now is deception, misspeaking, mischief, they either

misinform you or you misheard. We listen to them here, the story loud and clear,

and then they will come tomorrow and say, well, you misheard—like you dealing

with a pack of fools.

Mr. President, every “fore-day morning” as they say in Tobago—I cannot

even say every “fore-day morning”, because that is fourth-day morning. Every

morning, every week, I guarantee you there is some bacchanal, some “commess”,

some confusion, going on in this Government. When one thing ends it is another.

And you wonder, is this what I really voted for? Is this where this whole $32

billion credit limit is really going? [Desk thumping] When you budget for $52

billion in expenditure you are looking for something of good substance. Not every

day you wake up some Mystar giving you some report of something that does not

make any sense, and then they blame crime on the police service. One minute the

Prime Minister says something, tomorrow she comes back, it is not true or

somebody else says something different. We wonder, are we really in a better

position than we were under the People’s National Movement? Is this what we

voted for? And the thing that bothers me is when they get caught, they say we are

undergoing an investigation and preparing a report, we will get back to you. We

are still waiting on the report for the Reshmi Ramnarine situation, we still waiting

128


on the Israeli that tore up the SSA papers, the Mary King issue, the NP project, and

all of this has resulted in a fragile relationship between the Government and its

citizens. For me the notion of good governance is not about the amount of money

the Government spends but more about the relationship between the Government

and the people they govern. Now can we trust this Government?

Sen. Hinds: No.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Have they kept their promises?

Sen. Hinds: No.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Do they really listen and then lead?

Sen. Hinds: Cannot.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Are they really serving the people, all the people?

Now, I remember looking at the campaign—and it was expensive, it was

pretty. I will say give praises, where praise is due. And, I remember people

singing “we moving up with Kamla, we moving up with Kamla.” I remember,

Mr. President, “we will rise.”

Hon. Senator: It sounded better than that.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Yes, you are right. It sounded better because you put out

money and everybody still wondering where you got the money from. Now, I can

tell you half the people that sang, “we moving up with Kamla” now recognize that

they have moved on without them. More than half the people that sang “we would

rise” are recognizing that other people are rising and they are still there at the

bottom.

I have lived to see that over half the people that voted for this Government are

now feeling like fools. Who would believe that this caring Government—I saw a

newspaper issue around Christmas time, there was a landslide and a young man

lost his father in the landslide. And this Government showed up and presented

him with a box of cold Mario’s pizza, then had the nerve to pose for a picture

while giving the young man the pizza. This is a caring People’s Partnership—

Sen. Hinds: A pizza government—“ah piece ah government”.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Ah cold—not even a hot pizza—a cold pizza government.

Down to last week, I am listening to the radio and the parents are calling in

and saying that their students have not received textbooks yet. The school term

started last year September. This is the second semester or the second term, but

129


they saved about $8 million in the Ministry of Education—call it savings, prudent

financial management and rub the Minister on his shoulder. I have never seen a

bunch of people that love self-praise like this, holding a big ego orgy every “fore-

day morning”.

8.10 p.m.

Now, Mr. President, are we any better than we were under the People’s

National Movement? The people voted for change and we were promised all

kinds of things—things that they know they could not deliver, down to pension at

age 60. We remember and we do not expect anything better from them.

The past regime was rightly criticized and chastised for extravagant spending

and some would say, “it is right to do that now”, but I can tell you that it is

apparent that this Government has rapidly equalized that spending and surpassed

it. And if it was wrong then, Mr. President, it is wrong now. If it was wrong under

the People’s National Movement, it is still wrong now. But, Mr. President, you do

not hear those once independent people crying out. I remember when crime had

gotten out of hand and the people said they could not take it under the People’s

National Movement, you would hear them calling on the radio, “Fire Martin

Joseph!” “Fire—” and they would be screaming out the names in the background.

Who is calling in and bawling “fire” now?

Sen. Hinds: “Fire the Commissioner”—that is what they are saying now.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: They are saying “Fire the Commissioner”. All of a sudden,

the Government is not responsible for crime anymore.

Sen. Deyalsingh: It is Sen. Dr. Tewarie who said that, it is not the

Government.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Mr. President, as the people say, this is a Government of Porsches

and helicopters. I like to say that they have “Porsche-rized” the whole nation. If you do

not know what “Porsche-rize” means, Mr. President, that is to give benefits to your

friends, your family and your freeloading fans and no care for the people on the ground.

Sen. Hinds: And “pauperize” the rest.

Sen. S. Cudjoe: —and “pauperize” the rest. So some people “Porsche-rized” and

some people “pauperized”.

Mr. President, my concern, as I said before, is not so much the spending of the

money but what you are spending the money on and who is benefiting from this

spending? What do you we have to show for it? Are we really improving the

130


quality of people’s lives? Are we really dealing with the real issues or is this just a

big PR sham? But after they have gotten our votes, we do not matter to them

anymore.

I will tell you, even in Tobago, people who did not support the People’s

Partnership or the UNC before, they jumped on board, they jumped on the

bandwagon and they said, “You know what, we are going to vote for change.”

There are some people who did not vote at all. But, Mr. President, I will tell you

something: today, we live to see that anything that this Government has to do in

Tobago, it is at a price. We had to pay a price and we usually have to pay a price

of our dignity, some form of disrespect or undermining to our institutions, our

people.

Let me give you an example, Mr. President. They had savings under health to

make mischief. The Local Public Assistance Board in Tobago—now this board

looks at the applications of senior citizens to get pension and bus passes and all of

those benefits that senior citizens get. Now, over the past 30 years, since the

establishment of the Tobago House of Assembly, this board was appointed by the

THA sending their recommendations to the Cabinet and the Cabinet would then

approve those recommendations. Now those people have to be people from within

the community who know the people who is needy, know who sort of know the

background and have a good relationship with the people, and people that the

Tobago House of Assembly trust to be involved in THA matters—dealing with the

Chief Medical Officer and so forth at the hospital.

Now, I will tell you what this Government did. In two little years, this Government

ignored a 30-year practice—now, health is taken care of by the Tobago House of

Assembly under the Fifth Schedule. This is what this Government did. The THA sent

the list of people to the Cabinet, the Cabinet totally ignored the THA list and appointed

their own Local Public Assistance Board. Five people: one person who was not

consulted; one person who is a Trinidadian; one person who is dead and two people

who do not even know what they got themselves into.

Hon. Senators: What?

Sen. S. Cudjoe: There is a dead man on the list. There is a dead man on the board.

Hon. Senators: Recommended?

Sen. S. Cudjoe: Mr. President, a dead man on the board formed by the People’s

Partnership Cabinet.

Sen. Hinds: Are you serious? [Laughter]

131


Sen. S. Cudjoe: Mr. President, I will tell something. Now we have two groups

of people and neither of these boards can operate because the board that was

recommended by the Tobago House of Assembly, do not have instruments of

appointment from the President. The board that was recommended by the Cabinet—by

the People’s Partnership Cabinet—they cannot work in Tobago because they have no

locus standing with the Tobago House of Assembly to deal with the Chief Medical

Officer or THA matters.

So, Mr. President, we have a serious issue at hand. And you know what is the

terrible thing? This Government claims that it loves Tobago and we respect the Tobago

House of Assembly and we would not step on your toes and that promised more

authority. If you promised more authority, would you not respect the little bit of

authority that we have now? [Desk thumping] This Government that promised more

authority did not even call to say, “Okay, I got your list of the people that you

recommended or I got your list but I do not like the people, I see something wrong;

what about John Mark or what about Jane Luke?” No consultation! They sent their

board over to Tobago to do interviews—[Interruption]—probably the spirit of the dead

man included. Anyway, that is the People’s Partnership—a caring Government.

I go to one final issue before I wrap it up. The Tobago House of Assembly,

Division of Tourism, had requested a meeting with the Minister of Transport to treat

with some Caribbean Airlines issues. We were looking at having more international

flights and treating with some of the issues for the airport in Crown Point. Now, we

waited for months and months and no acknowledgement from the letter. No calls from

the Minister to say, “I have the letter” and so forth. But anyway, after a couple of

months, the Minister sent an invitation for a meeting. The Minister invited the Minority

Leader in Tobago to the meeting to discuss Tobago House of Assembly/Caribbean

Airlines issues.

Now, Mr. President, if the United Nations or Caricom or any other government

comes to Trinidad to do business with the Government of Trinidad and Tobago, can

they just invite the Leader of the Opposition and negotiate with the Leader of the

Opposition? It does not work like that. The Opposition Leader cannot make that

decision anyway; that has to come before the Cabinet, same for the Tobago House of

Assembly. Issues treating with Tobago’s development have to come before the

Executive Council. We have an Executive Council in Tobago that runs the business of

the Tobago House of Assembly.

So, when the Ministers from this Government make announcements, “Oh yes, we

have consulted with the Tobago House of Assembly” and have their private

meetings with the Minority Leader, totally ignoring the Chief Secretary and

132


ignoring the Executive Council, and then tell us, “You love Tobago and you

respect the Tobago House of Assembly and you are willing to give us more

autonomy”, and you do not even respect the little bit of autonomy that we have

now? And these are the people who were on the platform saying, “We would not

be dumb dogs in Jerusalem, vote for us. We will give Tobago that authority, that

autonomy that it needs.” Also, calling on the past Parliamentarians and the public

figures in Tobago that used to be on the telephone calling in on the radio stations

and on the TV talking about autonomy, when the People’s National Movement

was in power, saying that Trinidadian Ministers are not supposed to come to

Tobago to treat with Tobago issues, and Trinidad is too much involved in our

business and so forth. Where are they now? Where is the Tobago Organization of

the People that was supposed to be this Tobago party? I tell you, Mr. President,

when I returned from the US in 2008, I had liked the vibes of the TOP because they

had always a Tobago blood, a Tobago fight running with them but they chose to

join with the UNC and after that, everything that they stood for went down the

drain.

I will tell you something, Mr. President. In this People’s Partnership, you will

hear a little rumbling. In any political party, you would hear little rumblings. The

COP would stand up and say sometimes, “I am not happy”. The MSJ would say,

“We need to talk. We have some things that we need to iron out.” Mr. President,

you never ever, on any issues, whether it is relating to Tobago or not, hear the

Tobago Organization of the People say, “You know what, we are having a

problem.” Take a look at that!

Anyway, I will tell you something. Only the Tobago House of Assembly can

deal with Tobago issues just like your Cabinet. The Cabinet deals with the issues

relating to the Government, the Opposition Leader cannot negotiate on behalf of

the Government of Trinidad and Tobago. If it is not happening in Trinidad, do not

do it in Tobago. You can never love us or care about us and that is how you are

treating our institution and that is the respect that you have for our people and you

want to find some place in Tobago to come and lead?

Finally, Mr. President, the CEPEP programme, I see in this document that they

are giving $44 million more to CEPEP and it hurts today to know that CEPEP was

created in Tobago. The Tobago House of Assembly developed the CEPEP

programme and we developed that programme for single mothers and low-income

families to be able to have a means of working to take care of their children and

for the small contractors that would not qualify for big contracts to have a chance

to get some experience and so forth. For 2010, this Government allocated $8

133


million to CEPEP and we have not received a cent. For 2011, I should say, they

allocated $8 million to CEPEP and we have not received a cent yet. In 2011, no

money was allocated to CEPEP, no money was allocated to URP but the

Government’s CEPEP office is up and running in Tobago, and the word on the

ground is that they are looking to recruit people now. And they respect Tobago?

Mr. President, I have one thing to say. It is not about how much money you

spend so much, it is how you serve the people that you say you serve; how you

improve the quality of their lives. I want to appeal to all Trinidadians and

especially Tobagonians, “de trouble dat yuh see in de day, doh light bou’eille

d’feu to go and see it in de night”. [Desk thumping]

Sen. Prof. Harold Ramkissoon: Mr. President, before I make my

contribution, I would like to join fellow Senators in extending heartiest

congratulations to Sen. Abdulah, the hon. Attorney General, our cricket team for

the exciting cricket they played, and at the same time, extend condolences to Sen.

Dr. Tewarie—a colleague here and also a former colleague at the University of

the West Indies.

Mr. President, my starting point in this debate—my entry in this debate—is

going to be a statement made by the Hon. Minister of Finance and I quote:

“2012 will not be a walk in the park.”

I hope I got the quotation correctly. I am tempted, Mr. President, to add that it will

also not be like a ride in a Porsche Cayenne but I am yet to have that experience.

Mr. President, I want to look at some of the indicators globally with respect to

the economy. Sen. The Hon. Kevin Ramnarine touched on some of the indicators

and I want to add to that particular list. The UK now has the second highest level

of debt after Japan, 500 per cent of GDP. Germany is the only country in the

Eurozone that is expected to have a positive growth rate in 2012, and at that, 5 per

cent. The World Bank has said that the Eurozone is already in a state of recession

and if the crisis deepens, it will spare no one and it could also trigger off a second

global recession. The strong economies, Brazil, India and China have lowered

their expectations with respect to growth rates also.

8.25 p.m.

So I think, Mr. President, we can safely conclude that what the hon. Minister

of Finance said with respect to 2012, the year is not going to be a walk in the

park. Given the fact that we are very much interconnected with the rest of the

world it is hardly likely that we are going to be untouched by the events around

134

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. PROF. RAMKISSOON]

us. The question, therefore, is not if, but to what extent we are going to be

affected in the Caribbean region and in particular in Trinidad and Tobago? Should

we heed the advice of the World Bank? And what is that advice with respect to

the World Bank: prepare for the worst and hope for the best, engage in

contingency planning, draw up a list of public spending priorities. In addition, if I

may add, some of us need to tone down a bit. We need to avoid repeating the

mistakes of the past, and we need to be sensitive to the times in which we live. I

say no more.

I now wish to turn to two general comments with respect to expenditure and

budget, the first one has to do with accountability. It seems, Mr. President, that we

move from budget to budget without great accountability. What I would like to

see is that when a budget is presented, each Minister accounts for whatever

progress that had been made in his or her Ministry: what projects have been completed

in the past year, what projects are works-in-progress and what projects did not get off

the ground. That would give us an idea of the achievement of the Government, a very

clear picture of the achievement of the Government in the past year.

