Episode Transcript
[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability the all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5 welcome back. We welcome to our program. Haven't spoken to her in some time but it's nice to have her back on the show. Let's welcome back to our program Indira Saju and good morning to you.
[00:00:20] Speaker B: Good morning, Satish. Good morning to all your listeners, your viewers. I have been on your program though.
[00:00:26] Speaker A: You is there or maybe that's why I can't remember but it's nice to have you when I'm here so that we can have these discussions. And boy, oh boy, in this country there's never a shortage of things to discuss. I mean this morning we were having a raging discussion about the fire services and they being staffed properly and resourced properly and how politics influences that and how important it is and all these things. And it ties back into governance, it ties back into leadership, it ties back into the prerogatives, the focus of an administration of the day. It does. And in this country we have a lot of discussions about who's in charge and whether they're doing a good job and all those kinds of things. And we know that there's an election on the horizon and there are some who are saying, well things have not been going good, we need a change. Others are saying, well things going great, we need no change. And it depends on who you ask. So let's, let's, let's get your opinion on some of the latest pronouncements and those speak to I don't want to say we have a love hate relationship with this discussion, but it's an interesting discussion that we're having this time around coalition politics, the future of coalition politics, its role in the election to come. Some announcements made last week, I think it was with the UNC's leader announcing that they were in discussions with a couple people, couple organizations, Gary griffith, Congress of the People and hope they've been in some talks for quite some time.
What do you make of all of these pronouncements with an election on the horizon?
[00:02:06] Speaker B: Well, Satish, I want to start by saying it is such a pity that the only time, the only kind of conversation we seem to have in this country, conversations about inefficiencies, conversations about how we're unable to get things right. It would really be nice today that I'm called, you know, for us to have a conversation that speaks to the fact that those who are in charge of us are simply doing what they're supposed to be doing on our behalf and we could be singing their praises. That is an unfortunate thing. But let's come back to the matter of hand this issue of coalition politics.
Well, the reality continues to be that we continue to be a two party state.
So basically the way our constitution is constructed, the fact that there is no room to change that constitution except by those very people in parliament means that we are stuck with the system that we have, which is one that an election cannot be won without the involvement of one of the two major political parties. Whether it is the pnm, whether it is the unc. We know that the PNM is anti coalitions. They have always made that very clear. They go in it alone. So that the coalition has come from what has always been the opposition at the time. And it is not the first time that we are dabbling in coalition politics. We have seen where the issue of third parties have emerged, where they have attempted to go it alone and have not fared well. We had the nar, sorry, the ONR was a major force. I mean I remember I was a young girl at the time and very was my first foray into the, into going to political meetings, et cetera. And they brought a lot to the table in terms of intellectual capacity, in terms of ideas, et cetera, and simply couldn't make a debt. Then we had the cop which won about 130 something thousand votes and not a damn seat for them.
And that speaks volumes in terms of where we are as an electorate, where we are as a people, where we're still for the most part it is about voting party, not about voting issues and voting people in terms of who we believe are the best people for the job.
So having said all of that, we are once again here. We had the success of coalitions in terms of winning an election on two occasions. We had it with the, the NAR and then we had it with the people's Partnership. But neither of these coalitions were able to even last 55 years that was given to them. We had issues of, you know, of contentious issues and people break away and all kinds of things. We had it on both occasions. So I guess the question that we have to ask is what would make this particular effort at coalition different from what we have seen in the past? Is it a real effort at allowing the different elements that will come together to have a say in governance, to have a plausible role in the election process in terms of being able to slay candidates not just in those seats that we know we can't win because PNM will win it for sure. But maybe in seats where if they win, they really have a strong say in government and they can't simply be marginalized. These are some of the questions I think that this whole issue poses. The other issue it poses is to what extent, even meeting a coalition with the current forces, I mean, we have a set of small. What extent have they, they have attempted, in local government, they have attempted to seek candidates and didn't get much traction. What really is a coalition going to do for the United National Party, save and accept maybe ensuring that whatever few votes they may be able to garner in the marginal seats, which is where elections are won. Three, whether this is an attempt to ensure that by bringing them and you neutralize their potential impacts of the few boats, they can take away any marginal seats, which then strengthens your potential to be able to win those seats. Because if you don't win some of these key seats, really you can't form it.
