A LOOK AT GOVERNMENT COMMUNICATIONS

[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5. [00:00:08] Speaker B: We're gonna have in this hour an interview and guess who is visiting once again? Our former minister in the office of the Prime Minister and Communications. Well, Mr. Simon de Nobrega. Good morning to you and welcome Back to Freedom 106.5. [00:00:23] Speaker A: Thank you very much, Davey. [00:00:24] Speaker B: Always a pleasure to have you, man. [00:00:26] Speaker A: Good morning to you. Good morning, dear listeners, and thank you for making that correction. MP or Mr. Or just Simon. [00:00:33] Speaker B: I had to. You get accustomed over the last few years of seeing minister and the name associated with it. You know, I feel sorry for those children in school. Well, they don't have to. [00:00:44] Speaker A: I still have one there, so. [00:00:46] Speaker B: Well, I have two. And I. I had to learn this thing all over again. And I mean, in just one year we had three prime Ministers. [00:00:53] Speaker A: Imagine that. [00:00:53] Speaker B: Imagine that. So welcome back. [00:00:56] Speaker A: Right. [00:00:56] Speaker B: Well, that's it. That's it. I love it. I love it, I love it. We could never fight it. [00:01:01] Speaker A: No. [00:01:01] Speaker B: So we are entering a realm here where it's a different seat for you this morning, a different appearance for you back on the show. From Minister in government to now opposition. Let's talk a little bit about some of the things that you would have left in office. I want to kick things off in terms of communications, you know, that you think government of the day should continue with because it's the customary fact for government to do away with the past administration thoughts and ideas. What are some of the things that you left undone or was there to be finished that you think they should look at and work with? [00:01:32] Speaker A: Well, I suppose that the. I wouldn't want to presume anything that the current government will or will not do. Right. I think that if there is. If there is a mechanism that allows for a population to be informed, then you either continue with it or you improve on it. I think if you just scrap things right down to the bare boards and rebuild, what you're doing is really wasting precious time. I mean, look at the systems in place, see what works, see what doesn't, and build from there. Right. So I think the last time I was here, and I believe at least once before, we did talk about the mechanisms by which the government that I was a part of was working at keeping the population informed. And that was whether it be weekly, weekly newspaper newspaper articles, or every week we were in the papers on a Monday morning telling people, this is what has happened across government. We were on television, we were on radio, we were on social media across all the Platforms, keeping people informed. And I think that's an important, an important mechanism for any democracy. If you are not aware, then you don't make good decisions. And good decisions are critical, not just at elections, but good decisions in terms of how do you determine what is success for a government or for a country? What are you measuring that success against? Are you being adequately informed with fact as opposed to just opinions that you don't know where those opinions are based? [00:03:32] Speaker B: But is it not customary that when the incoming, they would usually not revisit some of the ideologies of the previous because of the fact? Let's, you know, everybody trying to be a winner. So if I accepted what the former minister, Simon de Nobrega did and brought to the table, that means that he was on to something. I'm just saying, hypothetically speaking, this is how I'm looking at it from a layman's perspective. If I have to endorse what you did, and I'm saying, but wait, but this was good, maybe we should continue. I would have then reinforced into the national diaspora that, hey, Lemon was on to something. So the idea is, anyway, you see, this doesn't make no sense. Let me do this. Five years. Let me try. [00:04:10] Speaker A: Well, I disagree because I think that if you, if every five years or at every turn of a government, because the previous government was in government for nine and a half, thereabouts, 10 years, right? I think if you start from zero every single time, then you're not. You're not. There is never any real progression. You know, you may have differences in ideology, as you correctly say, you may have differences in implementation or policy. But if a framework is there, then utilize it. Right? So I'll give you, I'll give you clear examples based on what you were saying. The Instagram and the TikTok feed for the Minister, for the Ministry of Communications, let's just use it as that, right? Office of the Prime Minister Communications. But Ministry of Communications is less of a mouthful when you, when you wipe those, those pages and then just start from, from, from one picture. So the first picture of the incoming government, what you were saying is that nothing before this actually happened, but the work was there. The work is there. And part of the population's ability to measure your own success is to measure it against what was there before. So if you, if you put out a clear mandate, this is what we are going to do. We are going to, we are going to address these critical areas, we are going to look at these policies