Opposition hypocrisy on PM's travel

THE EDITOR: Once again, the blatant and shameless hypocrisy of the Opposition is on full display as they seek to criticise the Prime Minister’s overseas travel bill. While I agree all aspects of public spending should be scrutinised, the resulting comparison should be fair and put into context.

I recall during the UNC’s tenure in government, the issue of overseas travel was a major one for citizens. Large delegations would often join the then prime minister, at exorbitant cost to taxpayers, leaving many to ask, was this really necessary?

While the opposition a few days ago raised issue with $818,000 spent on a US trip for the PM to meet officials and lawmakers, they remained silent back then on over $868,000 reportedly spent so the sister of the then prime minister could accompany her on trips.

The figure of $10.6m is reported as being spent for Dr Rowley’s trips over a three and a half year period, yet the opposition still cannot explain why, according to media reports, almost $12m was spent on a single trip to India.

Members of that delegation included the former prime minister’s husband and sister, all covered by taxpayers. What were the tangible benefits derived from that India trip? I challenge the UNC to defend their present-day hypocrisy by producing their own travel figures for the prime minister and her contingent over the five years of the PP administration.

PM Rowley embarked on a number of visits where he met with energy giants of the world. I have seen him in board rooms, speaking to chairmen and CEOs, heads of state and law makers. What were tangible benefits of these trips?

bp and Shell, our largest gas suppliers, as well as many others, after a long and protracted negotiation process, concluded long term gas supply contracts. New deals with these companies ensured that bp paid this country an additional $1 billion in 2018, with Shell paying $2.5 billion in 2019.

A deal was struck with the restructuring of Atlantic LNG which saw this country gain a larger stake in our gas processing sector. The highly difficult and complex Dragon deal was finalised, opening a new frontier for TT and Venezuela with potential, major game-changing, long term benefits accruing to both countries.

This was particularly significant, given the international relations challenges and sanctions imposed on Venezuela by the United States.

In order to progress the development agenda of this country, travel is necessary. It is clear Rowley’s travels have been reasonable and warranted.

The Opposition, in their haste to criticise, have forgotten their very own splurge on overseas travel at the expense of the very taxpayers they are now purporting to protect.

VYASH NANDLAL

Couva