[00:07:02] Speaker A: You know, it's. Whenever we have this discussion, and we've been having this discussion for a pretty long time in this country, it just seems to me that the discussion is always about forces opposed to the pnm.
It's never about, well, somebody is going to take the PNM head on and go after the PNM votes for whatever reason.
And I don't know if that's an indictment against the unc, because the UNC is considered the largest force opposed to the PNM in the country. They've been around for 30 something years. And I was suggesting to listeners, and some of them don't like when you say this, but I consider it unacceptable that a party that is around for such a long period of time still need other people in order to shore up its chances of winning an election against a political opponent that they've been battling for such a long period of time. It says to me that the groundwork was not done.
I don't want to say delegitimize all of these other voices, but to not make them as relevant to the discussion, because what you have is a set of horse trade in. Whenever there is an election on the horizon, be it local government, be it general, all of these other voices pop up and give the impression that you need to take them serious. Because if you don't take them serious, you're gonna lost the election. And all these kinds of things, none of them contested, none of them could show you the kind of support that they have. I mean, I spoke to Gary Griffith recently.
He is adamant that he has the hundred and something thousand Votes from the Congress of the People. And I ask him, I'll say, well, how have you shown that? Where has that manifested itself for you to say, well, you wield this power for the Congress of the People's supporters. Do you still speak for them? Where are they? And he couldn't answer the question. He spoke about the results from the local government election, which you really can't differentiate because that UNC support insider with the co, with the NTA and everybody else. But, but, but, but it's. Is it some. Am I fair to say that the UNC should have done more work to put itself in a stronger position? So, so it could have said like the PNM said, but we in business about all. Yeah, you know, and it's not that you want to be dismissive, but nobody enters. I don't think you should enter a war depending on somebody else to help you win. That's just, that's just my take on it. Am I wrong?
[00:09:26] Speaker B: No, you're not wrong. And I agree with you now. I am. I believe in unity politics, okay? I do. And therefore I believe that if you are to bring people together, you stand a better chance. And if you were to want to do something else. I am a believer in unity politics, but I believe it has to be genuine. I believe it has to be based on shared principles, shared values, shared space, shared sharing of the pie, so to speak. Now, I also agree with you that I believe that the UNC as a political party in the last five years has not done enough in terms of shoring up itself, not so much in the PNM show seats. I mean, I can't. I don't think it makes any sense for UNC to try to go and fight up in LAV until or even in any one of the. Although I think we did have a situation where. Under the pp, was it the PP government or the coalition before, where some serious enrollments were made in one of those. But certainly what we call the marginals, the tunapuna and the St. Joseph and the San Fernando West. I certainly agree with you that the UNC should have been doing a lot more work in these constituencies. In fact, I am also of the view that candidates for these seats should have been named a very long time. Having said all of that, Satish, I also believe very strongly that this election is the UNC's to lose. I believe that it is a very easy win for the opposition United National Congress this particular election. But to me, in my humble view, it really redounds to what the Opposition offers in terms of governance. I think that the only measure that people can have in this moment of what that measure of governance could potentially be is the slate of candidate that is fielded by the opposition. I think there is a lot of dissatisfaction in the country, not just interestingly amongst those who oppose the pnm, but even a lot of people within the PNM itself. For the first time starters, we are seeing public convulsion within the PNM whenever generally, the PNM is really very good at keeping, you know, keeping its dirty laundry very, very behind closed doors. For the first time, we're seeing something different happening. We are seeing a government, a Prime minister who's taken a 47% pay increase. When he can't offer to the average person more than 4%, when he's telling everybody to tighten the belt in here, this is what he's doing. We are in a position where, when you look at all of the variables, crime, economy, social, the social variables, I don't think we've been in a worse situation than we are currently. So therefore, it really is an easy take for an opposition to come in present the country with governance. People must be able to look at the slate that the opposition presents and they must be able to name the Minister of Energy, the Minister of Finance, the Minister of Planning. They must be able to name those individuals by the very slate that is presented. This is my view at this moment in time, and I believe very strongly if the opposition is able to present that, then they really don't need a coalition.
