Of what use was the Opposition Leader’s boast that the United National Congress (UNC) did more for the country than the People’s National Movement (PNM) in 60 years of independence? It made no sense to me. It was a moot point. How come, then, that the PNM is in Government and the UNC is in opposition wilderness if it did more for the country, as she said? Why the boast?
It is my understanding that all governments make an effort to do good for the country. In doing so they sometimes put emphasis in specific areas than in others. Who did more? It is really unwise for the Opposition Leader to start that kind of narrative. That is puerile stuff.
The PNM laid the foundation for almost all the governing structures in the country, be they infrastructure, finance, education, local government, national security, social development, judiciary, foreign relations, etc. Even with all the perceived imperfections in these governing structures they cannot be dismissed or underestimated.
There is absolutely no doubt that the UNC in its two stints at governance did exceedingly well. Like the PNM, the UNC faced allegations of corrupt practices and wastage of financial resources while in office. Indeed, a corruption matter dating back to the UNC’s 1995-2001 term in office is still lingering in the courts.
Last week Energy Minister Stuart Young raised several questions about a gas-price contract signed under the Kamla Persad-Bissessar administration that favoured a major foreign-owned oil company. The UNC has provided no answer.
So far, the present PNM administration in its second term seems immune from the kind of corruption scandals that plagued former administrations. So, Madam Opposition Leader, why not let the electorate decide who did more for the people of Trinidad and Tobago at the appropriate time.
former UNC MP