and move forward, then fine, but you should also allow people to see that, you know, this is what. Well, in my opinion, right. This is what happened before and this is where we are now. And what that also does is it allows, you already have a framework with an existing segment of the population who is following that page. You also, from a communication standpoint, you're also confusing the population because if you don't, if you don't utilize those pages, then the people who followed those pages now have to find somewhere else to get the information. [00:06:47] Speaker B: Well, the thing about it is you have been sitting in the government for a number of years. Would you say that the PNM adopted that same policy that you're now saying? Did they take up the precedent that when they took office back in 2015, to not piggyback but to enforce some of the things that they would have felt would have been good and created by the people's partnership then? So are you aware. [00:07:07] Speaker A: So I'm now about to tell you, I came in in the second term, so I wasn't, I wasn't presented with something like that. [00:07:16] Speaker B: So it was more or less of a continuance. [00:07:17] Speaker A: It was a continuation. [00:07:19] Speaker B: Noted. [00:07:19] Speaker A: But from a personal standpoint, I would have a problem with that because these things did happen. [00:07:28] Speaker B: So I'm not sure. We go through the various ministries under the current administration and I don't think communication came up. I can't remember. I looked through the list and I didn't see it, but were there. [00:07:38] Speaker A: It's not there. [00:07:38] Speaker C: Right. [00:07:39] Speaker B: So I mean which ministry does it fall under now? [00:07:43] Speaker A: My understanding of it is that there is no longer a Minister of Communications. So I don't know how that has been scrapped. That has been scrapped? No. I don't know if the function has been shifted or if that function has. [00:08:01] Speaker B: Been absorbed somewhere else in the office. [00:08:02] Speaker A: Of the Prime Minister. [00:08:03] Speaker B: Well, as you mentioned the office of the Prime Minister and the handing over of a continuance of varied things in the office of the Prime Minister, you'll be privileged to a lot of things that the PM would have wanted to initiate. Both PMs, former PMs, that is. Were there any talks of a handover of an updated file to pass on to the now incoming or the now sitting government? Were you part of any talks like that? Did they invite you all in? Did you all recommend that we have these talks? [00:08:31] Speaker A: So I think that at the ministry level, I think that is typically handled by the administration, the ps. So the PS would prepare, hand over documents from one minister to the next, particularly at a change of government. So that, Yeah, I don't, because I. [00:08:52] Speaker B: Remember speaking with Karen Nunez Teixeira, former finance Minister, and she spoke with me and reiterated the point that when she was the meeting office and the other one was coming in, he asked her, you know, could we meet and let's talk about what you are leaving, what happened. And she was able to update him very cordially and peacefully and hand over information and let him know this is where we are, this is what happened, this is what we're doing, this is what is pending and here are the documents and move on. So I'm asking, was the same courtesy allowed with the PNM ministers? Do you have any information as to whether that type of thing happened with the incoming administration? [00:09:27] Speaker A: I don't. I know that no request like that was made to me and. But I am sure, I mean, on the 23rd, Parliament opens and I'm sure if there are any questions, those questions can be asked informally at that time. [00:09:41] Speaker B: Informally at that time. What are your expectations going forward? [00:09:45] Speaker A: My expectations are that we will see a continuation of the type of communication that sort of framed the current government while they were in opposition. I see that there are still methods of communication that they utilize a lot of personalized communication. There are some things that from a personal perspective, I don't enjoy. [00:10:18] Speaker B: It would be remiss of me if I didn't ask you and for some clarity, you operated as a minister in the office of the Prime Minister, which was back then in that administration. There are talks that is in the public domain as it relates to the state of affairs of the Whitehall, the office of the Prime Minister. You know, Barry Patarat is saying one thing we have. I can't remember who it was on the PNM side taking a video showing something else. I don't know where your functions are. What happened? Can you speak on it? There was even talks that just weeks before former Prime Minister Steochong sat right there and had meetings with you all. And this building is so inoperable at the present. How were you all able to do that? What were your findings? What did you notice when you walked into the building? [00:11:02] Speaker A: Well, I can. My offices weren't in Whitehall, so I can't say from what I can tell you is just quite simply not weeks before our last cabinet meeting. If I am not. If I am correct, would have been the 24th of April that was held in person. And at Whitehall there was a decision that was taken at cabinet level in Whitehall, because I was at the cabinet