The hon. Vasant Bharath, who is not with us today, attempted to do this and fairly

successfully in the last budget. He gave us a fairly good picture of what is happening in

agriculture, what he was able to achieve with respect to the first budget and what was

the level of achievement with respect to some of the projects that were not completed. I

would wish to encourage other Ministers to do so in future budgets.

Secondly, Mr. President, I want to talk about a vision. Budgets are not something

that should exist in a vacuum, they need to be related to some grand plan or a shared

vision. Given the fact that this Government came into power on a sort of short notice,

and the People’s Partnership is an amalgam of parties, one did not expect an articulated

vision during their first year; but I think the time is now right—this is the second

year—for us to have an articulated vision of where the Government intends to take this

country.

If you have a vision, then what would follow I imagine would be policies,

programmes, prioritization and then implementation. I view the budget as a mechanism

to implement the programmes and the policies. The vision must also tell us what type

of society we wish to create. We need to go, Mr. President, beyond building an extra

lane here and an extra lane there. We need to go beyond giving out a hamper here and a

hamper there. We need to go beyond repairing a bridge here and a bridge there. We

need to come up with permanent solutions to some of the pressing problems that

confront the nation.

135


The hon. Minister of Finance, I think in the Lower House, gave some figures

which I find rather startling. I think the Minister stated that if the poverty

threshold is about $1,500 per month, then 30 per cent of our population lives

below the poverty line. Now, if that is correct, to me that is a startling revelation.

What it tells me is that many persons are trying to survive on $1,500 a month. I do

not know how individuals can survive on $1,500 a month, but it tells me a bit

more than that. It tells me there are families in this country with two children who

are probably trying to make ends meet with $5,000 a month.

And in the same society, Mr. President, we have someone who was earning $2

million a month and claimed she could have been earning more. We have a

divided house and a divided house cannot stand. There are invisible walls in our

society, we have a society of the haves and the have-nots. That is not a tenable

situation, and this is a problem that we need to confront and tackle. If we ignore

this problem we do so at our own peril and I am sounding a warning to all those in

power—who have the capability to bring about change and to help restructure the

society—to do something about this. We need to create a more equitable and a

just society.

The hon. Minister of Finance, like myself, spent some time in Canada. And I

am sure he recalled the 60s when the well-known Canadian politician Pierre

Elliott Trudeau criss-crossed the country during an election campaign, and his

motto was to create a just Canadian society and he succeeded fairly well in

creating that just society in Canada. I am sure you will remember Pierre Elliott

Trudeau, one very articulate and charismatic politician in Canadian politics and,

in fact, a movie was made on Trudeau recently and, in fact, aired over one of our

television stations here in Trinidad and Tobago. I think that is what we need to do,

we need to start creating that new society that is more equitable.

Now, the hon. Minister also talked about looking at a new tax regime and I

fully support you, Mr. Minister. I think the time has come for us to do that and in

one of my contributions in this Senate I, in fact, mentioned the need to go back to

our tax system. We have one of the lowest tax regimes in this country. You look

at countries as Sweden—the Scandinavian countries have good social services—

but the tax system, some of them pay up to 50/60 per cent tax on their income. So

I fully support you—but I support you, hon. Minister, if you are thinking about

creating the new society, the society of tomorrow. I would not support you if you

are merely thinking about raising funds to put into other projects. If your vision is

a nobler vision to create the society of tomorrow for Trinidad and Tobago, I fully

support us reviewing the tax regime.

136


Mr. President, I want to now look at the Bill, Part 2, Item 54, Ministry of

Science, Technology and Tertiary Education; amount of decrease almost $13

million. Given the importance of science and technology as a tool for

development; given the fact that there are numbers of NGOs working towards

developing science and technology in the Caribbean and in Trinidad and Tobago

in particular, and the need to fund some of these NGOs; and given the need to

increase our spending to 1 per cent with respect to research and development

(R&D), to 1 per cent of GDP—I am taken back a bit with moneys being returned

with respect to science, technology and tertiary education.

I hope the Minister of Science, Technology and Tertiary Education or the Minister

of Finance in his winding-up would enlighten us as to why this amount of money was

returned. When it, in fact, could have been put into what I had suggested in the budget

debate, that we create an R&D centralized fund. [Desk thumping] If that centralized

fund was created then this $13 million which is neither here nor there could have gone

into that fund to help with research and development in the country.

Mr. President, I also want to mention that we need to develop science and

technology for another reason: it is a tool for sustainable development. I think Sen.

Abdulah talked about what we can do to ensure that we have sustainable development

down the road, that is one of the things we can do and we must do. We must invest

heavily in science and technology, particularly in information technology, but there is

another reason we must do so. There have been three transformative waves of

development in the history of mankind: the agricultural wave, the industrial wave and

the information and technology wave. Whatever the next wave is going to be, if we do

not develop science and technology and information technology, we will not be

prepared to reap the benefit of the fourth wave of transformative change in the world.

So the two reasons we need to invest in science and technology are: as a tool for

sustainable development and to prepare us for the next transformative wave of change

that may come our way.

Mr. President, I want to turn to tertiary education, and in particular I want to talk

about UTT a bit. There are problems at UTT that need to be addressed if we are to

convert or to make UTT contribute to national development. The problems are, as I

understand them, one: termination of contracts of staff members without notice. Now,

if you are working in a place and you can be fired without notice, your contract can be

terminated without due notice, it does not give you that kind of security you need to be

productive. So you have an environment that is not particularly secure, you are not

productive and the university is adversely affected; so we need to deal with that

kind of situation.

137


UWI has good procedures in place for dealing with renewal of contract or non-

renewal or firing of persons, they do not do it suddenly. UWI gives you a contract

for three years and they have criteria for renewal of contracts. If you perform in

terms of mainly research and teaching you get yet another three-year contract and

beyond that you would be considered for tenure. On the other hand, if after the first

three years they are not happy with you, they give you a one-year contract. So if you

are given a one-year contract that is enough notice, you know that they are not happy

with you; and that at the end of the year if you do not do what you are supposed to do,

you would have to leave the university.

8.40 p.m.

I think UTT needs to institute that kind of procedure to ensure that people feel more

secure in their job and if they are fired, they are fired for good reasons and they are

given sufficient notice. That is one of the problems that needs to be addressed.

The other problem is that there are apparently PhD students at UTT who do not

have supervisors. To me, that is not ethical. You do not take a PhD student if you do

not have a supervisor to supervise his or her work. It is as simple as that. That situation

has to be remedied. More than that, UTT is a university now in its initial stage of

development. UTT should be focusing more on strengthening its undergraduate

programmes and less on postgraduate programmes.

The third issue at UTT, Mr. President, is the duplication of programmes with other

tertiary level institutes. Now I brought this up in the Senate and the hon. Minister was

kind enough—he created a National University Council. I thanked him before for

doing this, but the sad news is that that council has apparently not met yet.

Sen. Karim: That is no trouble. It is headed by your campus principal.

Sen. Prof. H. Ramkissoon: Well, the last time I spoke with him, I was told that

there was not a meeting yet. Maybe they have met since. One of the problems, I think,

is that the heads of tertiary institutes are very busy people; almost as busy as Ministers

and what I would like to suggest to the hon. Minister is that maybe the Chair of that

committee should be someone from the outside, ideally a semi-retired person who has

had lots of experience working in tertiary education. That is my suggestion.

Sen. Karim: So change him then?

Sen. Prof. H. Ramkissoon: That is my suggestion to you.

Sen. Karim: Sure. I will take the suggestion.

Sen. Prof. H. Ramkissoon: Thank you very much.

138


Mr. President, it is my hope that the problems at UTT would be sorted out and

we can get on with the task of building a first-class university. I always make the

comparison between the UTT and UTech in Jamaica because they came up with

the same vision around the same time. UTech today has about 13,000 students,

almost twice what we have at UTT. More than that, they have five faculties. They

offer law, architecture—

Sen. Karim: Duplicating.

Sen. Prof. H. Ramkissoon: There is some duplication, yes.

Sen. Karim: Mona.

Sen. Prof. H. Ramkissoon: It is Mona and they should probably follow what

we are doing here with respect to setting up a National University Council.

Sen. Karim: They have a Commission for Education there.

Sen. Prof. H. Ramkissoon: They have, yes, but, Mr. President, I am talking

about the progress they have been able to make. They have done quite well and,

in fact, UTech advertised their programme in one of our newspapers recently.

More than that, they sent down a team to recruit students here in Trinidad and

Tobago—over the last month or so.

So UTech has had tremendous success. There are two reasons why they have been

successful at what they are doing: dynamic, strong, academic leadership; and the

second reason is that all political parties in Jamaica support UTech. So my only hope is

that we get on with building a first-class university with respect to UTT.

Mr. President, as I bring my contribution to an end, let me state that, in my view,

we face a very challenging future, not only in 2012. It can go beyond 2012. People are

talking about 2013. Some are talking about 2015. There is a tremendous amount of

uncertainty there. Your guess is as good as my guess or anybody else's guess. The

waters ahead are going to be choppy and turbulent. You must give the hon. Minister of

Finance credit for bringing stability to the system, stabilizing the ship. We must give

him credit for doing that. His duty is now to navigate those choppy and turbulent

waters, guide the ship through those waters and take it safely to port. That is his

challenge.

Sen. Dr. Balgobin was quite correct. That calls for making tough decisions. It is my

hope that the hon. Minister will have the will and the courage to make those decisions,

if not, history will not be kind to him.

Thank you very much, Mr. President. [Desk thumping]

139


The Minister of State in the Ministry of Arts and Multiculturalism (Sen.

Embau Moheni): Thank you, Mr. President, for the opportunity to make a

contribution on this Finance (Supplementation and Variation of Appropriation)

Bill for the financial year 2011.

In so doing, I must compliment the Minister of Finance, not only for showing

the will, but also for exhibiting the skill in taking on that serious challenge to

restore discipline, sobriety and propriety to the financial affairs of this country.

[Desk thumping]

It is one thing to say that the Minister of Finance made one prediction or the

other, but what we sometimes neglect is the fact that not only the Finance

Minister, but the People's Partnership Government walked into a situation when

we entered government that could only be described as a mine field.

Tonight, I would like to speak a bit about the Ministry of Arts and

Multiculturalism and some of the work that we have been doing in an effort to

add value to the lives of the people of Trinidad and Tobago in terms of arts; in

terms of the various departments of this Ministry.

We, too, have been plagued by that problem that all the other Ministries

encountered when they were established under this new Government. During the

past year and a half, we have had to address and pay out over $200 million in debt

that we inherited in our Ministry alone from the previous regime. We are not an

isolated case; all the other Ministries were faced with that situation.

So we give an allocation in order to provide; in order to provide value for our

people and, in so doing, you have to be going back to clean up the mess left by the

previous regime, the very persons who have the audacity to come here and talk as

if they are holier than thou.

During the 2011 period, in seeking to restore the museum housed at the Royal

Victoria Institute, we have had to expend $800,000 because we recognize the

value of the museum and what it should reflect for the country, what it should

reflect for our youth, as part of the memory that we need in order to create the

connections that are so necessary and that are so sadly lacking in our society

today.

Not only that, but we were able to host ten exhibitions as well as two quarterly

concerts, one of which focused on the contribution of our womenfolk who are so

critical in the transmitting of culture in any society.

140

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. THE HON. E. MOHENI]

That exhibition of our women artistes represented the 100th anniversary of the

hosting of the International Women's Day celebrations in 2011. As part of the

work of the National Trust, our Ministry was able to host five heritage lectures in

order to give our people a little more appreciation of the importance of the

preservation of our heritage, which is being lost.

That heritage that allows us to put our feet on the ground, going back to our

grandparents and our great grandparents in establishing that connection between

what they did, where they have brought us and where we have to take off from in

order to move into the future.

In so doing, we were able to host, in 2011, five heritage lectures at a cost of

$138,000 as well as four heritage tours to give our people a greater appreciation

of that richness of heritage that exists throughout our nation.

Through the National Library, NALIS, we recognized the importance of

assistance to our young persons, some of them who are underprivileged. As such,

we established the Sunday library targeting students who were preparing for their

examination.

In addition to this, we established two projects: one at the cost of $1 million in

order to provide the mobile library service to take into the outlying areas that do

not benefit from library services as well as the establishment of the American

Embassy Science Corner at the Port of Spain Young Adult Library, which will

provide science-based resource learning for the schools that did not have such

access.

We have also embarked on the construction of three new libraries: one at Rio

Claro, one at Chaguanas and one at Mayaro, in order to continue to pursue providing

the services and encouraging our young persons to do research, to read, to become, not

only functionally literate, but to become lovers of knowledge, which is so important in

taking this society to the next level.

Not only this, we have gone in the prisons to establish library services where we

have found over 60 per cent of the inmates are illiterate, so that the question of crime

and illiteracy are directly related and we have entered the prisons in order to seek to

uplift the literary standard inside there.

In addition to this, the Archive Division has embarked on a process to digitize the

items on CDs and DVDs in order to provide easy access for individuals who are

doing research, and during 2011 we were able to complete over 2,000 such items.

141


8.55 p.m.

Very important as well is the launching of the national registry which will

play a critical role for our artistes, promoters and all those who are involved in the

arts in one way or another. This national registry of artistes and cultural workers

will provide the avenues through which greater funding could go to our artistes

who play such a critical role in providing the example of the kind of excellence

that we need to strive after for the building of a better nation. But not only this,

we will also afford them free access through the Caribbean region, as well as

through Europe, where their platforms will be broadened in terms of their

opportunities to earn revenue in the expression of our art form.