The attempt to bring all of these small parties together is simply about ensuring the few stray votes that they seem to have and make sure that it comes to you.
[00:13:12] Speaker A: Well, sometimes when you have these discussions and you put forward a point of view, people take offense for whatever reason, because some people believe that whatever the party does needs to be supported, regardless of what's going on and all those kinds of things. But you have a population that experienced coalition politics in a very real way between 2010 and 2015.
Now, when I make this comparison, people get upset as well. In criminology, one of the things they teach you, one of the first things they teach you is that criminals often plan up until when they commit the crime. They don't necessarily plan after. And that is where law enforcement looks to find the weaknesses to catch them. And it seems to me that in coalition politics, they plan up until they win the election and not how they will govern after. How they share up the spoils of war. War. And that's where the problem comes in. The Congress of the People complained bitterly that it was not treated well and they were in a loveless marriage for the greater part of five years. And they were there. So they stayed because of the children, which was the population and all that kind of nonsense. But it fell apart. Now Kamala Posad Bisesa is suggesting that the people that she's speaking to at this point in time is going to bring to the nation a coalition that will rival what was there in 2010. And I'm looking at the people around in the initial stages. I don't think so. In 2010 you had a Winston Dukaran. In 2010 you had a Makandal Daga and persons who brought to the amalgamation a certain level of respect.
And I mean, I was in Tunapuna for that election night when Winston Dukharan was the candidate. And I had said to my listeners, because I was on television at the time, that a political leader like Winston Dukerand seeking to fight a marginal constituency is not common in this country.
You have political leaders who go into safe seats because they want to lose. And Winston Dukerand won to nap on a resoundingly by 2,500 votes or some kind of thing like that. So it shows the mettle of the man and the support that he carried with him into this amalgamation.
[00:15:41] Speaker B: Well, Sade shows more than that in my humble viewer, of course. I mean, Vincent has a tremendous amount of support in this entire country and therefore his candidacy would have been amazing. And I agree with you in terms of his willingness to have taken on a marginalist. But you have to remember the national feeling that was aroused with the people's partnership.
It created a national sense of hope that we had not felt since the ner.
And therefore it all worked in order to be able to fuel that willingness of persons to give this thing a try. Because I mean the people's partnership for I think it might have been for the first time had a kind of majority in parliament, that the promises they made with respect to constitutional reform should have been made. We should have had fixed term for a political leader. We should have fixed. We should have had the right to referendum. These things should have been made. These changes should have been made, constituted under the people's partnership government. It didn't also remember in that time the cop came with its 130, something,000 votes. We knew that they had the evidence the previous election had shown that they had that kind of support. This was a sickness significant player that you were bringing into the play. It's the same thing like with the, with the nar, the ONR was bringing in a signal they had proven their mettle. In this current situation, we really don't have third party players who have proven that they have any significant numbers. And which is why I come down to the fact that the only duty to me the real value here is that what the UNC will be seen to be is bringing people together. And secondly, in the marginal seats where you feel where you may have could potentially lose to a hundred, couple hundred votes, you're kind of making sure if people are supporting these stray elements that you're bringing it in.
I agree with you very much in terms of the pick up side kind of approach to coalition politics. And it only happens just before the election. It is only thought through in terms of what should we do together to win this election. And then after the fact, you know, it already literally falls apart. But again, I want to say I don't really believe in this moment a coalition is required. I think where the country is, when you look at, you know, the economics and the crime, etc. I think this is an easy win for the UNC if it simply takes the time and does what it needs to do in order to bring it up, to bring it.
[00:18:44] Speaker A: One of the other interesting elements of this discussion, whenever we have it on the program, the two, the two names that people throw out all the time as they wanting the UNC to engage in are the two people who have been left out.
That's Gary Griffith and Michaela Pandey.
Because if I open the phone lines now, I am positive there are people who will call and say the UNC need to get, or rather not the unc. Gary Griffith and Michaela Pandey need to get involved with the UNC in order to be. They say that all the time. But those are the two people, the two groups who are not a part of any of the discussions. We've not been told at this point in time.
Do you think the country will give coalition politics another chance if the UNC and the other parties go it as a coalition in 2025, you think it's going to work to the UNC's benefit or it could be a hurdle.