meeting, that there were works that needed to be done in the basement of Whitehall. And that basement level is where the Cabinet Secretariat meets. Sorry, not meets. It's where they operate. So a decision was taken that they would relocate temporarily. And of course, that process did take some time as they tried to find the best possible location, not just administratively, but also for the functionality of the Secretariat itself. They require a certain level of space for their own flow. I mean, it's a very intricate system that they have in terms of their own process. It was eventually decided that they would move the Cabinet Secretariat temporarily to the Sinclair offices of the Office of the Prime Minister. So they stayed within the. The ministry that is called the Office of the Prime Minister. They stayed within that, but physically relocated temporarily to another location that is conducive. [00:12:36] Speaker B: For work and all of that, but still close. But you walking into Whitehall, your observation. [00:12:42] Speaker A: Oh, no, there is. Listen, I have visited Whitehall for Cabinet, for FNGP to meet with the Prime Minister for press conferences for all of those things. I couldn't give you a number, but. [00:12:59] Speaker B: Numerous times and it seemed to be operating. There is molding anything. [00:13:03] Speaker A: There is nothing that is. There is nothing that makes it unusable as a office space. Whitehall still continues now, as far as I know, to be a working building so that you have administrative staff, you have the ps, you have all those things that operate in Whitehall. We would have had press conferences at the media center that was built maybe up, I think maybe about two years ago. So the operations of Whitehall weren't being impacted other than the maintenance work that had to be done in the basement. And some of that maintenance work, of course, also included waterproofing because there was some water intrusion on the basement level, obviously, because the basement is below ground level. [00:13:52] Speaker B: So you did have some water seeping in. [00:13:54] Speaker A: Correct. [00:13:55] Speaker B: All right, so let's talk a little bit about the fact that you all are now sitting in the opposition benches. How do you all plan to hold the government accountable for things going forward? I mean, the projected images continuously spewed from the previous administration is that we have no money. This government is now saying, okay, we operating in a red, in a deficit. How is. And a lot of plans, a lot of talk by both sides. Promises if the, if the PNM had win power, promises, same thing. We expect that. That's the election banter. But as we go forward, how are you all planning to hold this government accountable in Parliament? What are some of your plans? [00:14:31] Speaker A: Well, I wouldn't want to speak about. About how about how we plan to hold them accountable in Parliament. Other than that we will continue to do what we have done, which is speak honestly, speak responsibly and we will point out issues that exist, we will point out our own policy differences and ensure that that is done. But it is important for, for me, Simon de Nobreger, who is now the member of Parliament in opposition for Dego Martin Central, that if you are part of the governance framework of this country, because your position is part of the governance framework, that one we don't weaponize our now minority in Parliament as I think it, as I think existed previously there was a weaponized opposition. So that's just a fancy way of saying I suppose you're opposing just for opposing sake. All right, all right. And I think that we are going to be reflective of the opposition leader as well. And I think MP Beckles as the opposition leader does have him measured approach, which I think is needed, is going to speak responsibly, is going to point out from a position not only as opposition but also as a person who has numerous years of experience in government as well and as a member of parliament. So we do have, and I think we have a great mix of old, not so old and first timers coming in. And I think that as long as we, as long as we 1 maintain the decorum of the parliament and speak in a certain way, that is important. But also as soon as the offices of the opposition leader are available to the opposition, those offices are right now being, I don't want to say renovated as they're major renovations, but there is work being done, of course. [00:16:51] Speaker B: Where's your position leader office located, if you don't mind, I ask? [00:16:54] Speaker A: Oh my God. Charles Street. [00:16:56] Speaker B: Charles Street. [00:16:58] Speaker A: All right. [00:16:58] Speaker B: So it will be remiss again if I don't ask you. We paying attention to the news outlets, news media. We as a media conglomerate, we sought after the news. I have to ask you, is there a rift within the pnm? And now you can answer, not to your knowledge. So everything is nice and smooth. [00:17:15] Speaker A: All is. Listen, we have come out, we have come out of a loss of government. We have an election that was called that we lost. And I mean the numbers show that that loss was not, was not a close loss. So it requires introspection, it requires us to see what have we done and to lose the, I suppose the public trust. Is it, is it just, I mean. [00:17:49] Speaker B: We could, we could talk a number of things that lost the