So, notwithstanding the constraints that our Ministry has been faced with, as a

result of the need to address the debts that we have inherited which we have tackled

head on, we are working assiduously in seeking to pursue these goals and objectives. I

must speak to the fact that the Ministry has been called the Ministry of Arts and

Multiculturalism, an expression of the vision and wisdom of our Prime Minister. We

have inherited a society that has been very fragmented, which has been faced with

divisiveness, and needs to be given some kind of common purpose in the establishment

of our nation. We are seeking to pursue that development of the art form as

representative of all the ethnic groups, all the religions and all the sectors of our society,

in pursuit of what is so necessary at this point in time—the question of national

development.

Before I wind up, however, I would need to make one or two comments on the

contribution that was made by the previous presenter, Sen. Cudjoe. We have heard

much about the Tobago House of Assembly, which I do agree, as a representative body

representing Tobago, needs to be respected, but what we need to hear even more is the

question of the THA respecting the people of Tobago. [Desk thumping] What we need

to hear is the question of the Tobago House of Assembly accounting to the people of

Tobago for the finances that have been placed in their care [Desk thumping] and which

we have spoken to on previous occasions—the hundreds of millions of dollars that are

still not accounted for. What we need to address is respecting the population of Tobago

in terms of proper employment practices, devoid of nepotism, favouritism and all the

other “isms” that have plagued the people of Tobago over the years [Desk thumping]

which we cannot afford to forget, and which continues, so that we must look at both

sides of the coin.

This People’s Partnership Government is determined that proper financial

practices be adhered to at the central government level and just as well at the level

of the Tobago House of Assembly. This is what we want to hear about, and not

142


some frivolous issues. We want to hear about the issues involving the lifeblood

and the livelihood of the people of Tobago who have suffered over the past eight

years under a regime that has shown little consideration for the proper utilization

of the funds that have been entrusted in them—taxpayers’ money. [Desk

thumping]

So, Mr. President, we have much work to do. Again, I must compliment the

will and the determination, not only of the Minister of Finance, but of the other

Ministers in the other Ministries who have been faced with a financial mess that

was handed down to them by the previous regime. To hear Sen. Hinds get up and

talk about the People’s Partnership as being hopeless, something that they have

been propagating for the past year and a half, a partnership that has offered this

country for the first time, an opportunity for national unity—five parties

representing different sectors; different orientations, different thought patterns and

different ethnic groups coming together trying to offer a hope of national unity,

which is our salvation in moving forward—and his only comment would be to say

that it is hopeless. This is the same thing the previous Prime Minister said when

the partnership was established—it would not last, it would not this and it would

not that—instead of recognizing its worth.

We are faced with a situation where worth is sometimes very difficult for us to

recognize in our society today, and the time has come for us to put the cheap

politicking aside and recognize that we are faced with challenging times ;and,

notwithstanding the fact that the will and the determination of this People’s

Partnership Government has been able to bring some stability to the society, at

this point in time, if we are to move forward, we must move forward with that

conscious realization that we are faced with challenging times. As Sen. Prof.

Ramkissoon said, the international financial and economic environment is very

challenging and will impact and affect us here in Trinidad and Tobago.

The United Kingdom has already lost 700,000 jobs. We need to recognize that

politicking and propagandism are not going to get us anywhere. What is going to

save this nation is the recognition that unless we could inject some new hope—

which the Opposition is trying to destroy—into our people and a new

determination to work with a greater sense of unity in order to build this nation.

So, we need to continue to build the bridges, and my Ministry along with the

other Ministries remain committed to this in ensuring that those bridges are built

so that unity and strength could prevail. Thank you. [Desk thumping]

143


Sen. Dr. Victor Wheeler: Thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me at this

late hour to make a contribution on the Finance (Supplementation and Variation

of Appropriation) Bill 2012 for the financial year 2011. I just want to make some

brief comments on some of the reasons for the savings and transfers in the various

Ministries, and I would also address some of the matters raised by Sen. Cudjoe

and Minister Moheni with respect to the Tobago House of Assembly and Tobago.

First of all, with respect to Head 18, the Ministry of Finance, it said $2.8

million was transferred to meet operational costs of the Property Tax Reform Unit

for the period December 2010 to September 30, 2011. What we did not hear is

what the status of this property tax is, which was one of the campaign items when

the People’s Partnership Government came into power. Since it has come into

power there have been no property tax or land and building taxes collected. Now,

the Minister of Finance said that he plans to review the tax system, so I do not

know if this means that you have basically given the country a tax cut when you

came into office by not having them pay the property tax. Is the introduction of

some form of property tax or land and building tax going to be, what looking at

the tax structure will be? I do not know. I am hoping you could probably give a

comment on that in your winding-up.

Some of us have said that we have no problem paying tax. There are many

people who have said that they are not happy with it, but we all know that for the

Government to provide services to the population, one of the ways in which it can

provide that is by money earned either from earnings outside or from collecting

taxes from people. Throughout our history, when we were dependants of the

United Kingdom, the kings and queens made sure that they collected their taxes.

So, I am sure that there will be some efforts to reintroduce this, so I would like, at

least, your comments on that.

The second matter is, with respect to the Ministry of National Security, there

was a saving of $129 million as a result of the failure to complete negotiations for

Government’s hourly, daily and weekly-rated employees that were not finalized

in 2011. However, even if this is a saving for 2011, I am sure—and I hope

negotiations will be completed, at least, in this final year, because we have

already seen the labour community very upset for the dragging-out of

negotiations. I do not know if this may have been one of the reasons Sen. Abdulah

has now been elevated to the position of leader of the MSJ. I guess, in time, this

will be revealed—by the way, congratulations on your appointment.

144


There were some other Ministries where there were cost savings; for example,

in the Ministry of Health, there was a saving of $40 million because they did not

have to pay revised salaries, cost of living allowances and lump sum payment

owed to monthly-paid employees for the period January 01, 2008 to December

31, 2010.

9.10 p.m.

Below that, it is said, “there was a $64 million saving because of difficulty

recruiting suitably qualified persons to fill vacant contract positions in the

Ministry’s establishment”. I am pretty certain among this shortage would be a

shortage of specialist doctors and other health care professionals, which would be

very important and vital to the provision of health care in this country. I hope that

the Ministry of Health does have a serious plan to address this.

The other area I would like to come to is the Ministry of Sport and Youth

Affairs, where $5 million was requested for financial assistance in the national

and community sporting organizations, as well as high-performance athletes to

end the fiscal year 2011.

At this point, I would like to congratulate the cricket team, as my colleagues

have done, for their success in the T20 cricket campaign. I would also like to

make a request that, maybe, the Cabinet and the colleagues of the Minister of

Sport, assist him in resolving the very bitter public dispute that is taking place

with himself and the Trinidad and Tobago Cricket Board.

We do not want the success of this team to be affected in any way, by any

dispute among those in charge of the sport, because I have heard the Minister say

that he does not intend to provide anymore additional funding to the Trinidad and

Tobago Cricket Board. So, I really hope the success of this team, in particular the

star performance of the two individuals who have been the subject of the

dispute—I hope that this is resolved amicably and will not be a distraction for

them, they are certainly capable, and I am certain that with no distraction, they

will win the champions league later this year. [Desk thumping]

Sen. E. George: Well done.

Sen. Dr. V. Wheeler: I am quite certain. There was $5.5 million that was

allocated to the Ministry of Transport under Head 43, to meet operational

expenses of the Water Taxi Service to the end of fiscal 2011. I also saw in the

news recently, Sen. the Hon. Devant Maharaj said that he will be assisting Tobago

145


with respect to the ANR Robinson International Airport, where we will have the

airport open for 24 hours, and the flights will be extended until one o’clock. I am

actually pleased with this because that will allow me to get home on a Tuesday,

rather than having to stay here.

Hon. Senator: You stay at the Hyatt?

Sen. Dr. V. Wheeler: I am quite thankful of that. On that point, I would just

like to make some comments on what Sen. Cudjoe said about the Tobago House

Assembly being disrespected. As far as I am aware, transport is actually on the

Sixth Schedule, which is the responsibility of the Ministry not the THA. I am a

little bit baffled because, if the Ministry has responsibility for transport and the

Ministry is inviting the THA to a meeting to address it, I am not certain that those

being invited can actually dictate who is to be present at a meeting or not. [Desk

thumping] I mean, there have been episodes of disrespect to the THA by the

Ministry, but I think the THA has to be a little careful about how far it takes this. I

was a little bit concerned that the Minister addressing a matter as important as this

would help tourism, that the Executive Council will choose to exclude itself from

these discussions. I hope that this will not be to the detriment of the airport in

Tobago. I really hope so.

The other thing I would like to address briefly, before I am done, is the

Finance (Supplementation and Variation of Appropriation) (Financial Year 2011)

Bill, 2012, whereby Ministries that have not spent money at the end of that

financial year, the Ministry of Finance has the ability to vire money from one

Ministry to the other, to address needs in various departments. This is a process

that I am not aware takes place in the Tobago House of Assembly. I have said in

my budget contribution that I was a little bit concerned that the THA had requested

“$3 point something billion”, and only got $2.9 billion, and every year, has still

been able to have unspent balances.

Today, we have heard that the Ministry of Finance has not allocated any

money for CEPEP for the THA yet, there is a complaint about the Ministry of

Finance not financing or providing funds for a budgeted item. I have seen where

budgeted items under the THA, for example, the Tobago Regional Health

Authority (TRHA), in 2011 was allocated $202 million by the Ministry of Finance.

But, the THA only provided $157 million in funding for the TRHA, and this is at a

time when the TRHA has creditors owing millions of dollars that has resulted in

some of the services to the hospital being reduced.

146

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. DR. WHEELER]

I am labouring this point today, because in 2012, we expect the new hospital to be

delivered in Tobago. This is a hospital that the Tobago public has waited on for

over 30/40 years. We expect the hospital to be complete, fully equipped and fully

staffed. I am aware that for you to have a fully functional hospital, the agency

responsible for the function of the hospital when it is open would be the Tobago

Regional Health Authority. I hope that in this financial year 2012, the THA provides the

RHA with all its allocated funding of $288 million, because if this is not done—right

now the RHA is hampered with providing sufficient staff to provide the services to the

public, in terms of purchasing equipment, so that the Tobago public can get the type of

health care they deserve.

I hope that the conflict that is taking place between the THA and central

government is really not to the detriment of the people of Tobago, because it is

my belief that this is our best chance to get a hospital that we deserve, and I am

hoping that both parties will come together and work in the best interest of the

people of Tobago.

Mr. President, I know that this Bill deals with money that has already been

spent. I really do not have any major issues with it, and I thank you for my short

contribution. [Desk thumping]

Sen. The Hon. Fazal Karim: Thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to

join in this debate this evening, on the Finance (Supplementation and Variation of

Appropriation) (Financial Year 2011) Bill, 2012.

Let me, from the outset, join with colleagues on all sides, so far, to

congratulate the hon. Minister of Finance for ensuring that we are getting our

records and our arithmetic right, as we present the accounts to the Parliament. We

are proud of him and his accomplishments, and as has been said by Sen. Moonan,

we boast of him all the time, in terms of integrity and competence and calibre of

the individual who holds the position of Minister of Finance in the Government of

the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

Mr. President, I want to take this opportunity, since it is the first occasion that

the Senate is sitting and I am speaking, to wish you and all Members, as well, all

the best for the New Year, and may all of our dreams come true. Some are already

coming true, as we have congratulated unanimously this evening, so far, the

victory of our cricket team in Barbados last night, and we just had a prophecy for

another victory from our Sen. Dr. Wheeler.

147


I also wish to congratulate my distinguished colleague, Sen. Abdulah, for his

ascension to the leadership of the Movement for Social Justice, and we know that he

will do well in that position as well. At the same time, we want to extend our

condolences to Sen. The Hon. Dr. Tewarie, on the passing of his dear father and

to his family as well.

Mr. President, before I get into the meat of my contribution, I want to respond

to some comments that were made by my colleagues. I would do that briefly, in

terms of one that was made earlier by Sen. Ramkhelawan. He said that there were

three main growth areas that he identified; one in manufacturing, one in financial

services, in fact, he was exhorting what the Government should do and pursue in

terms of agriculture, by way of creating high employment.

Mr. President, it is always a sad thing for me to speak about agriculture in this

Senate, especially when I have to make reference to what happened in the past,

with respect to agriculture. The largest agro industrial company in this country,

with over 10,000 workers, was simply wiped away from face of Trinidad and

Tobago by the previous regime, and we are now reeling to recapitulate from that

loss that we have had in terms of returning to the heydays of agriculture.

In fact, when Caroni (1975) Limited was closed, what you found happening—

and Sen. Moonan made reference to this too—is, in many places, prime

agricultural lands were now overtaken by four-inch PVC pipes from the ground

up. In one case it was so ironic—and I had to comment on this when I was

launching an aviation school in central Trinidad—I really do not know whose

wisdom it was to build houses in the glide slope and the final approach of any

aircraft to a landing strip. I hope that has now been put to rest. Worse than that as

well, we have unoccupied lands from Caroni (1975) Limited, prime agricultural

lands, made into a gated community in central Trinidad. It is just overrun with

bushes, and we talk about agriculture.

In fact, as we talk about agriculture, I want to go into making some comments

about Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon’s contribution, when he talked about tertiary education—

Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon, I have a lot of respect for you. I know you are a man who has

lived many years of your experience in the university, and I too lament agriculture,

especially when we look at the days and we read of the days of the Imperial College of

Tropical Agriculture, world famous. In fact, in the village in which I live and continue

to do so, the Central Agricultural Research Station of Caroni (1975) Limited, was also

world famous, and under a Dr. Vlitas, at that time from Tate & Lyle, I would have

seen, strawberries, grapes, and pears growing there in that very station in the green

house. We again lament about agriculture.

148

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. THE HON. F. KARIM]

You spoke about the University of Trinidad and Tobago, which I want to

come to before I go into the substance of my contribution. UTT, in fact,

developed—like many of the companies that happened in the Point Lisas

Industrial Estate—out of the movement of people from traditional companies. For

example, when I went to Presentation College, San Fernando, I would have seen

the one fertilizer plant, “W.R. Grace” marked on the very large tank, and Point

Lisas, substantially, grew out of the expertise of W.R. Grace, of Texaco in those

days, and of Caroni (1975) Limited, and T&TEC, and what have you. I see Sen.