[00:19:50] Speaker B: I think people have an expectation, just like you said, your callers are calling in and they're calling for Michaela, they're calling for. So people want. It would appear that people seem to want an amalgamation of the forces. Okay. But I think people are very cognizant of the fact that the major player in this coalition is the UNC is the opposition. It is the opposition currently holds 19 seats. That is what it brings to the table. And really what it means is that a few marginalistics in order to form the government, but people are, people want to see the individuals that they believe should be in politics. And I think that is what you're hearing because people are not saying we want Gary and listing a whole set of names that come with Gary to be part of this. You know, they say we want Gary Griffin. They're not saying we want Michaela Pandy and her slate of people, whoever they are, because we're not sure. They're not saying that. They're saying we want Maquela Valley. And I think what you're hearing is you're hearing the die hard UNC call stalwarts who are calling in and because the dependee legacy is significant in this country and we cannot dismiss that Michaela Pandeyan, she has, you know, she brings her father's legacy and therefore this call is that kind of nostalgic call, you know. And I think that would certainly strengthen the UNC if the UNC and Makila could find some way in order to bridge whatever, you know, issues that seem to be there and can actually come together. Because I mean, let's be serious. Michaela in this moment, from what I've seen is a party of one. I have not seen Michaela present individuals with her of substance that she can argue to me she's going to slate where even if she decides to choose a few seats, I can't see that she can meet any inward in the, in the election, in this moment, even Gary and Gary Bishop as well. I can't see if Gary goes it alone. I can't really see that he can do anything. So if these individuals want a chance of being in governance, in being in government, the only model in this moment, Satish, is through a coalition.
That's reality.
[00:22:31] Speaker A: Yeah, unfortunately, we're gonna have to.
[00:22:35] Speaker B: Can I therefore say. Sorry, just last, last quick point. And I, I have to say therefore if the opposition, the United nations, they're the ones who have the 19 seats. So in my view, anybody wanting to come with them needs to really come cap in hand and say, listen, I want to part of, I want to be part of this process. You know, I mean, I don't think Gary could really knock his chest and you know, shout out there that I can win because he's not proven that he can.
[00:23:02] Speaker A: Yeah, we're gonna have to interrupt our interview. No, the Best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5 we resume our interview with interview for probably about 15 minutes or so. We have another interview at around 20. Before, before we interrupted our discussion we were delving into coalition politics, its relevance and all these other things taking place.
For those of you if you'd like to join the conversation, feel free to do so. You can call us on 625-2257.
I've been suggesting to my listeners and practically everybody you meet wherever you go, politics, elections, the state of the country, people are discussing it, crime, the economy and all these other things people want, want to speak about. And I've been saying that the election of 2025 is going to be a very interesting one if all the people who say they're going to be a part of the election actually follow through and do take part in the election. Because you have, obviously you'll have the pnm, the UNC and now you have all of these other players who are saying well we're going to throw our hat in the ring as well. Makayla Pandey has been saying that her party have now this what seems to be a coalition between the cop, the Hope and the NTA and everybody else. Let's take this call before we get your comments on what you think is going to play out for 2025. Hello, good morning.
[00:24:32] Speaker C: Good morning Satish. And good morning to your guest, Mrs. Sajeevan Ali. Listeners, Princess Tong Satish. I would like to ask Mrs. Ali her view on the, you know, we talk about the numbers in the politics and the coalition and the math of everything but what about, what about credibility?
What about trust and capacity? I mean it is all well and good to put up candidates and have a manual festival and you have your meetings all over the place and everything else. But I think the population, population now in 2025 will be looking for men and women of substance, of credibility, of trust, public trust. When we reflect tatish on the experience that we have had over the years.
[00:25:23] Speaker A: Okay, just now, what makes you think that the electorate is going to be looking for this integrity that, that you say they're going to be looking for?
[00:25:35] Speaker C: Well, let me rephrase. A substantial section of the population will be looking. This is what you might call the NER onr COP middle group, whatever you want to call them. Because the fact is that we know how to win sometimes. But the problem is really well, so, so we have to bring, we have to bring people to who have the requisite skills and abilities I think it's not just about numbers.