public trust. [00:17:51] Speaker A: Yeah, there are, but there are, there are things that will be done at the party level and then even at the constituency level. Right. But I think that anytime that happens, there is always. There are always going to be people who have an opinion as to why we lost and people who have a differing opinion as to why we lost. And then also what is the way forward. I think one of the most important things as a party is that one we moved quickly to ratify party's position on who the opposition leader was going to be. So that's the first thing. And that was done at our general council. That is an important and important step. [00:18:35] Speaker B: Democratic step going forward. [00:18:37] Speaker A: Correct. [00:18:37] Speaker B: But as you continue with your answer there, it's bordering on comments made by Ashton Ford, former general secretary of the pnm, Ferdy Ferreira, founding member of the pnm. There is some discontent about Foster Cummings and whether he should stay or go. Now in the past, Foster Cummings, we saw the debacle out in arm. You were part of that as well out there in Magdalena Grand. I don't know which part of the percent you made up. If it was 9 or 11. I want to put you on the spot and ask you. But that happened. We have Akash Samaru saying ministers called MPC call and all. They told that to Dr. Rowley in his final, you know, attempt to. [00:19:14] Speaker A: You remember how he defined it? [00:19:16] Speaker B: No, that is it. I remember his face though. [00:19:18] Speaker A: No, he said, he said it's the first time he ever seen them acting. How uncish. [00:19:28] Speaker B: But you know the thing about it is this. Maybe people were fed up. If you want you mentioned that the public trust was eroded. But what about within the ranks of the pnm? Maybe that was eroded as well. Like I said, I don't know which side if you was 9 in the 9 or the 11, but we got that. [00:19:46] Speaker A: Let me tell you right before we touch that. Right. Let's just look at the process that we are going in order for us to move forward in opposition. So our general counsel position was taken ratifying Penelope Beckhamson as the opposition leader, supported by. Supported by all the members, one, all the members of the opposition in parliament and then second, also supported by the General Council of the People's National Movement. So that that decision was. [00:20:23] Speaker B: Was unanimous by. [00:20:24] Speaker A: By the General Council of the People's National Movement which is a critical. A critical function of the party's structure. But more than that, there's also been a decision that a special convention. Sorry, not a special convention that internal elections will be held within the party with all offices within the party being up for for grabs for election. I'm not talking about grabs. [00:21:00] Speaker B: We ain't talking grabs for election. That's a diplomatic way of saying it. [00:21:03] Speaker A: Which says. [00:21:03] Speaker B: But why so far? Why quite June? Why not a date closer? Just asking because there is some kind of content there, you know, as I said, Ferdy Ferrero, they have concerns as to why so far, why it's not been announced. People even had problems or concerns. That column Inbrut was re elected again as vice chairman of the party. [00:21:25] Speaker A: Is it unopposed? [00:21:26] Speaker B: So unopposed. [00:21:27] Speaker A: I don't understand. Where. I don't know. There was no. If there was no one else. [00:21:30] Speaker B: But maybe is it that people can't say what they want to say in the party? Just asking. [00:21:35] Speaker A: No, I don't think people are allowed to talk. We are. Yeah. Yeah. [00:21:38] Speaker B: That is without political repercussion. [00:21:40] Speaker A: Well, that is the function of the. Of general counsel. In particular, a place where the party comes members who are representative representatives of all the constituencies and those things coming into general council and that is, that can get, I mean people speak honestly there and it can, it can get a little sticky. It can be people who hold back. [00:22:04] Speaker B: I mean I've never been part of it. And we always ask those questions. I don't know if other journalists will ask you, but I ask and you're straightforward. I mean, you're in a position now to either explain or not. So going forward, we have an opposition leader there, which is the honorable Penelope Beckles, MP for Rima. And now we have a situation where the party is headless. There is no political leader of the party. [00:22:25] Speaker A: The party, the party in itself as a party does still have a leadership. Right? And that leadership is responsible for the, for the running of the party. [00:22:37] Speaker B: But wouldn't that have been prudent to just make Penelope Beckles the interim leader temporary? [00:22:42] Speaker A: That has to be done. That has to be done at an election. That has to be done at an election. And if I am to be honest with you, I am not, I am not a scholar of the PNM's constitution noted. But that to the best of my knowledge must be done at a, at an election, whether that election is at a convention or in this case the party's holding is holding internal elections. And that is done in a, in a responsible way. So you asked about, about the, the timeline, right. That timeline is required one to ensure that you have a supervisory committee in place to manage that