Ali is nodding, which means he is agreeing with what I am saying. And so too in

the case of UTT. UTT, effectively, has developed to a large extent out of the

expertise and the capacity of UWI, and people who would have left that university,

and of course other universities and other places in the world.

9.25 p.m.

I will make reference to my budget contribution, when I indicated that we

should avoid the duplication, the very duplication you talk about. We have the

Faculty of Agriculture and Science at the UWI, and now we have the University of

Trinidad and Tobago—before now, our administration—getting into cocoa

research unit, getting into all kinds of agricultural programmes, and you are

absolutely correct.

That is one of the reasons we started, and it is a manifesto promise that we

have committed to. In fact, that is one of the last things I did in keeping the

manifesto promise for 2010, and it is to appoint a national commission for higher

education.

Among its duties and responsibilities, the national commission for higher

education is supposed to rationalize the post-secondary sector; improve

efficiencies—teaching, learning and research, academia—but at the same time to

avoid the duplication, to avoid competition for the scarce resources, but increase

collaboration and cooperation. I think it was Sen. Ramkhelawan who said today

that Singapore was always used as a benchmark. In fact, Singapore has gone to

the stage beyond cooperation and beyond collaboration they have now launched

into the stage of co-creation.

As I speak about Singapore, one of these days in my contributions I want to

tell the country, in some analysis—as we celebrate our 50th anniversary—that I

would like to do a comparative study of Trinidad and Tobago in 1962 and

Singapore in 1965. That is when they became independent. It might be useful to

us to learn of some of those statistics.

149


Sen. Ramkissoon also made reference to some of the issues that are taking

place at UTT. These are some of the things that were brought to my attention

recently, and in an interview I indicated to the media that I have asked the

Chairman of UTT, Mr. Curtis Manchoon, to give a report on some of those very

matters that you have raised, and I can tell you that we are not going to be

compromising on students, PhD. thesis by lack of supervision.

In fact as you are well aware, that even if it is a case where a supervisor leaves

or for whatever reason, there can always be another supervisor who will have

continuity. It may not be under the same conditions but we will want to ensure

that we do not compromise the future success of that student.

I have indicated to the media that I will also want to let the country know—

and because these are some issues that are being raised—about the remuneration

packages, not for individuals to expose their individual packages, but to let them

know what obtains at the University of Trinidad and Tobago, as it relates to the

rest of the post-secondary and the tertiary sector, in terms of what you obtain at

UWI or the University of the Southern Caribbean or wherever have you. So it

would be very interesting news I am sure when the national community sees some

of the benchmarks upon which the packages have been platformed.

So, I just want to give you the assurance Sen. Ramkission that as soon as I get

the report I am sure it will be made public as well. We are going to advise—I

know that meetings have been held with the University of Trinidad and Tobago,

the Board of Governors led by the Chairman and the acting President. You would

have probably seen in the newspapers, yesterday, an advertisement to fill the

vacancy for President of UTT.

I did indicate in my contribution earlier on in the Senate what was happening

at the University of Trinidad and Tobago. I made reference to Tamana Park, the

Tamana campus, which is a major drain on the university, from an initial estimate

of TT $1.87 billion spent today, some $875,000 at about 60 per cent completion,

with current projections of up to a further $1.4 billion to complete. When we talk

about the University of Trinidad and Tobago, I do not want to go into too much of

the details at this stage, since I would have said some of that already in my budget

contribution, but certainly there has been a substantial haemorrhage of funds to

support what has been happening at the Tamana InTech Park.

Mr. President, I think Sen. Ramkisson also asked that we should give an idea,

when we are talking about the movement of funds—what has happened. He made

reference to the fact that there was something like $13 million of which you have

150


seen a decrease. And I just concurred with the Minister of Finance, and confirmed

the reason for that. It had to do with the realignment of portfolios, if you would

recall, and certainly in the case of the expenditures relating to the Ministry of

Science, Technology and Tertiary Education that you raised. I can refer you to

pages 101—104, I think, of this document which you would have.

Substantially, what we are talking about is that in the realignment of

portfolios, iGovTT, the National Information and Communication Technology

Company and its secretariat were repositioned to the Ministry of Science,

Technology and Tertiary Education. But the movement of funds that you are

talking about, to the extent of $7.4 million, had to do with Cariri being realigned

or repositioned to the Ministry of Planning and the Economy, so that there was

movement of $7.5 million. The Institute of Marine Affairs was repositioned to the

Ministry of Housing and the Environment, and that amounted to $3.7 million.

You had some projects arising out of that, for example, with respect to the

construction of the Institute of Marine Affairs. You had a $2.5 million movement

from there. So I just wanted to explain that when you asked the question about

whether we were missing that $13 million which could have been spent on

research, it really had to do with the realignment of the portfolios, and therefore,

the movement of the sums of money.

Mr. President, I take this opportunity as Sen. Ramkisson also exhorted, to

indicate what we have done so far with the money that were allocated to our line

Ministries. I will start with Tobago, since Dr. Wheeler spoke substantially about

Tobago and the Tobago hospital. I will deal with some of the matters with respect

to Tobago and the expenditure from the Minister of Science, Technology and

Tertiary Education.

Quite unlike the houses that Sen. Moonan spoke about, and I know that it was

raised on the other side by my Opposition colleague, when he said today that I

would have had the most amount of houses that were distributed. The shouts from

the other side were, “We build that”. Yes, that is correct, and he indicated that we

had to spend quite a lot of money in bringing them up to the stage of distribution.

Well, I can tell you that we delivered on something that you started but were

unable to complete in Tobago—the state-of-the-art Tobago Technology Centre at

Canaan/Bon Accord.

You cannot escape that building when you are driving from the airport to

Scarborough, and I want to advise that classes have already commenced at that

technology centre. Very importantly, and I am sure that Dr. Wheeler would be

happy to know that, prior to now, persons from Tobago who were pursuing the

151


Bachelor’s in Education at UTT—and this again goes in terms of Prof.

Ramkission’s comments—had to commute from Tobago to Trinidad causing

dislocation in terms of their family. There was personal dislocation, and it also

increased costs for housing and commuting. The Bachelor’s in Education

Programme is now being conducted in Tobago—for Tobagonians by Tobagonians

as well—at the Tobago Technology Centre. [Desk thumping]

When I had the privilege of studying in Singapore, it always impressed me. In

fact, when I was there in 1997, Singapore was preparing to launch Singapore ONE.

ONE means One Network for Everyone. Singapore is just the size of Tobago—just

like that. I went back to Singapore a few months ago, towards the end of last year.

God did not give them any additional land space, they have the same amount of

square miles; but when I was there in 1997 they had 3 million people. When I

went back 14 years after, the population had risen to 6.5 million people, of which

1.5 million were expatriates who really were being invited because of their

contribution through their brain power.

In fact, I remember when I was talking to one of the technocrats from the

early days of Lee KuanYew, I asked him, “What would you ascribe to one of the

success stories of Singapore?” In fact I am hoping to get him on a live hook-up

one of these days when I want to launch a programme in Trinidad and Tobago. He

turned to me and he said, “I tief, I tief”. And I said, “What do you mean you tief?”

I thought he did not understand the question, because sometimes as Trinidadians

and Tobagonians we are told that we speak too fast; we “sing song”. So I said,

“What would you ascribe to one of the successes of Singapore?” And he said, “I

tief. “We tief brain, and if you are bright, we invite you to Singapore.”

Mr. President, whenever I look at Tobago it reminds me, in a sense, that

Tobago has the potential, like Trinidad, to become a country like that. I know for

a fact, for example, that we can do a lot, and we will be doing a lot more. One of

the ways in which I want to proceed in terms of the development strategy is

through the ICT sector, and reference was made here again this evening with

respect to that. In that regard, I propose to launch through the Ministry of Science,

Technology and Tertiary Education, what I call closing the digital gap. In that

regard, in December last year, we launched with a grant of US $90,000 from the

United States Government, US AID, and we now have a dedicated, mobile

computer facility for Tobago that goes from place to place, and from village to

village, ensuring that we teach computer literacy. That mobile facility will not

only be a teaching facility, I propose that it would also be an assessment facility.

152


You would have recalled that towards the middle of last year we launched an

initiative in Trinidad and Tobago for the first time, in fact for the first time in the

entire Caribbean, called the Workforce Assessment Centres. Workforce

Assessment Centres are opportunities for persons with skills and competencies,

but no recognition of those skills and competencies by way of certification. You

can now go into those centres, present yourself, and be certified—after you have

been assessed—towards a Caribbean Vocational Qualification within the national

qualification framework or certainly at the level of the institution awarding that

qualification to you.

Mr. President, as we speak, we are preparing to open the new O’Meara MIC

Technology Centre. I have been advised—I visited yesterday—that we now have

approximately 225 persons who are already certified and ready to be awarded

through that facility, as part of the Workforce Assessment Centres, and we plan to

do that everywhere. We plan to do that in Tobago as well.

In fact we have plans to launch a trade school in Tobago on the PTSC

compound, in collaboration with VMCOTT, and that we hope would happen within

the first quarter of this calendar year, between now certainly and June. But we

have plans in place, and we should be announcing them very shortly.

I want to say as well, Mr. President, that yesterday, too, I had the opportunity

to visit Costaatt’s newest addition to their campus, which will be in Sangre

Grande. For the first time Costaatt will have its home in Sangre Grande on the

main road, and will serve communities, for example: like Arima, Wallerfield,

Valencia, Guaico, Cumuto, Sangre Grande, Toco, Matelot, Manzanilla, Biche,

Mayaro, Guayaguayare and Rio Claro, Coalmine, whatever have you. And today I

know for a fact that furniture has gone in already. I saw yesterday, and we

propose that within a month’s time, and we want to set that date in consultation

with the hon. Prime Minister, we are going to formally launch the Costaatt Sangre

Grande Centre that would bring learning to the people of the entire north-eastern

region of Trinidad.

Mr. President, as I talk about bringing learning to the people, I want to also

advise that we are going to be commencing a new initiative in learning. I was

thinking about launching it as a knowledge network, but I was just toying with the

acronym, L-E-A-R-N-T-T. We are yet to formalize it; I am just advising what the

concept could be; and LEARNTT will be Learn Trinidad and Tobago—the National

Knowledge Network of Trinidad and Tobago.

153


I know that my colleague, Sen. Hinds, is taking in everything that I am saying.

He is in deep meditation [Laughter] and thought, and I know that he always

listens attentively whenever I am speaking. He is my very good friend and my

brother. [Interruption] [Laughter] I did not mean to wake you up.

Sen. Hinds: This is just for the record: I want my friend to know that I am

well and truly awake.

Hon. Senator: Now, now.

Sen. The Hon. F. Karim: And I will be credited with ensuring that that

happens. [Laughter]

Mr. President, I want to just also say that for such kinds of deficiency and

sleep defects, we will be taking care of things like that with the new nurses

training academy that we are going to launch in El Dorado, and that too is going

to address the critical shortage in the medical sector. As a matter of fact, we have

calculated approximately 3,000 vacancies in terms of nurses and medical workers.

9.40 p.m.

I want to also indicate that we are going to be having what is called a World

Skills T&T this year, 2012—this year being very significant for us in terms of our

50th anniversary. World Skills T&T really is going to showcase the talent and the

skills of Trinidad and Tobago in competitions throughout the country. I want to

also—as I talked about Independence, Mr. President, I had the good fortune on

my way back from India recently—and I know my good friend will want to ask

me to say something about India which I will make mention of shortly. I had the

good fortune of—through Trinidad and Tobago, and being at this time able to

hold the Chairmanship of the Commonwealth Connects ICT Committee. I stopped

off in Marlborough House in London and I was so happy and pleased to be there.

I remembered the signing of Independence—that celebration we had in Trinidad

and Tobago and I still remembered as a little boy those favourite photographs of

the Union Jack being brought down and the National Flag being hoisted.

Sen. Deyalsingh: That Rudranath Capildeo did not falter.

Sen. The Hon. F. Karim: I want to tell you that we compliment all those

persons who have lived, who have loved and who—[Crosstalk]—I see there is an

Independence debate I am starting here, in terms of Dr. Capildeo and Dr. Eric

Williams.

154


Mr. President, through you, I take this opportunity to say that Marlborough

House is a wonderful place, full of history, but more importantly for the benefit of

the people of Trinidad and Tobago it is the place in which we signed our

Independence award in terms of getting Independence as a nation—from colony

to Independence.

Mr. President, I said earlier on that I want to make mention of some of the

things that are going to happen and the benefits out of the India mission. My

colleague, the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs made some comments and,

in fact, gave you some information with respect to the benefits of that mission. I

am sure Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon is looking on attentively; he will want to hear

some of this with respect to the tertiary sector.

So, I want to say, Mr. President, and colleagues, that among the meetings I

had, I met with the Minister of Culture, Mrs. Kumari Selja, and we had a very

wonderful meeting and, in fact, they are going to assist us in terms of the exhibits

of science, contemporary art, masterpieces and paintings from Trinidad and

Tobago to India. It was at that meeting, as well, we had discussions in terms of

donation of steel pans to India and the training of players in India through the

University of Trinidad and Tobago. I have spoken to my Cabinet colleague, the

Minister of Arts and Multiculturalism, who is in support of this initiative.

One of the important meetings—and I am sure academic colleagues in this

audience would recall the famous Indian Institutes of Technology like, in Delhi,

in Kanpur and so on. I want to tell you that the Minister of Finance also left his

mark, as you heard earlier on, in terms of the Jawaharlal Nehru Niversity (JNU)

and the Indira Gandhi National Open University (IGNOU), which are very

important institutions of higher learning. One of the things that the University of

the West Indies, signed with the Jawaharlal Nehru University was a memorandum

that allowed for faculty exchange, student exchange, co-supervision and research

in collaboration with both universities, in heritage and diaspora studies. They also

had discussions with the energy and resources institute and as I indicated, the

Indira Gandhi National Open University.

