Carolyn hits PNM, UNC

Hit. Small word but carrying big weight, it means “to strike with a blow or a missile.” And so, in the midst of the flooding and heavy cross talk, Congress of the People (COP) new leader, Carolyn Seepersad-Bachan, hit out at the People’s National Movement (PNM), the United National Congress (UNC) and the short-lived alliance, the People Partnership (PP) of which her COP was once an integral part.

Her fast and furious statement claimed that the housing development at the La Horquetta/Greenvale Park site started under a previous PNM administration and continued under the PP government with Dr Roodal Moonilal as housing minister (Newsday, October 31). She asked, “What then were the criteria for selecting that site? What policy enabled the land use change?” Indeed, published reports indicated that since 2007, Town and Country (T&C) had rejected applications for the project, saying it was a “flood zone,” after which the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) proceeded in 2008 to construct houses “without T&C approval,” (Like the Telecommunications Act and several others, the relevant minister has discretion to override).

Planning Minister Camille Robinson-Regis indicated from “ministry’s files” that T&C director Stara Ramlogan gave approvals in 2014 to the UNC government. Dr Moonilal countered that the Greenvale/La Horquetta project (“230 houses, $253 million”) was entirely a PNM project “without approval” and which the PP met when it came into office. Robinson-Regis said she was talking only about “planning and approvals” and not housing. She indicated it was “550 units at Greenvale Park.”

Such exchanges apparently stimulated Seepersad-Bachan to call for “an investigation into the criteria used to select sites for housing developments.” This incident, she said, exemplified “the failure of our governance system and the effect of political expediency over sound management principle and engineering.” Calling for proportional representation, she added: “We are now paying for the misdeeds of every administration. The two-party system has entrapped the electorate, all for the sake of voter-padding in marginal seats.” Is this so?

I return to this flooding calamity for three major reasons.

(1) To help prevent us from repeating mistakes.

(2) To be fair, Works and Transport Minister Rohan Sinanan did the best he could. Character is tested under stress. The pressures put upon him are OK. After all, he is the minister, one of Rowley’s finest. He inherited these flooding problems – just like the Tobago ferry issue. And as minister, he carried these burdens with dignity and focus. I admire that. He deserves public commendation. If what he now promises remains unfulfilled, well, I hope I am still around.

(3) Governance. Whoever to blame, this is yet another example of political mismanagement which eventually brings distress upon citizens, and bringing some current office holders into public embarrassment. The issue is not only about “the criteria for selecting sites for development.”

It is equally important to review the distribution of HDC houses. These are not “government houses.”

And by putting the distribution of houses so directly into the hands of ministers, whichever one, leaves open the following questions:

(a) Is the public satisfied that the distribution of these houses is done fairly and equitably?

(b) Would the public prefer that the distribution (with published criteria) be based on a merit and deserving list managed by a professionally-independent committee, reporting by statute to Parliament via the minister? Imagine a chief justice asking a minister for a house? And the minister agrees?

The temptation now put upon a housing minister is too severe to resist corruption and favouritism. Spare the minister.

Agriculture Minister Rambharat tells us ministers already have too much work. There is also too much suspicion over favouritism. Many houses are built, left at the mercy of rain and sun, waiting to be given out when politically convenient. All this, for a very long time, is bad governance, breeding public mistrust. In such circumstances, will Seepersad-Bachan’s COP, Kamla Persad-Bissessar’s UNC, and Dr Rowley’s PNM declare a new, more transparent, merit-based system of constructing and distributing these houses. This will be a visible example of morality in public affairs, of political integrity.

How long are we going to have “outside people” criticise us, directly or indirectly, for lack of good governance, transparency–from the US Ambassador, Sandals’ Gordon “Butch” Stewart, to the IDB?