process. And the release from Balizi House would have mapped out what is required. Right. So that timeline is required, but it's also a timeline to allow for people to make their decision. So if you do it quickly. There's a rush, a rush to vote. But you don't know necessarily. Remember they're all, all offices are up for election. So you allow people the time to say, okay, well listen, maybe I think you would make a good ex office. [00:24:00] Speaker B: For that time frame. [00:24:01] Speaker A: So would you consider putting yourself up? We would like you to advance yourself for that office. [00:24:07] Speaker B: So then the possibility exists we could have a political leader of the PNM and an opposition leader separate. The Constitution dictates that within the PNM it could happen. Is that what you're saying? [00:24:15] Speaker A: Yeah, but I suspect that that won't happen. I suspect that the political leader must be a member of the lower house and in this case it is unlike the case previously. Right. The political leader is a member, must be a member of the lower house and I suspect that that person. [00:24:35] Speaker B: So how many members of the law house do you all have? [00:24:37] Speaker A: Thirteen. [00:24:38] Speaker B: Thirteen? [00:24:38] Speaker A: Yeah. [00:24:39] Speaker B: So unopposed. We can safely say all eyes are on Penelope Beckles to become the first leader political leader of the pnm. Female. [00:24:48] Speaker A: Well, I don't, I don't know that, that making those presumptions. [00:24:54] Speaker B: But as far as you know, is there anyone else throwing their hat as far as you know, would you be. [00:24:58] Speaker A: Willing, as I was waiting for you to ask me that the answer would be no. [00:25:02] Speaker B: Why? I mean, you supposed to ask. I remember one time speaking to a producer, I wanted to, to, to sit in on a show and I said I didn't want to take the show, but I want to be considered in the event the person's person can no longer do the show or they're out or whatever the case may be, I can be considered. And they said that was some a while back. If you don't see yourself owning it, then why are we, why, why were we taking you? [00:25:29] Speaker A: Well, it depends on, I suppose, what whatever you, the person sees as success as success. And that changes for everybody. So whatever your measurement of your own. [00:25:39] Speaker B: Personal success is, but you don't see, you don't think that you could take the helm. Would you be willing to take a couple calls with us this morning? I'm just asking. If not, we continue. I have myriads of questions before the next 12 minutes of our interview. [00:25:51] Speaker A: I am here as your guest, so whatever you want, I will do. But to answer your first question, it is not about seeing, it is about a desire for it and I have no desire for it. [00:26:00] Speaker B: Noted. I got that. Now here's a question I want to get some clarity on. You're an mp. When in opposition as an mp, how difficult would it be for you to get funding to manage your constituency? Now, if your government in power and you're an mp, we see challenges. We have people quarreling still. We see in the mp we are road to pave. We had a gas street light here. And your government in power, now that your government is in opposition, you know, have to rely on the Finance Minister to release funds. How does that process work? Explain that. [00:26:30] Speaker A: So let's start from the position that the People's National Movement in government was very honest with the population. In terms of our revenue challenges, there was a. We said it. We said it before, we said it on the campaign trail and even after, we continue to see it. Right. And so the revelation to the population that there are revenue challenges is not a revelation at all. We have been seeing that this is a challenge and it required prudent fiscal management. And so even as we said what the next five years was going to be like under PNM government had we been elected, we always said that that was in keeping with the reality of our financial positions. What can we do? What would we like to do? And what. What we will do? Right. So the truth is that I've never been in opposition, so I can't tell you what it's like because I am only a few weeks into. Into that. [00:27:37] Speaker B: Welcome to it. Welcome. Well, you'll do well. You'll do well. You will do well. You will do well. [00:27:42] Speaker A: Right. But it is. It is a challenge. I mean, we've only just seen, and I haven't read the entire thing, but we've only just seen the gazetted breakdown of ministries and what services are reporting and there are already changes. So it means that even in my mind, if I had to write as an MP to ex Minister, that has changed because that minister or that ministry, no longer responsible, no longer responsible for that thing. [00:28:11] Speaker B: Function that you need help. [00:28:12] Speaker A: Correct. So that is where. And it is. It is. And I expect it to be a challenge. There's a reality to that because for. [00:28:19] Speaker B: Me, looking on as, as a layman on the street, if I am in government and you're an opposition mp, me helping you to get your constituents, you know, especially in marginal seats, it will simply mean that I could lose that seat to. Because this Simon was showing up in her. Now, we have seen the differences. We have heard talks about the former MP Esmond Ford out there in Tunapuna