The University of the West Indies, also through the principal, had an

agreement with the Shriram Institute of Delhi University and that outcome was

with respect to work done for research, testing and applying new technologies.

Mr. President, one of the highlights of the mission, with respect to ICT, was

the fact that our team from the iGovTT met with the head of Global and Infosys in

Bangalore, and they agreed to send three faculty members—well, to receive three

155


faculty members from Trinidad and Tobago for training and also to send members

from Infosys who will assess the computer landscape in Trinidad and Tobago in

terms of the kinds of courses, whether they are appropriate. We had a meeting

with the executives from the Skanda Group. Skanda really is a group that is

involved as well, in terms of manufacturing the tablet computers and they have an

interest in manufacture in those computers in Trinidad and Tobago.

People often ask you what the tangible outcomes of these missions are. Well,

one of the tangible outcomes will be: there was an agreement signed by NIherst

and the Director General of the National Council of Science Museums and they

have agreed to bring their science museums to Trinidad and Tobago. It is a

travelling exhibition and it is entitled: “India, the Culture of Science in 2012”. We

expect that to be here in May. You will see it and you will be invited to attend.

Another important initiative that was signed was with the Pandit Deendayal

University; it is a petroleum university.

Let me also say that as I speak today, I want to tell you and to tell this Senate

that we have received the advisor to the President of Nigeria, Mr. Kuku. He

landed this evening and he is here to look at the training that is being conducted

for the 100 Nigerian students at the National Energy Skills Centre (NESC), in

Point Lisas. We have the Nigerian students—it is now into two months

approximately—[Interruption]

Sen. Hinds: They are from India?

Sen. The Hon. F. Karim: From Nigeria and I want to also say that we are

very proud of them; they are doing very well and they are pursuing studies in

automotive, welding, industrial-mechanical maintenance and heavy-equipment

maintenance and operations.

I just wanted to say, Mr. President, the NESC is an important institution in

providing global training; not only training to Trinidad and Tobago nationals, but

even to the nationals of Nigeria and the rest of the world. [Desk thumping]

Mr. President, I can say quite a lot more but I think I have given an insight

into some of the usage of the funding that the hon. Minister of Finance has

allowed us to use. I know that he is very keen on the maritime sector, and again I

know that Sen. Ramkhelawan spoke earlier on and he said that we are not a

gateway, but I want to say that we are in fact a gateway. We are the gateway to

the Americas, to South America and we are dealing with—through the Ministry

of Energy and Energy Affairs as well—we are talking to Petrobras University in

terms of linkages there, in terms of North America and in terms of Central

156


America. And in case you have any doubts about our location as an entrepôt and

as a gateway you just need to start reading about what is happening in Panama

and what is happening in Panamax. That is an important investment for the

maritime sector.

I know Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon—as I wind up—indicated that we need to look

at UTT. Mr. President, I would want to invite you one day and Members of this

august body to visit the Maritime Campus at UTT in Chaguaramas. Heavy

expenditure, “nice” as my colleague, Sen. Al-Rawi is saying, wonderful, but a lot

of investment, millions of dollars heavily underutilized. Therefore, we are now

into promoting the maritime sector and the Minister of Finance in closing here

was saying that in fact Waterloo will be one of those centres. Not only are we

going to have it at Chaguaramas, but we are going to have it in other places and in

Tobago as well.

Mr. President, Ladies and Gentlemen—[Interruption]

Sen. Hinds: What about the pre-engineering programme?

Sen. The Hon. F. Karim: The pre-engineering programme, that is going well.

It used to be called PUP and it is now called the Pre-engineering and we are

advancing that and it continues to be an important articulation to prepare. I see

you are very well aware now that you are awake. [Laughter] You see that is what

the energy does to you, when you take a deep sleep and you internalize the

message that we have given to you, you are now in a position to respond and

therefore we want to invite you to pursue a course at the University of Trinidad

and Tobago.

Mr. President, I thank you very much.

Sen. Pennelope Beckles: Sen. Karim was “waxing warm boy” at this hour.

Mr. President, let me just join with my other colleagues in wishing you the best

for 2012, and also extending best wishes to the entire Senate and the staff. I also

would like to join my other colleagues in expressing condolence to hon. Minister

of Planning and the Economy Sen. Tewarie and to also express congratulations to

the Trinidad and Tobago cricket team and Trinidad and Tobago Cricket Board of

Control and also wish them the best for 2012. I also would like to congratulate

Sen. The Hon. comrade David Abdulah on his ascension—[Interruption]


Sen. P. Beckles: Yes, I called him Comrade. He knows why. [Interruption]

157


Sen. Hinds: No election.

Sen. George: Advisor.

Sen. P. Beckles: —as the leader of the MSJ and to wish him the best. [Desk

thumping]

Mr. President, there are just a couple of matters that I [Crosstalk] would like

to raise. I know that the Minister has left and I hope that someone would inform

him, because there are not many, but for me they are very important. The first one

I would like to raise—and I have not really seen it addressed, but I suspect that

with the increase for the Ministry of Finance, maybe that is one of the matters to

be dealt with, but it has to do with the Amendment to the National Insurance

Scheme and the minimum guarantee for monthly retirement pension. I am raising

that because almost on every occasion I see some senior person—including this

morning—who asked about this matter, and it was a matter that was addressed in

the last budget where the Minister stated that the minimum pension benefit was

increased to $3,000 for a vast cross section of persons in the Finance Bill of 2010.

He indicated that despite those persons being insured under the NIS, making

contributions, the minimum national insurance retirement benefit remained

unchanged from the sum of $2,000. And in order to bring equity to the system, the

minimum NIS retirement pension will be increased to $3,000 per month during

fiscal year 2012, and people are anxiously awaiting that.

So, I have not seen it as one of the items in terms of any sort of adjustment or

transfers, but at least I hope the Minister could make some comment on that to

bring some comfort to those who are awaiting this implementation.

The other matter has to do with the issue of the implementation of the $1,000

to the other categories of persons; that is to say the Coast Guard, Fire Services and

other members of the protective services who were to be brought in line with the

allocation—SRP, of the $1,000 that was allocated by this Government when they

made that comment some time last year. I think in the previous budget the first

announcement was made in relation to the police and then later on it included the

others: Prisons, Fire, Coast Guard and so on. I looked again at the transfers and

so, and I did not see anything here in relation to that.

Mr. President, on page 33 of the Supplementation and Variation of

Appropriation for fiscal 2011, the document that was submitted to us, I saw where

there were savings of some $129 million in relation to the fact that the

negotiations for the new arrangements for Fire and Prisons—that those were not

yet completed.

158

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. BECKLES]

9.55 p.m.

So, clearly, there is funding available to meet that promise that the

Government made. On the same page 33, I saw where there was approval to

facilitate payment of travelling allowances to 15 newly recruited immigration

officers; that that was not finalized, so there was a saving of some $6 million.

If I can just express some concern that one gets the impression that there is

quite a bit of savings, but in having those savings, the question that one asks is:

why savings in those particular areas? Sen. Dr. Wheeler referred to the issue of

the savings under the Ministry of Health, for example, and that is such a

substantial amount of savings that that is cause for serious concern, because you

are talking about some $60 million-plus in savings. The unfortunate thing is that

we are not really quite aware as to exactly what that substantial amount of savings

is.

As a matter of fact, you are talking on page 34 that there was difficulty in

recruiting suitably qualified persons to fill vacant contract positions, and there we

are talking about some $64.2 million. That is a substantial amount, and those

issues as they relate to proper health care—I mean, we begin to understand that

something has to be wrong, whether it is in the whole issue of the human resource

area and how they go about actually filling these positions, that you would have

so much savings.

The other matter that I would want to raise is—it may not be for some people

a very big issue, but I looked at the Ministry of the People and Social

Development, and I saw where they had to make a transfer of some $1.2 million

to meet the cost of telephones for the period June to September—$1,170,918,

which amounts to almost some $300,000 a month in telephone bills.

Some of us may just pass that over as casual, but it tells us—I mean, I do not

know how many other Ministries have similar challenges, but it is clear if you

have to meet telephone bills of $1.2 million for a four-month period for a

Ministry, that speaks volumes. Maybe that is an indication of improved service in

the Ministry, but I am sure most of us know that when you call most Ministries it

is almost impossible to even get through.

At page 40, looking at the Ministry of Housing and the Environment, I saw

where there was a saving of some $42 million. A number of projects which

remained at the embryonic stages of development were rescheduled for

commencement in fiscal year 2012. Whilst the Government is speaking about

performance and doing very, very well, it is clear that there is some clear

159


indication that management of some of the projects and planning in some of the

Ministries, clearly, are not taking place. And even though we argue that some of

this has to do with realignment in some of the Ministries—and that is, in truth and

in fact so, that you have to have transfers and so to other Ministries—it is clear

that some of these savings clearly tell us that the issue of planning is a serious

matter and governance in some of these Ministries—that you have a substantial

amount of savings taking place.

Then if we were to go to the same Ministry of Housing and the Environment,

you would see that they had to meet operational expenses for CEPEP for the period

August to September 2011, and just for that period alone the figure was some $44

million. So if there are some challenges for payments for CEPEP in Tobago, well,

just in two months they spent some $44 million—

Sen. Hinds: In Tobago.

Sen. P. Beckles: That is CEPEP in Trinidad. And, of course, you know that

was the same programme that was condemned resoundingly by this Government.

[Desk thumping]

Hon. Senator: Feeding the trough.

Sen. P. Beckles: The other interesting thing that I looked at when I looked at

this entire—this $300 million that has been allocated to the “Colour Me Orange”

project, I will be very interested in exactly what Ministry this $300 million was

allocated from, whether it was Housing, whether it was the CEPEP. It was a

programme that was mentioned sometime during the year; it was never from the

budget in the last budget presentation or the one before. So I guess maybe

sometime again some further supplemental variation will come again to treat with

some savings from some Ministry that would be transferred to deal with that.

I want to ask the hon. Minister to look very closely and consider a matter in

relation to the credit union movement. In the first page of the document the

President speaks to the Colonial Life Company, looking at the figure of

$748,200,000, and it deals both with Clico, and he also speaks of HCU later on. I

would like the hon. Minister of Finance to look at an area that I think requires his

consideration, and it really has to do with the issue of the credit unions and the

whole issue of interest payments.

Now I happen to have attended a couple of meetings with the credit unions

when this matter was discussed, and I am advised that the credit unions have

received communication from the Ministry of Finance indicating that no interest

160


is to be paid on any deposit which matured after the budget presentation of 2010.

What it means, therefore, is that a credit union whose deposit matured on the day

following the budget presentation of 2010 would get absolutely no interest,

although Clico had used their funds for two years and 364 days.

When the credit union is paying interest on these very deposits, negative

interest margins could lead to the risk of solvency. Now, whilst there are some

credit unions that would be able to treat with this, some credit unions will not be

able to do so. It may be that the Minister is aware of this situation, but I do not

think that this is a situation where you will have a one-size-fits-all approach and,

therefore, I would like him to give some consideration to this matter, as it is a

matter that is really very serious.

Listening to the majority of credit unions, I know that they are extremely

happy for the position taken by the Government in relation to recognizing the

challenges faced by a number of credit unions as it relates to this matter, and I

know he has gotten commendations for recognizing the special risk that have been

posed to the credit union movement in this matter. I would also like to suggest

that it is a matter that should be given further consideration so as not to put them

in further jeopardy. So I will ask him kindly to give some consideration to that

matter. [Desk thumping]

The hon. Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs sought to give us some

comfort that, in relation to the exportation of LNG, only 19 per cent now goes to

the United States. Looking at today’s Business Guardian, I still want to suggest

that the confidence with which he speaks as it relates to the natural gas price, I do

not know that everyone shares that confidence; that the fact that we are now

exporting the majority of our gas to, I think he said Europe and places in Asia and

South America, that we should not concern ourselves.

I would just like to share with him that in today’s Guardian—and I am

referring to an article that says: “Natural gas price plunge aids US families,

businesses”. And there are just probably two important paragraphs, one says that:

“Companies that drill solely for natural gas are earning less these days, too.

That’s prompting some to hunt instead for oil, whose price is near US $100 a

barrel."

Of course, the entire article is dealing with the future of natural gas and the fact

that people are clearly saying that there are going to be some challenges because

in truth and in fact, natural gas is cheap. If I could just say very quickly, they are

actually referring to the fact now that in the United States:

161


“With electricity prices falling, the profits of all electric power producers,

whether they rely on coal, nuclear or wind—are shrinking.”

They went on to say:

“…drillers aren’t reducing natural gas production as much as they would have

during previous periods of low prices. They’ve found ways to produce the fuel at

much lower cost so they can be profitable at much lower prices.

The benefit of falling natural gas prices to homeowners is not as big as a major

drop in oil and gasoline prices would provide.”

So that people are now saying that natural gas, of course, is available, much more than

before. I expect that it is a matter that you are paying close attention to, but I do not

think it is a situation where you should simply say, “Well, only 19 per cent is going to

the United States; the rest is going to Europe, South America and Asia where we are

getting a much better price.” I think one should err on the side of caution.

The last matter that I want to address has to do with the fact that the Attorney

General, before he left, and a couple other speakers, indicated that the—if I could use

his words, he basically said that the Government is taking the country on to a specific

path of growth development.

10.10 p.m.

He was very flamboyant in his words in terms of describing where the country is

heading.

I looked at the Express today—the editorial and the headline says “State of

dizziness” and it may be that some of the Members on the other side would want to

read this editorial. So sometimes when you endorse and give yourself so much credit,

there are others who have a totally different view.

Now, at the second paragraph it says—probably I should read the first paragraph:

“There is more than a touch of irony in the United National Congress describing

itself as ‘stronger than ever’ as it prepares for tomorrow’s celebration in marking

the second anniversary of its election of Kamla Persad-Bissessar to the position of

political leader.