[00:26:12] Speaker A: Okay. All right, let's, let's try to keep the calls short so we can get as many in as possible. What's your, you were speaking about the caliber of the candidates prior to the interruption in our discussion. Is that what the kola is talking about? Do you think so?
[00:26:26] Speaker B: So I very much think so. And like I said, I agree with him. I mean, that's the point that I was making earlier. I believe that the opposition can in fact win this thing without a coalition because of where the economy is and therefore we have all the only thing we can judge. And it doesn't matter. The numbers don't matter, the names don't matter. When it comes to your traditional seats, it really is not so important to the core seats of the UNC who the persons who are being offered are. It really doesn't matter. They will vote for whoever the political leader puts up, whoever the election is won in the marginal seats. There are few marginal seats that will determine the election. And for those voters, those more discerning voters, it matters who the candidates are. It matters who the candidates are not just in their own particular constituency, but it matters who the candidates are in the party that those persons are being offered up in because they are the ones who are looking for the governor. They're the ones who are looking to see who are going to run the country. And you therefore have to, you have to strategize this election, in my view, for those people.
[00:27:44] Speaker A: I, I, we, we had a very, should I say spirited conversation about this recently, and the PNM has been announcing candidates in, in, in a, in a fast and furious manner. They've gone up to 30 something. I, I think it is, and, and whatever. And I was, I was making, I was making the pronouncement whether I should or not as debatable that when you have an individual like pennybeckles in Arima and you have a Esmond Ford in Tunapuna and a Farah Salrawi in San Fernando west, these are formidable candidates. Yes. And it is difficult for me to sit where I sit and say that you, you're going to beat them. You have to come rude. That's correct. You have to come.
[00:28:32] Speaker B: Exactly, Satish. I'm very correct.
[00:28:36] Speaker A: I was, I was called pnm. I was called all kind of thing because of that, but it's a sense of reality I had to deal with. Farah Salrai is one of the most. Whether you like the man, you don't like the man or whatever People say about him he is charismatic. He's a true, true politician. I mean Faris Al Rari's already on social media, campaigning and all of that kind of thing. So what you're saying more than that.
[00:28:58] Speaker B: He brings a legacy. He brings the legacy of his name. Let us not, let us not dismiss that line as Sukha ran his mom. He brings that much like a Michaela Pandy for example brings that Pandy legacy. Okay, so you are correct. Penny Becker's in a reamer that's a no brainer. That's born.
You know and I have met, I've had the opportunity to meet Desmond Ford a few times and from all I knew that he is well loved in a Tuna Puna. Although I don't think it is impossible if you do put the right candidate into really make a difference. I think the San Fernando one is a little bit more challenging. But I think tuna puna if you find the right candidate. But then we need to look at St. Joseph. St. Joseph is another seat that you really need a formidable candidate and a formidable in the sense that people have to be able to see what this person would to bring to government. And that's why, I mean the caller I just called you I think is correct.
Maybe he didn't articulate it in the way that is appropriate in the sense that it matters to the voters in the marginal seats. But again I'm repeating it doesn't just matter. So let's say for example you're able to find, I mean I can't call a name but you're able to find a formidable UNC is able to a really strong candidate and put in Tunapuna.
[00:30:28] Speaker A: Right.
[00:30:28] Speaker B: But you don't make any other changes.
People in Tunapuna are not just going to look at the Tunapuna candidates. They are going to look at the entire slate and they're going to wonder, okay, except for my person who's going to form the government, you know, where is the experience that's going to form the government. And Satish, I know we have been for a long time, we've dismissed that and we always talk about it don't matter who you put up in your core seats. But does it difference between if you're happy to stay in opposition or if you want government for very long? The opposition was very happy to stay in government and didn't do what was necessary to transition into government. If you want government, you have to do some things different. People are feeling it Satish. They're really feeling destroying of the economy. Of crime.
And therefore people are, I believe more dissonant. There are a lot of younger people who are now part of that voting pool. You have to appeal to them.
[00:31:38] Speaker A: Okay, but how do you, how do you rationalize or justify this that people are saying. There are some people who say, I always said some. There's some people who happy. There are some people who are saying things are so bad, look at the crime. Over 600 homicides and yet still a party that's saying to you, well, we are the opposite of what is in governance still has to bend over backwards to try to convince people to put them in office. One would think it's an over, you know, at least for the people who are saying that they're dissatisfied. But yet still the rest of it.