and we saw Roger Alexander appear on the scene weeks before and we saw what happened. So Esmond was one that Was spoken highly of in the Tunapuna area. When I did my groundwork, a lot of persons spoke well, he's always present, he's there. So it begs to differ, you know, if, if, if it is, you're in opposition and I help you, so then, you know, it's a, that's how I. [00:29:03] Speaker A: Look at it, Mikey. I'll tell you this, right? I'm in now my second term as a Member of Parliament, right? And as a Member of Parliament, if someone came to see me in my, my MPs office, my, my. No way in my questioning to them around, you know, the things that, that, that I would ask in order to be able to provide assistance would be, who did you vote for? [00:29:30] Speaker B: Of course not. [00:29:31] Speaker A: That is, that is not once you're elected, then you become the representative for all the citizens who live within the boundaries of your. Of your constituency. [00:29:42] Speaker B: I agree. [00:29:43] Speaker A: And sometimes, sometimes you even give representation to people who are outside of your, of your constituency because they may come to see you for whatever reason. [00:29:52] Speaker B: Maybe you're more accessible, you're easier to talk to. [00:29:55] Speaker A: Well, I would like to think I'm both accessible and easy to talk to. [00:29:57] Speaker B: But that's my point. That's my point. If you're easy to talk to and you're easy going, so persons will reach out to you. [00:30:02] Speaker A: So I can tell you that if there is a, if there is a situation where there is a requirement in my constituency, I would have absolutely no problem reaching out to the relevant minister and through them to try to, if it's a state agency or whatever, to. [00:30:22] Speaker B: Try to get, to get some assistance. [00:30:24] Speaker A: And quite frankly, I think I have had, for the most part, cordial relationships with everyone in the opposition. I think that regardless of whether we sit on opposite sides of the aisle, we are part, as I said before, we are part of a governance structure and we must be able to work together. One of the major projects I was working on in my ministry was the delivery of the Miyaro Public Library, which was a long standing issue that I met as a minister. And that mayoro is not a mayor, is not a PNM constituency. But it was based on the fact that this was a need and people. [00:31:06] Speaker B: Needed it and you addressed it. All right, well, let's take a couple calls. We have a question for you. Question for Mr. Simon de Nobrega. Sir, Respectively, you and the Ministry of Communications, were you okay with how the PNM was treating people? Oh, my God. Were the rich getting richer? I remember that statement by your former. [00:31:23] Speaker A: Prime Minister So can I, can I just point that, point out something? Very often I can tell you because I saw that always sat in the, in a clip of an interview with Dr. Rowley. Right. And that clip was just a moment in an entire conversation, as per usual, what happened. And I, and I would, I would ask that, I would ask the person who was sent in the question and I'm only speaking about that comment. [00:31:55] Speaker B: Right, yeah, that comment. [00:31:57] Speaker A: If I'm to paraphrase what was said and feel free to go back and verify what I have said. What was said by Dr. Rowley at the time was that there is no problem, there is no problem with the rich getting richer. However, we must find ways to bring, to bring the people. I can't remember the exact words he used, but we must find ways for poorer people to also advance themselves. And I only say that because we take that simple five seconds out of a 15 second statement. Very much like the whole we're not closing petrotrine statement where you take 10 seconds out of a 30 second or. [00:32:43] Speaker B: A 30 minute speech. [00:32:45] Speaker A: I was, no, not immediately a 30 second statement. You take that and you use that and that is a real problem. The rest of it. I didn't hear the rest of it. [00:32:55] Speaker B: Well, we didn't worry about it. Let's take a quick phone call. We're getting to the news very quickly. Good morning. [00:32:59] Speaker D: Morning to you, Davion, to mv. [00:33:03] Speaker A: Morning, sir. [00:33:04] Speaker D: Yes, and you're correct. I think it's unfair that they use, you know, little snippets and it costed election. But I always say, Davey is an election that I don't mind the PNM losing. What I want to know. This is a program, sir, where we asked Davy and about reform. [00:33:20] Speaker A: Sure. [00:33:21] Speaker D: Do you think that as an mp, if you get reform to shape where you win a seat, you should be entitled, similar to Tobago, to part of our budgetary allocation that would make it easier to run a constituency and would that reform need a majority? [00:33:42] Speaker A: I want to tell you that I'm not, I'm not speaking in absolutes here because I do think that, that, I do think that it would require some level of a constitutional majority in order to be, in order to enact. That was one of the, one of the topics that came up when we did have or when there were discussions around the country on constitutional reform. I don't know, I don't know if the answer is that MPs should, should be given some sort of a budgetary allocation. I don't know if that is the answer. And quite frankly, I don't have a. I don't have a specific position on