At a time when the country is reeling from a new spiral of murders, when the

economy is in stagnation, and the politics of the ruling party is marked by open

expressions of disenchantment among the partners and talk of internal conflict at the

highest levels of the main partner, the UNC’s claim of being stronger than ever is,

at best, being overconfident.” [Desk thumping]

162


This is not from the PNM, this is from the Express. Just to jump a bit and come

to the end. And they are referring—this is specifically to the Minister of Finance:

“In addition, the Government has spent considerable sums of taxpayers’

money in various retreats for review and training. And yet, the Partnership

administration keeps lurching from one misstep to another, burning up public

goodwill and confidence at an alarming rate. Twenty months into office, the

Government has the country close to dizziness from the assault on its

intelligence and sense of logic.”

[Desk thumping]

And the advice it gives to the Minister of Finance:

“The latest unexpected missile to land on us is the Finance Minister’s

announcement of the Government’s intention to review taxes. Speaking at a

gathering of the COP faithful, the Minister casually announced the

Government’s intention to review taxes with the aim of creating income

equality. Vagueness of statement aside, what is the policy basis on which the

Government is pursuing this path? Where is the planning framework into

which this strategy fits, what level of consultation has taken place on this

matter, and with whom? Or is this just another unplanned, ad hoc

announcement doomed to end up as yet another red herring distraction, after

yet another convulsion of our political nervous system?”

So very often when the criticism comes and it comes from the Opposition, it is

always because we oppose. I wonder what the Government has to say when they

read such an editorial in the newspapers. At the end of the day, I heard Sen.

Moheni, in his closing statements talk about a new type of politics—for us to stop

the politicking and political propaganda as we move forward. That is very

idealistic, and I am sure a lot of us share that view. But the truth is that when we

examine the performance of the Government over the last 19 months, the same

political propaganda that Sen. Moheni is asking us to avoid, that is an activity

which this Government has perfected. [Desk thumping]

So we are happy to know as Sen. Moonan said, they have corrected some of

the shortcomings, of some of those contractors who failed in their responsibilities

to do what they are contracted to do. I am sure on this side we would want to say

that we certainly condemn, and we do not support any contractor who has been

paid by—whether this Government or the last government to do a good job and

they did a poor job. I have said from time to time in this Parliament that some of

us are willing to accept what I will call “it could go so” and sometimes we give

people stars, sometimes even bonuses, for not performing properly in Trinidad

163


and Tobago. So if it is the Government of the day has sought to correct that, I

congratulate you for correcting it. Let us hope that in the selection of your

contractors that you could learn from some of the mistakes that we may have

found ourselves, not deliberately, but certainly from time to time what does not

take place is the proper supervision.

So that we are happy to know that you have given out 500 houses. As the PNM

we should not in any way feel unhappy about it, and where credit is due, credit is

due. Therefore, the PNM is still to be taking credit for its policy and programmes,

[Desk thumping] in relation to housing and many other things. You will find as

you are in Government for the next couple of years, that there are times when,

with all the good intentions, that there are projects which you have embarked on,

for which you will find that there will be similar situations as the one you

encountered where you spoke about the challenges as it relates to the toilet and

other things. Do not feel that that is an isolated incident, and that only happened

under the PNM and it would not happen under your Government. But we will wait

because I am sure such situations would arise.

Therefore, those are the few matters that I would like—as I indicated, I had

just a couple of matters to raise. And certainly we look forward to a very

productive year, one in which we would probably accept some of the advice that

Sen. Moheni talked about, and I do hope that there would be a much greater

cooperation certainly from my colleague who is not here right now—the Leader

of Government Business, so that we probably could achieve a lot more in the

Senate this year. [Desk thumping]

Sen. Dr. James Armstrong: Thank you, Mr. President, for allowing me to

join in this debate. I would like to start with another article following on from

where Sen. Beckles, just made some comments about the economy. Interestingly

enough, I read a similar article with respect to natural gas and the effects that it

might have on our economy. Quite recently, on January 19, there was actually an

article CNBC natural gas prices on CNBC. And the article was on the fact that

“Natural Gas Prices Fall Further”, and that there is a glut and that future in gas do

not look too good, and that in fact, there is no indication that that situation is

going to improve any time soon. And, I found that rather curious. The other thing

that struck me was the fact that there is also an indication that within the United

States they are also thinking of now becoming an exporter of gas, which again I

found to be rather strange, since we have been seeing them really as importing

gas.

164

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. DR. ARMSTRONG]

However, the implication is that our economy is not doing extremely well, and

that there are no indications that this is going to improve significantly in the near

future. With respect to the items that we are looking at in the Appropriation Bill, I

was quite surprised as well, at the fact that there are savings that accrued in the

budget. I would like to think that this is not the responsibility of the Minister of

Finance. My suspicion is that he perhaps, as a good soldier, is presenting the best

face of this problem, of this issue. But clearly, it has to be that there is a lack of

planning and a lack of management for that sort of thing to have happened. How could

we have savings in education for instance, when children are underperforming? How

could we not have spent all the money that we had allocated when we have so many

problems to face? And I want to say that if this economy is not doing well, if this

country is not doing well, we will all have to sink together. We cannot have some

people sinking while others are doing very well, and I have said this on a number of

occasions.

Quite recently, I got a request—I am actually a Member of the Trinidad and

Tobago Art Society, and I got a request from a school in the Morvant/ Laventille area.

Actually, the request did not come to me, it came to artists—and I do a bit of painting.

And it was from a teacher who was asking for assistance in some art projects with the

students. I actually decided I would offer my services, because it is a school in a

depressed area. In fact, the school, I think, it is Horquette Baptist Primary School.

So I went and I met with the teachers, and I must say that I was extremely pleased

by that interface. And what did I see? Children who were well-dressed, quite happy,

and children with a lot of hope, a lot of aspirations; the teachers were committed. And

what crossed my mind in this primary school of children between five and 14 is, what

happens to them next in this country? What happens to them next in this country? Their

aspirations, the hopes that they have.

I got some of my friends to go there with me—Dr. Earl Lovelace, who is a novelist,

and wrote “Dragon”, and knows a lot about Laventille; an acclaimed artist—Dr.

Hinkson, he was there, and we said we have to recommit ourselves to this community

and other communities like that—and we are going to move ahead on that. All the kids

said “Good Morning”, and what I would like to see is that the way in which we are

developing, that they continue to do that.

What did they want? When we were leaving, one child ran up and asked the

teacher for a football to play in the field, the football was ruptured and there was a bit of

heckling—they filled it with paper—a football. The field that they played football on

needed to be repaired. But we are returning money in the Ministry of Education,

and we are not spending all our money. That bothers me.

165


10.25 p.m.

What I would hope to see is that if this starts happening and there are

deficiencies or, in fact, underexpenditure in one area that, in fact, we direct it to

areas in need. Not only that, but that we increase the expenditures in those areas

that are in the greatest need in terms of where we want to go. Because in the same

way that we have identified some of our communities as hotspots, they are

hotspots not only because of crime and that we are going to lock them up and let

them go, but they are also in need of special attention because they are hotspots in

other areas of need. So that I was quite disturbed by this request that we have

before us and I hope that we can address this problem in the not-too-distant

future.

I am also glad that the Minister of Finance is here, Mr. President, because

there is another matter that I want to raise which has to do really with outstanding

payments to contractors, for instance. Again, we know that all of those payments

have not been made but, at the same time, there is underexpenditure. In particular,

I would like to refer to the Education Facilities Company Limited (EFCL). We

have reports of a number of outstanding payments to contractors who worked for

that educational facilities unit and the understanding is that, indeed, the Ministry

of Finance transferred funds to meet those payments. Some payments are being

paid but what is not very clear is really under what circumstances and the criteria

for making those payments. So that is something that I am very concerned about

in terms of, again, underexpenditure in a situation in which a lot of money is

really owed—and owed in areas where, if it is paid, it can really generate some

activities in terms of the economy and the local economy in certain communities.

I also want to touch on—and I mentioned this in an intervention that I made

earlier—which something that Sen. Al-Rawi spoke about at some length today,

and I am glad that he did, and this has to do really with that Invaders Bay project.

I am, again, making a very strong appeal to the Government: there is no planning,

there is no forethought that went into that project. [Desk thumping]

The approach that I would have preferred would have been to look at the ways

in which that land could be linked to the local economy. And what I mean by that

is, not simply giving up that land where we are going to need a vast amount or, in

fact, what it is going to be doing is taking foreign exchange out of the system

where we are going to be importing stuff and selling again—but perhaps, even

linking it to the very depressed communities that I am talking about and that we

want to really improve.

166

Finance Bill 2012 Monday January 23, 2012 [SEN. DR. ARMSTRONG]

Some mention was also made of the highway and we were talking about the

significant expenditure on the highway and the fact that some of the increases that

we are talking about, in fact, would go to Clico and the highway and so on. Now,

I do not have a problem as such with the highway to Point. However, what I

would like to see happening as well is that, if we are going to make that

expenditure of $7.2 billion, we also see in what way—look at how we are going

to improve the economy in the areas to destinations and along the path of the

highway. Because, $7.2 billion is a vast amount of money, but again, it really

requires effective planning. It does not make sense saying, “Look, we are going to

have a highway, $7.2 billion” and we are not thinking, at the same time, about

how we can improve the economy so that that highway, in effect, is economical.

I heard the Minister of Energy and Energy Industries, for instance, speak about the

possibility of a new city in the eastern part of the country because of, perhaps, what we

call, a growth poll situation there that lends itself to other kinds of activities that may

make it more attractive for development. So what about a road to there, if that is the

case? But the point I want to make is this: these are considerations or approaches for

which you have to plan. You have to understand what is the national context, the

national economy how are we going to develop nationally our relationships with our

external economies and so on—partners—and how we want to develop this space, and

it is not clear to me that we are giving any consideration to this. It is just, you know, by

“vaps” and I am really hoping that we give some serious consideration to the kinds of

expenditures that we are talking about here without any clear indication, justification or

explanation, as to how we are spending or how we are not spending. So, it is to me, a

sort of disorganized and disconnected approach, really, to the expenditures that we are

making.

In general, I have no difficulties really in supporting the requirements as set out, but

I simply want to reiterate, Mr. President, that what I would be looking for in the future

is more effective management—a greater consideration to the fact that our economy is

not doing well and the money that we spend, we must spend it wisely. We must ensure

that those who are failing or at least, not doing as well as others, are given greater

consideration because if we are going down, we are going down together. If we are

doing well, we have to ensure that we uplift those who are not doing as well. Thank

you, Mr. President. [Desk thumping]

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Winston Dookeran): I thank you, Mr. President

and may I say, at the outset, I believe there is a great deal to be learnt from the

contributions that have been made on all sides of this Senate. [Desk thumping]

Before I attempt to respond to some of the very legitimate questions and queries

167


that were asked by many who have spoken, I just want to dissuade Senators from

two misperceptions that have developed, and if I do not, these might become

currency in the public domain. One of which was raised by Sen. Dr. Armstrong in

his closing and echoed a sentiment that was expressed from time to time, and that

is, the fact that we have had an underexpenditure ought not to have happened and

reflects bad planning and bad management, and what was required was a variation

of the expenditure to reflect the basic needs of the people.

Let me just point out for the record that in the proposals before us, the virement of

funds across heads was, in fact, done and we are giving vent to the decision to transfer

across heads $675 million, so that in fact was done. But even after we had done that—

and I said it in my presentation but I think for the benefit of the audience, I should

repeat it—and that is the composition of the falling expenditure on the recurrent side.

We had made provisions for the finalization of all the collective agreements during the

course of 2011. You would, of course, remember that this has to do with collective

agreements from 2008 and, in some cases, below that. The non-expenditure of $263

million can be attributed to that. Now, you could not take that and put it elsewhere

because it meant that you had made provisions and you had to be ready because it

would have to be paid hopefully in the first quarter of 2012. So the prospect of what

you are saying could not arise with respect to collective agreements.

The other area which I mentioned earlier related to interest payments which were

lower than what we had projected and this should be an act of managerial effectiveness

rather than managerial incompetence.

The third area had to do with current transfers and in the documents before us, we

have listed—and I have it here—a great deal of the current transfers of the order of

$467 million, and those items by themselves represented $1.1 billion. In other words,

we had ensured that the virement of funds was done to the tune of $675 million and

these particular expenses will go over into the New Year. So therefore it was difficult.

Where there was a shortfall—and it was a shortfall of 12.5 per cent on the capital

programme where we had budgeted somewhere in the order of $7.7 billion and ended

up spending $6.6 billion—the figures may not be very accurate—but that represented a

shortfall of 12 per cent.

Now, it is normal that budgeting is not a very precise thing and therefore, there will

be variation, and a variation of 12 per cent on the capital account of $7.7 billion is not

extraordinary in budgeting. It does not reflect, in my view, this issue of bad

management, and to refer to it as savings is not quite correct.

Sen. George: That is right.

168


Hon. W. Dookeran: It is not really savings, it is expenditure that was not

incurred for items for which they were allocated and which we could not move

more than we have moved. So I want to dissuade the feeling that was reflected by

Sen. Dr. Armstrong very well, but he, being a management expert, I thought I

should at least clarify that issue.

10.40 p.m.

There is another misconception that emerged and was largely raised by

Members on the Opposition Benches: they keep saying nothing is happening. I

reflected on that. I reflected on what the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs

said; I could not repeat what he said about the actual investments which have been

programmed to take place in 2012. I had used a figure of $2.5 billion during the

budget, and he adjusted it based on a more elaborate assessment of US $3billion.

Then we listened to the Minister, Sen. Fazal Karim, outline some of the issues

of actual things that were happening with respect to tertiary education. To give the

suggestion and to leave the impression that nothing is happening is really not

based on the evidence before us. [Desk thumping] Now, this is reflected in the

outcome at the end of the year, and I will come to that in my closing.

I wanted to dissuade this honourable Senate from the impression that there

were savings which could have been used elsewhere that was not so. Secondly,

there is, in fact, a lot that has been happening. Within the next two weeks we shall

be coming back to debate the Finance Act, and at that time —many of the

Ministers do not speak about what is happening this time around, but we can

clarify that issue very clearly when we come back to deal with the Finance Act

which is the legal requirement for all finance measures that we took last year.