[00:32:15] Speaker B: Is, it is a no brainer if the. You yourself made the point earlier that you don't feel that the opposition has done enough work in the five years to prepare itself for government.
[00:32:25] Speaker A: Right.
[00:32:26] Speaker B: Whether it is to have started the process of this whole coalition thing from earlier or what autism. Strengthen itself and presents itself, present itself as a, as a government in waiting.
And I think that really is the issue. The issue is that, and I repeat it, this is the opposition's election to lose it is the opposition's election ready to present governance. Now listen, the PNM has named a whole lot of candidates, but the PNM gets a lot of poll points for the fact that it is bringing in a lot of, it's bringing in new people, but it's not just bringing in you, it's bringing in new people with experience.
People could actually, you know, a Ricky Sukai for example, this young man who probably can't wait to see. They give him in because obviously I'm not going to give him a safe seat.
But if you look at him, he comes with a track record of performance, performance of community service.
And this is the kind of candidate that the PNM has brought in. And they have, they're offering and PNM as we know, if they do any next election, they will make him a senator, they will probably make him a junior minister so that we can, from the way that the PNM operates, we can see these individuals finding themselves in positions to make decisions.
Let us look at the opposition and let us see what is happening there. But we can't really judge yet because to date the opposition has only identified three candidates.
[00:34:05] Speaker A: Yeah.
Do you think that's, that's to their credit or not? Because people tell you, well, you can't put the candidates out there too early because the longer time that they have, the greater the risk that something could go wrong. And then the flip side to that is, well, you need to put the candidates out early to work the constituency so that people will know who they are in time for the election.
What's your opinion, Savage?
[00:34:35] Speaker B: I think we've gone past early now because we are in that time period. Really the opposition has two dilemma. One, naming candidates in marginal seats, which I think it should be the priority and those, those candidates should be named very quickly because those people really have to work those constituencies and you need testimonial time to be able to do that because you are potentially bringing somebody new into there and therefore they need time to be able to work it. Obviously the UNC doesn't need to work its traditional seats but there are, it comes back to the notion of there's your current offering of a governor.
[00:35:20] Speaker A: Well, I guess, yeah.
[00:35:23] Speaker B: And that's where that is why naming those, naming those seats also become important. But those seats I think can hold, you can hold on naming those candidates to the end hour. However, it is my view that if you, even if you have strong candidates in the marginals but then you don't make any changes in what you currently offer, I think that will work to the detriment of the opposition.
[00:35:49] Speaker A: Well, it's going to play itself out over time and I think we have a lot of time because I don't think the PNM is going to call any election. I mean the Finance minister has already.
[00:35:58] Speaker B: And then look at where the EBC is, I mean with respect to this, the whole issue. So I agree with you. I don't think, and I think the PNM will want to try to see what they could shore up in terms of some of the issues. I don't think they could do anything about the state of the economy within the short space of time. I see they already give the, I think they gave the pilots, pilots got.
[00:36:19] Speaker A: A 5%, they signed off on 4% as well.
[00:36:22] Speaker B: Yeah. So they added a 5% to them. So you mean that that area, they may want to see what they can do but they can't do anything about the state of the economy. You know, the only thing probably could happen with Dragon is the situation could worsen. I can't see it improving.
But crime, maybe they can do something with crime.
[00:36:39] Speaker A: Yeah, well, I don't know. I, I, I, I'm suggesting that on nomination day when, whenever that is and we figure out exactly who all the players are going to be because plenty people could tell, you see me, I gonna contest this, I gonna feel this candidate and that and the next. But on nomination day, you may see a totally different thing playing out. It's only on that day that we'll know who put in their money, where their mouth is and how it's going to influence possibly what an outcome could be. So until then, we're going to have a lot of discussions. I want to thank you for being with us here this morning, and I'm sure that we will have some more conversations moving forward. It's my pleasure, as always.
[00:37:18] Speaker B: Absolutely.
[00:37:19] Speaker A: And that's how we end our conversation with Indeed, There is a G1 here, ladies and gentlemen. The best insight, instant feedback, accountability, the all new Talk Radio Freedom 106.5.