that. A year or nay. [00:34:32] Speaker B: Okay. [00:34:33] Speaker A: I do think that there is a requirement for the delivering agencies, whether that is ministry or division or agency itself. So a Unicot, as opposed to Ministry of Works or whatever, I think there is a requirement for them to do work in constituencies. [00:34:56] Speaker B: Hello. Good morning. [00:34:57] Speaker E: Good morning, Davy. And Good morning to Mr. Good morning, sir. You know, I've searched my mind and I have not been able to find any evidence that there had been any opposition to Eric Williams as political leader of the pnm. So I think that the first credible election in the PNM would have been the one where Dr. Amy S. Wills challenged Mr. Patrick Manning. At that point in time, I supported Mr. Patrick Manning. We went on later on when Dr. Rowley challenged Mr. Manning, and I supported Mr. Manning. When Mr. Manning departed in 2010, it was virtually automatic that Dr. Rowley, who was a seasoned politician, he had paid his dues. He became political leader of the pnm virtually, I would say, on oppose. You know, virtually on oppose. Today I show my support behind Penelope Beckers, a lady who I've known, I've worked with for the last 30 years or more, sat side by side at General Council, worked with her well, and I think to myself that she's going to make an excellent political leader of the party. Another thing, Mr. Demogre, I would say this to you. While you have put forward the view that the leader of this party has to be a member of the House, it isn't absolute in that someone could be leader of the party. And having become leader of the party, then a member of the lower house can decide, well, okay, I will resign from my seat and allow the political leader to fight that seat and then come into the House, all that is possible. Have a nice morning. [00:36:36] Speaker B: All right, thank you very much. Let's take a listen to this. [00:36:39] Speaker C: Good morning, Davy. And Good morning to Mr. Inobrega. Davy, with regards to the PNM internal elections, I suspect it would be the honorable penalty. Beckless against Short Young, because yesterday I've been sent some photos that he's already on the ground campaigning, and persons who are close to him are saying that he is throwing his hat into the ring with regards to the former minister saying that there should be some level of continuity in terms of what government would have done through the different ministries and different online platforms. I want to say each government will have their own agenda. And it reminds me of when Dr. Rowdy got his second term. And he said to the public, he said, I have gotten the mandate of the populace and we are going to carry out our mandate. And I think that is the approach that have been adopted by governments. So I think. I don't necessarily agree with him. Each government will have their own agenda. Policies will remain intact, though. [00:37:49] Speaker A: So, Davy, can I just say, before the news ends, I think that he is correct in terms of a mandate and there is an agenda. However, the Ministry of Communications has a very specific mandate, if I'm to use that word as well, and that is to communicate what is happening across government. And very often, very often you would want a central location to come to see one, what is happening across all ministries. And from that central location, you can then also go to see what is happening in specific ministries. It allows, it allows the population to see policy that is being delivered across various ministries and it also allows them to see at any one point in time what all of government is doing. That's all I would say. [00:38:45] Speaker B: All right, to take one more call before we wrap our interview this morning. Hello, good morning. [00:38:48] Speaker F: Tell me, honorable guest, very quick, please. You spent 10 years in parliament, I. [00:38:54] Speaker B: Think five, five, five. [00:38:56] Speaker F: And you know something? We have so many brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant, brilliant people all the time. Why is this country in the position in this study we had all those brilliant people. Can you give a reason for that? [00:39:09] Speaker B: All right, you have at least 40 seconds. [00:39:11] Speaker A: I think that. I think that if we think. I think that what we are experiencing in Trinidad is based only on factors that happen within Trinidad. I think that it's a wrong position. There are external factors that influence how much money we have to spend. There are external factors that influence the cost of food in our country. We are limited by our own size so that the idea of food, food security in terms of not being able to import food at all is a flawed concept. Yes, we want to try to grow more and produce more locally and all of those things, but there are limitations and the fact is that the last 10 years were extremely difficult for us. And to that end, of course, there is a level of fatigue that comes with that. [00:40:03] Speaker B: Indeed. So, MP Simon De Nobreger, I want to thank you very much, Diego. Central did put their confidence in you and I trust that you will deliver. I thank you for passing through and visiting me again here on Freedom 106.5. Always a pleasure. [00:40:15] Speaker A: Always a pleasure. [00:40:16] Speaker B: Brightly smiled early in the morning. [00:40:18] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5.