Having said that, Mr. President, I think there were a number of very legitimate

questions that were raised and I will attempt to try and put the records straight.

Sen. Ali, in his usual way raised a number of important missing information in the

sense of the Parliament, but I believe that the hon. Minister of Energy and Energy

Affairs responded to each one, so I would not go further except to say that we

have the information and we are happy to have the opportunity to explain what

Trinidad Generation Unlimited (TGU) is and so forth, and the pipeline and the

other issues you have raised.

Information is really the critical issue here because many of my friends

opposite were unable to have all the information, or at least interpreted the

information in a certain way. In fact, when you look at debates, I keep reflecting

on: what is the emotion of this debate? What is the emotion that emerged in this

169


very wonderful debate here today? And I sense that there were three essential

emotions. From many of the Members who spoke on the Independent Bench there

was a sense of impatience, a sense of impatience that a new society is not being

articulated. And I believe the Member, Sen. Dr. Rolph Balgobin, was very

articulate on that and I want to compliment him for urging us to have less patience

in building that future. [Desk thumping]

That was well echoed by Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon, in the areas in which he

addressed. So that was that sense of impatience and it is an impatience that really

reflects to some extent the people’s expectations as well. It is the search for that new

vision that they believe should happen immediately, because they want to escape the

agony from which they came, from which [Desk thumping] we have now been

building. The sense of impatience is a response to getting rid of the agony of resistance.

[Desk thumping]

Sen. Ramlogan SC: Hear! Hear! Hear!

Hon. W. Dookeran: And it is this agony of resistance that I sense has permeated

the entire contribution of the official Opposition as they urge us to return to the old

vision; that we shall not do! [Desk thumping] That is not our mandate, and that is not

where we are going as much as they will like us to go back to those old days. Every

time they come up with a new idea, it is about an idea that was discarded, has been

tried, and has failed and an idea that would not work anymore for the future of Trinidad

and Tobago. [Desk thumping]

It reflected itself in their call for the Revenue Authority. If we had pursued that path

as an example, before us was the need to rationalize the Revenue Authority’s

employment. There were proposals to provide voluntary severance to a number of

persons; if we had pursued that route even from the point of view of people, we would

have had to go through that process and provide voluntary separation.

Sen. Ramlogan SC: “Yes put dem on de breadline and then—”

Hon. W. Dookeran: We took the policy decision that, in spite of the difficulties,

we must maintain as far as possible employment levels in Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk

thumping] And that was an important factor why we could not go back to that old

vision.

Sen. Ramlogan SC: Their plan was to put them on the breadline and impose

property tax on them too. That was their plan.

Hon. W. Dookeran: I am getting the dragon agitated here this evening. [Desk

thumping and laughter]

Hon. Senator: “Enter de dragon!”

170


Hon. W. Dookeran: But what we did instead, Mr. President, is that we got

the Inland Revenue department and we said we need to reinforce your capability

to be more efficient in tax collection. And although we did not make any major

institutional changes except ask them to change their methods—which I must say

they did with great distinction—and it is because of their ability to change

themselves that we are able to outperform ourselves in revenue collection on the

amnesty. [Desk thumping]

So we were able to achieve a revenue increase, the figures I mentioned earlier,

without any retrenchment and now set ourselves on the path of a major

transformation in the department by introducing the electronic billing that will

become part of the future. [Desk thumping] That is the change that the people

wanted, they did not want us to change by retrenching. [Desk thumping] They did

not want us to change by keeping the system as it is, and I used that as an example

of the agony of resistance to return to that vision. There are many other examples,

but I would not go through them all.

Hon. Senator: You all are the agonizers!

Hon. W. Dookeran: When I listen to my colleagues on this side, I try to say

what is the mood of my colleagues. And I sense that they too are sensing a pain

and an expectation—a pain by the people that things are not happening fast

enough and an expectation from them that things must happen, and a passion to

close the gap between the pain and the expectation [Desk thumping] is what we

are about; a passion to deal with that.

When you listen to those who have spoken on this side, you will feel that

passion. Let us close the gap between the pain and expectation. But to close the

gap you have to change the policy direction, you have to change the institutions,

you have to change the priorities, you have to change the performance and that is

what we are all about, Mr. President. [Desk thumping] That is why the

Scarborough Hospital would be opened shortly. And that is why the campus in

Tobago—

Hon. Senator: Integrated campus.

Hon. W. Dookeran:—the integrated campus is ready to go.

Sen. Cudjoe: “All yuh find land to put dat on!”

Hon. W. Dookeran: Now, that is a debate of the past. [Desk thumping and

laughter]

171


Sen. Baynes: Shots! Shots!

Hon. Senator: “Dat is de agony! Agonizers! Instead of organizers, the

agonizers!”

Hon. W. Dookeran: Mr. President, you know I always learn something

from Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds.

Hon. Senator: “Whey him?”

Hon. W. Dookeran: I am sorry he is not here.

Hon. Senator: “He sleeping?”

Hon. W. Dookeran: I always learn something from him, because I am of the

view that even anyone in the class can contribute knowledge. [Desk thumping and

laughter] So he joined by saying that Trinidad and Tobago is not serious and he

supported Sen. Dr. Balgobin in his articulation. I said to myself when I listened to

his contribution that he confirmed that Trinidad and Tobago was not serious, and

his contribution should not be taken seriously. [Desk thumping and laughter]

Sen. Baynes: Shots! Shots!

Hon. Senator: “Man on fire, man!”

Hon. W. Dookeran: Mr. President, we are in an environment so well

articulated by Sen. Prof. Harold Ramkissoon, but I want to put it a little more

graphically. What is happening in the world? On the streets in London recently,

thousands of persons were going about to react against the threat of lowering of

their pensions, proposal to cut their pensions.

In Spain between 30 and 40 per cent of the young people are unemployed and they

were agitated to provide employment for the young; this is happening within the last

three months. In Greece, the population has lost parts of their income and now they are

being called upon to have haircuts on the returns on their investment. Not only the

population, in terms of people, but in terms of the banking sector. In the US, the housing

bubble has left many homeowners without the sense of security to be able to meet their

commitments.

Hon. Senator: Occupy Wall Street!

Hon. W. Dookeran: Occupy Wall Street has now become the order of the day,

and the balanced budget deficit or the balanced budget debate that is taking place in the

US that brought about a gridlock last year, is about entitlement cuts—cutting

entitlements from the population that led eventually to the downgrade of the US.

172


In France very recently we saw further downgrades leading to higher interest

rates, which will affect not only France but elsewhere. In India and China, which

have been showing great momentum in growth over the last 10—15 years and

more so in the last 10 years, now have to deal with the issue of rising inflation

which will undermine some of the gains that they have made and that is what they

are tackling.

The only countries that have remained somewhat immune—our own

Caribbean countries are now facing the real threat of being fragile economies. I

would not go into the details on that, we are walking very closely with them.

But Latin America and Africa are the only places which are showing some

form of insulation from what is happening in the world.

10.55 p.m.

They are insulated but they are not isolated because, in due course, they

recognize that this global phenomenon will affect them. We in Trinidad and

Tobago are fortunate to be in a position where, while we are not insulated and we

are not isolated, we have been spared a lot of these major outcomes of the policy

environment.

In Nigeria, riots are taking place on fuel subsidies. Remember some Senators

here were telling me that I must remove the fuel subsidy? [Desk thumping] There

was a commentary in this country saying that they must remove it. We took the

other course. We said that we would accelerate a programme for the use of CNG,

and that programme is being done. We took the decision that the PTSC buses, the

new ones, should now be equipped with such a facility; and we took the decision

to introduce administrative measures to stop the abuse of that subsidy. [Desk

thumping]

I was advised today by the Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs that,

according to the performance of the last three months, $90 million of that subsidy

has already been cut by the administrative measures. [Desk thumping] What I am

saying is that the change that they are talking about is here and it reflects itself on

how you approach the problem. If we were to listen to the agonizers, we would

cut the subsidy, but that is not the course we are taking.

Having said that, we do not believe, Mr. President, that the road ahead is not

without new challenges, some of which we may not even have been able to

recognize today. That is why you are right, Senator, when I was quoted as saying

that 2012 would not be a walk in the park. At the same time, we will not be

173


looking over our shoulders every day to say, “How am I going to pay that debt,

which I had to pay when I came into office?” [Desk thumping] It is true that

there are some debts still to be paid, but the bulk of it, VAT refunds, has been paid.

The bulk of it with respect to HDC and contractors has been paid. I was told by the

Minister of Housing and the Environment—I do not remember the figure

offhand—but they were given sufficient funds to pay almost 18 per cent. UDeCott

is a special case and that is continuing.

I said that in my first few days I did not know how to manage this affair. Now

I can say, at least, that I have put the books in order. Now we shall start to build

the bridges and the pillars to make sure that this country is on a sustainable path

for the future. So, the anxiety that I sense—impatience, agony and passion is what

I sense here today.

I want to comment on what Sen. Dr. Balgobin said. It is exactly similar to my

own thinking. I used to argue once that we have created in our post-Independence

period a situation where everyone feels he is a client of the State. You will

remember that Sen. Faris Al-Rawi—I spoke to you about that before you came

here. I was hoping to ask you to join us then. [Laughter]

The clients of the State: the clients of the State are not only the people who are

working in CEPEP and URP. The clients of the State extend to every strata in the

society, including the private sector. [Desk thumping] I just raise that point

because you cannot build a society where everyone is a client of the State. That is

the point that Sen. Dr. Balgobin was making.

The politics of clientism must now give way to the politics of individual

responsibility. That was the crux of the debate about the Clico depositors. They

ask for the facts and when I give them the facts, they say I am boasting.

[Laughter] I do not understand this. That was the crux of the debate. The State

came in to substitute for individual responsibility due, of course, to factors outside

the control of those who made such decisions. We must, indeed, move from a

society that is based on clientism to a society based on individual responsibility.

It is in that context, Mr. President, that I believe that this debate should be one

we should encourage. What are the premises of a new society that will provide the

resilience for our economy? That is what the debate should be about and I agree. I

believe the people who can help lead this debate are the people in this Chamber. I

doubt you will get it in the other Chamber. [Laughter] That debate will go

beyond just the simplification of the argument.

174


The politics of clientism, the politics of entitlement must now give way to the

politics of individual responsibility and the politics of collective accountability. It

is no longer based on the concept of what I can get when you produce the budget;

it is what I can be after the budget is presented. [Desk thumping]

If you look at the presentations over the last two years, you will see the urge

to do that, but it requires much more than fiscal measures. It requires much more

in terms of changing the consciousness of the people. If we were to sit here and

try to measure today on yesterday’s standard, we would have done a great

disservice and this is what we must resist. We can only measure today’s

performance on tomorrow’s expectation. [Desk thumping]

So, Mr. President, some very detailed issues were asked of me and I think I

am obliged to answer them. Sen. Ramkhelawan, who for once was able to stay

away from the theatrics, [Laughter] asked the question, “Are we ready to make

Trinidad and Tobago a gateway to Latin America?” As the hon. Minister said, in

certain areas we have already opened the doors. Well, as I speak here, discussions

have already started for double taxation treaties. This is only Latin America I am

talking about. We already have one with Venezuela and discussions are ongoing

with Brazil, with Panama and with Costa Rica at this point in time. [Desk

thumping] This presumably will be extended as we go on.

From the point of view of double taxation treaties, which may raise some

concern, we already have double taxation treaties with many other countries, most

of which are in Europe. Today, we have to work towards building the gateway to

Latin America. In addition to that, the investment relationship is developing.

The hon. economist Dr. Lester Henry said that he could not understand what I

was talking about when there was a 1.4 per cent negative growth in 2011.

Someone pointed out here that every country has revised its growth rate during

the course of 2011 and probably the projection for 2012 will be further revised. I

think, maybe it was Sen. Prof. Ramkissoon who outlined some of the figures.

I want just to point out that while the growth rate in 2011 was 1.4 per cent

negative, in current terms the actual incomes of the last three years—and this is

why the buffers are there—without regard to inflation in 2009, the per capita

income was $95,000. In 2010, it was $101,000 and in 2011, it was $108,500. So

what we had was a small buffer of a rising income over these years on a per capita

basis. Now the distribution of that income is something else. I can talk about that

when it comes to tax review. So we have been buffering some of the negatives of

the falling growth rate and the falling growth rate stated in 2009 went on to 2010

175


and remained so, but the figure was reduced. Just one figure, since they tried to

establish that the Central Bank is saying something different to what the Minister

of Finance is saying. The Central Bank gets its information from the Ministry of

Finance on certain matters.

I just want to point this out. The construction sector, in 2009, contracted by

7.1 per cent—major contraction. In 2010, the construction sector declined by 28.4

per cent. That was the shock that we had to absorb—a 28.4 per cent in 2010.

Remember we came into office in 2010, and in 2011 the construction sector

declined by 7.9 per cent. So you are beginning to see that the growth process has

started and this is the best indicator. The shock that we had to undertake as a

result of the Clico debacle affected 10 per cent of the economy, which meant that

at the outset of 2010, we had 10 per cent lost revenue in this country beyond what

was happening outside of that. So the return to a sense of growth we hope is likely

to take place.

The last report that was done on December 16, Standard & Poor’s had this to

say. They are an independent group and they know what they are doing in the

world. I will quote one paragraph so that Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds will realize that

we are serious.

The economic recovery has begun and is expected to be supported in 2012 by

higher investment in capital projects, renewed dynamism in the energy sector, and

a further pick-up in the non-energy private sector activity. Still, given the sluggish

international outlook, real GDP growth in 2012 will be modest, projected at 1.7 per

cent, which is below the country’s medium-term growth potential of about 3%.

11.10 p.m.

That is the situation as it exists today. So, I want to ensure that Members

opposite do not create the impression that the slide continues, because we are of

the view that the conditions have now been set to be able to regain that growth

momentum.

I just want to quote one line from another independent source, Oppenheimer,

on emerging markets commentaries—it is not about Trinidad and Tobago alone—

and this is what it says:

We live in a world where strong balance sheets are all important. In this

context, Trinidad appears to be a clear winner. [Desk thumping]

This is a commentary made on November 21, 2011.

176


Now, if I read more, they would say I am boasting. [Desk thumping] All I am

trying to do is to convey information, because when the information is uncomfortable

from their point of view, and they cannot attack the information, they attack the person

who is bringing the information and say that he is boasting. [Desk thumping and

crosstalk]

Mr. President, there are a few other issues that were raised. Sen. Helen

Drayton raised some very important issues in her brief contribution, issues for

which we should be accountable. The first one, she said that we had indicated that

we will be setting up a committee to do an independent assessment of the

effectiveness of our regulatory system. You would recollect, in the budget of

2011, I indicated that. We have been working to develop the modalities for that

independent assessment. I have been working with the IMF and others to work out

the modalities because that is an issue that has to be tackled with a high level of

confidence and professionalism. This is not to cast any doubt on the regulatory

system. It has improved enormously over the last few years, but yet in the world

financial architecture these kinds of watchdog oversight committees are being

established, and it is in that context that we are looking at it, not only in the

context of the experience we have had here in Trinidad and Tobago.

The Senator also made reference to our commitment on the Clico matter, that

we should report to the court and to Parliament on a tri-monthly basis, and that is

a commitment that we would ensure. I do not know exactly what the time frame

is, but it is part of the Finance Bill that will come before us in the next two weeks,

hopefully before.

The third issue is the denial of the access to the court. She made a very

powerful contribution when that was debated, and said that it should be limited

under certain circumstances, and we did give an undertaking that we will move in

that direction, and the Finance Act will be brought to this Parliament. It ought to

have been here now—but within the next week or two—and it will incorporate

these commitments that we have made. So I just wanted to assure Sen. Helen

Drayton and others that those very important issues are, indeed, being dealt with.

I would not say very much on the tax review at this stage, except to make

three small points. We need to review our tax system now. The last time we did so

was in the mid-80s. At that time, we introduced the value added tax and changed

the tax structure, and every so often a country needs to review it, from the point of

view of ensuring that there is a stable tax base for the future. Now, we are talking

about the future, I am not talking about tomorrow. I am talking about the future. It

177


must be stable, reliable and it must be equitable. It must close the loopholes that

exist in the current system, and it must strengthen the enforcement measures. Now,

that is the change that we are talking about, by changing that process for the

future.

So when the people call for change, it is the change in the policy directions

and the methods by which we implement those policies. This is, but another

example of where we shall be moving. To do that we would, of course, not rush

into it and we will be informed by professional work, for these are matters of a

professional and technical nature.

Sen. Dr. Wheeler wanted to know whether I will consider the land and

building taxes. We have always said that we will find ways to do so, as soon as

we can cross some of the hurdles. This will be part of that review but, at the same

time, Mr. President, I just want to say that the non-implementation of the land and

building taxes for the last two years has not significantly affected our revenue,

because even when it existed, it had a revenue base of $180 million or something

to that effect, but it could have a greater base, but we will see what the tax review

says about that, because the role was too limited. So even there you need to

reform the whole process of collection, because it was a limited amount of people

from which it was collected. So, it is not an easy question to get up and say that

we will just do this tomorrow. We recognize the complexity of it, but we will, in

due course, go into some greater detail.

I have here quoted, “Our capacity for self-deception is great”, and I was

wondering if the hon. Senator was not talking about my colleagues in the front

there. [Desk thumping] Where is the census result? I think that is a legitimate

question. The Central Statistical Office conducted the survey and they have not

told me or told us when it will be ready, but they have conducted the survey for

2010. That is an area we are trying to tackle, the question of data.

The Central Statistical Office has lagged over the years, and getting up-to-date

data is not readily available, but I do not use the absence of data to prevent my

desire to make decisions, because as Sen. Dr. Balgobin said, when I used to teach

with him at the university, one of the things we used to teach our students is how

to make decisions without data, because you have to carry on as we wait for the

Swedish consultants whom we have engaged to come and streamline the Central

Statistical Office, and they will be spending some months with us to be able to do.

178


These are all corrective actions that we had to undertake because the

institutions of the country had fallen down, and we moved from the politics of the

decay of our institutions to trying to rebuild our institutions in the politics of

progress. [Desk thumping] I think those were most of the questions. There was

much talk by Sen. Deyalsingh about Invaders Bay.

Mr. President: Hon. Senators, the speaking time of the hon. Minister has

expired.

Motion made, That the hon. Minister’s speaking time be extended by 15

minutes. [Sen. E. George]


Hon. W. Dookeran: All I can say on that issue is that the process of which

we speak—as we are designed to be very open and transparent, and you raised

certain issues—that started some time ago and it is continuing. There is a

committee that has been established, and in due course the Parliament will be

apprised of the results of those new investments. The Minister of Planning and the

Economy is really the one to deal with that matter.

I think Sen. Dr. Lester Henry made what appeared to be a highly technical

point, but I do not want him to convey the wrong impression. He said our debt

position was not rising because we were borrowing from the Central Bank, and it

is true. All governments borrow from the Central Bank within the law. The law

allows us to get temporary advances from the Central Bank provided they do not

exceed 15 per cent of the estimates of our annual revenue, because cash flow

management requires that. It is a normal thing—cash flow as opposed to debt

financing.

The Government balances, over the last few years, continue to be healthy

although there have been some withdrawals. Part of the reason for an increase in

withdrawals was because the borrowing limits were not available to us until we

came to Parliament, when you said one month before, and that had gone to a

point, and we came here to seek the approval. We have not used it, but we had to

seek that, and we did use it in the local market not in the external market.

The point he made that, because we said we were going to borrow money

from the external market, we must borrow it regardless of the circumstances.

When we saw the financing needs of the country were going to be reduced and

also because of turmoil in the international financial markets, which were closed

to most emerging country markets, are beginning to open now, so we are looking

179


at the right time. We could not go because we made a decision in October to go to

the external market in a market that was very uncertain, and you may not have

been able to get the right rate. So we made a decision not to go and, in any event,

we did not think that we needed it in light of the reduced deficit that we were

beginning to see. I do not understand what the hon. Senator was saying that

because we said so and we did not do it, we are inefficient.

Now, in this world, the key to managing a small economy is to have the

flexibility to adjust. That is the key. You cannot manage a small economy and

restrict your ability to adjust, and you adjust on the basis of the evidence as it

emerges. That is an example of how we had to adjust our borrowing and did not

go to the external market. We said we will go in 2012, based on our projections.

Markets are beginning to open up again, and the rate remains low, but we

hope that during the course of this year, we will have the need to do so. So the

argument that because we said so, we must go to the market, I did not quite

understand that argument, but I thought I should clarify it. The figures I have do

not suggest any undue pressure outside the law of the Central Bank, and we took

the step of increasing the limits so that when the time comes, we will have the

facility. For some time we are stuck with that problem.

So, Mr. President, I think those are the main issues that I have sensed that

needed some kind of explanation on the Bill before us. I do consider that this was

a learning debate. I think very many important issues emerged, and I have taken

clear note of them. They have helped me to sharpen my own capacity to

understand what the people’s wishes are, because one of the side effects of this

Parliament is to get the feeling of what the population feels, and the population

feels what you say. If you say things they do not feel, they will punish you and if

they say things they feel, we must respond to them and that, to me, has been an

important contribution by all the questions that were raised here today. I hope I

have attempted to answer them in the interest of full accountability.

Finally, when we were pursuing our policy programme on a budget deficit of

5.8 per cent of our GDP, there was a lot of cry saying that we were, in fact, on the

wrong path.

As it turned out, we were able to bring our budget deficit to nearly $4 billion

for 2011, and they are saying, “You should have had a deficit of $7 billion.”

Well, you cannot win when your arguments are not based on national

development, but on narrow political self-interest. In that sense, I am glad that

180


Sen. Lester Henry came back at the right time. And I must say he was right the

last time when he indicated to me that the interest rate would not be so for all

time, and I said, yes, but in fact we are fortunate, it is still there.

11.25 p.m.

Perhaps I should indicate that the understanding that we have worked out with

the banks is for that 80 cents to be there, at least up to the end of March of this

year; therefore, it will be in the interest of those who wish to access that. I did not

go into the Clico details here today; I am sure we will get another opportunity to

do that but they will have to use it for that time.

Here again we have worked closely with the private sector, with the banking

sector, to find a joint solution to this effort that has almost derailed our system

here and in the Caribbean. We are also working with the Caribbean to see how we

could work together to solve that problem.

I believe those are the main points that I had to respond to, and I thank

Members for their contributions. This is only the Supplementation and Variation

of the Finance Bill of 2011. I think we would come back shortly to discuss the

Finance Act.

I said once before that I believed the Parliament rules for dealing with

financial matters should be reviewed, because we end up having the same debate

about four or five times in one year. [Desk thumping] Those are the rules as they

stand now. So we follow those rules, but I am not too sure it is an efficient use of

parliamentary time and if it also allows us to move ahead. While we have to have

full accountability, we must find ways and means, Leader of Government

Business, to see if we could in the future streamline this, so we could have full

debates on all the issues—well not every three months on the same issue. I beg to

move.


Bill accordingly read a second time.

The Minister of Finance (Hon. Winston Dookeran): Mr. President, in

accordance with Standing Order 63, I beg to move that the Bill not be committed

to a committee of the whole Senate.


Bill accordingly read the third time and passed.

181

Adjournment Monday January 23, 2012

ADJOURNMENT

The Minister of Public Utilities (Hon. Emmanuel George): Thank you, Mr.

President. I want to take the opportunity to thank all Members of this Senate, the

Leader of the Opposition Bench, and the Leader of the Independent Bench for

their support in bringing this debate to a conclusion today.

Mr. President, I beg to move that this Senate do now adjourn to Tuesday,

January 31, 2012, at 1.30 p.m. I propose that it be Private Members’ Day, and that

we continue the debate of Sen. Hinds’ Motion, that the Honourable Senate take

note of the strengths and deficiencies of the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service

and its impact and potential in the fight against crime. I propose that we bring the

debate on that Motion to a conclusion so we can move on to debate, on another

Private Members’ Day, the Motion brought by Sen. Corinne Baptiste-McKnight,

which I think is topical, in the sense that we are celebrating the nation’s 50th

anniversary of Independence this year, and Sen. Baptiste-McKnight’s Motion

speaks to tributes to former leaders: Prime Ministers and Presidents of Trinidad

and Tobago. Thank you very much, Mr. President.


Senate adjourned accordingly.

Adjourned at 11.37 p.m.

WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS

National Petroleum(NP)

(Details of Rental of Trucks)

22. Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds asked the hon. Minister of Energy and Energy Affairs:

A. Contract exists for the lease of tractors for fuel distribution service.

B. The Contract is between NP and CDS Transport Limited and 20 tractors are

contracted. The Contract is dated 14th

June 2006 and is stated to have

commenced on 1st July 2006 and to continue for a period of three (3)

years. The contract has been renewed successively until the current period

which runs until January 2012.

C. The Board of Directors has taken no such decision.

D. Not applicable.

E. Not applicable.

182


Unnatural Deaths

(Details of)

29. Sen. Fitzgerald Hinds ask the hon. Minister of National Security:

For the period June 01, 2010 to October 30, 2011, could the Minister indicate to

this Senate:

(a) The number of unnatural deaths reported in Trinidad and Tobago;

(b) The number of these deaths classified as homicides;

(c) Identify and explain the classification categories in respect of all unnatural

deaths; and

(d) The number of the category at (a) above which were recorded as “unclassified”

if any?

The Minister of National Security (Sen. The Hon. Brig. John Sandy):

a) For the period June 01, 2010 to October 30, 2011 there were eight hundred

and ninety-one (891) unnatural deaths reported in Trinidad and Tobago.

b) Of this number, six hundred and thirty-one (631) were classified as

homicides.

c) The classification categories in respect of all unnatural deaths are as

follows:

Classification Categories of Unnatural Deaths

No. Classification Explanation

i Drownings

Suffocation and death resulting from

filling of the lungs with water or other

substance or fluid, so that gas exchange

becomes impossible.

ii Death by Fire Where an individual dies as a result of

being burnt to death by fire.

iii Accidental Death

Individual’s cause of death must be

as a result of an accident, for

example a fall, electrocution and

certain acts of nature.

iv Murder

When an individual of sound memory

and age of discretion, unlawfully kills

any person with malice aforethought or

the person dies from his injuries within

a year and a day after the injuries.

183


v Manslaughter At common law, all unlawful

homicides, which are not murder, are

manslaughter. Manslaughter is divided

into two groups: voluntary and

involuntary manslaughter.

Voluntary manslaughter refers to the

situation where a person may have the

malice aforethought of murder, but the

presence of some defined mitigation

circumstances reduces his crime to

manslaughter, eg provocation,

diminished responsibility etc.

Voluntary manslaughter refers to the

unlawful killing of a person without

malice aforethought.

There are two broad categories of

involuntary manslaughter:

(1) Manslaughter by an unlawful and

dangerous act.

(2) Manslaughter by gross negligence.

vi Inquest An enquiry by a Coroner’s Court into

the cause of a death.

vii Shot and killed by Police

Where an individual dies as a result

of being shot and killed by a police

officer/(s) during the execution of

his, her or their duty/(ies).

viii Shot and killed by Estate Police

Where an individual dies as a result

of being shot and killed by an estate

police during the execution of his or

her duty.

ix Unclassified

Where cause of death of an

individual is undetermined, it is

unclassified until the cause of death

can be determined.

d) The number of unnatural deaths during the period June 01, 2010 to

October 30, 2011, which were recorded as “unclassified” is fifty- four

(54).

Documents

20120123 - Senate Debate - Monday January 23, 2012 - 11:00 ...international non-profit organization, SE International, for ophthalmic, medical, surgical and educational services for