CHAOS INSIDE THE UNC

[00:00:01] Speaker A: The best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5. Welcome to our program. She was with us recently speaking about the call for Natics elections in the UNC and what transpired back then, defending her position or rather explaining her position. She, she's back with us here this morning and well, as I said to her back then, I'm sure that we would need further discussions because things are going to pop up and well, yeah, something has popped up. Last Friday, five UNC MP's were not present for one reason or another. And that has, that has started an entire discussion about all kind of thing about whether it was intentional, whether all of them gang up together. Political scientists know, saying that the political leader could sue her MP's and all that kind of bacchanal they're throwing into the mix. The UNC leader is quoted in today's newspaper asking if MP's don't know how to read the order paper. No, it's gotten much more controversial since Friday. So joining us this morning is Tabikit MP Anita Haynes. Good morning to you. [00:01:14] Speaker B: Good morning. How are you? [00:01:15] Speaker A: I am fine. How are you? [00:01:17] Speaker B: I'm feeling okay. Incidentally. Thank you. Thank you for having me onto the program. And I know most persons that have been listening to the discourse. I myself have been thinking in how things have been growing. So I really appreciate the opportunity to be here this morning. [00:01:38] Speaker A: Yeah. When the producer spoke about all that has been transpiring, just yesterday a man called and accused me, accused me keeping the matter alive, saying that it's my fault that the issue is as controversial as it is because I choose to raise it every single day. And I had to remind him that I wasn't the one on Saturday who got up at the UNC's conference and bring it up and cause a whole set of headlines and all of that kind. I wasn't the one who do that. But that's, that's part of the cause. You get that kind of idiotic comments all the time. But it's, it's, it's something that UNC supporters would question. These five MP's, they, they've found themselves swimming against the tide, if that's how you want to describe it, because of the calls that you've made and all kind of bacchanal people saying remove them and fire them and everything else. The opposition leader chose to make some comments that only served to further inflame the matter. There are some who are saying she's right to say what she's saying, such as the opposition chief whip David Lee issued a release yesterday. So let's hear from you. Why weren't you in parliament on Friday? [00:02:52] Speaker B: Well, so I had an unfortunate circumstance where I had to send out a press release yesterday because, you know, the thing is, the political leader would have sought to create this exact scenario that is playing out here on Friday. I was absent from the sitting from the beginning, requesting personally from parliament, which, you know, is, I mean, for various reasons, people will have to request this from time to time. At this point in my life, I am not prepared to discuss why I requested, but suffice to say it was important and urgent. And so that, you know, I looked on and I saw that my request for leave, Doctor Rai, who was, I believe, in his son's graduation, he also requested his leave, lumped together to create this exact conversation. And I found it really, really disheartening that he would take an opportunity to basically launch an attack. And so I, like I said, to put myself in a position. Look, I do have a parliamentary representative event and I have a good ethic that I think almost everybody in Trinidad and today would have seen over here that I take my, my representative function very seriously. And so I took that very seriously and took those comments very seriously because not only did you not even inquire as to the reason why I requested privately, but to then go publicly and put onto that some sort of sinister function, I found out to be really, really unacceptable. And, you know, I found myself in what I still consider to be a very difficult position because my whole strengthening of the internal structures of the UNC, my calls for the voice of UNC members to have a seat via elections following our democratic process, all of those things, I think I would always stand by, but then use those calls to say that you are attacking people and while you yourself are launching attacks, I find it, you know, I mean, it is convoluting what I find to be a very simple issue, which is that those of us who are in leadership positions must consult with the persons who we still lead and we must find a way to go forward and get different results in 2025. [00:05:39] Speaker A: Yeah. When an MP like yourself needs to be absent from parliament, what are the steps that need to be taken? And were those steps taken? [00:05:51] Speaker B: Yeah. So the steps that need to be taken is that you inform the parliament that you would be absent. You aren't required to give a reason, but most persons, whether it is out of the country, whether you are parliamentary business, whether you are even some instances. So it's really out of the country. If you are on parliament or if you have some sort of immigrant medical waterway. [00:06:19] Speaker A: So you just need to get to notify the parliament for the, for the speech through, I'm assuming, the, the clock of the house. And that message will be passed over. [00:06:28] Speaker B: The House speaker two. [00:06:30] Speaker A: Does the opposite. Do you need to ident to notify the opposition, chief whip? [00:06:35] Speaker B: You do. Well, you aren't required, but it is normal that you would. [00:06:41] Speaker A: Did you? [00:06:43] Speaker B: I did. [00:06:44] Speaker A: Okay. Because the impression being given, and doctor, I. Ragbear sent me information as to why he was not there, and he sent me the program for his son's graduation as evidence of, listen, this is why the man wasn't there. And we had a raging debate about it yesterday, and people start saying, well, you know, your parliamentary business trump your personal business and all of that kind of thing. And I said to them that, are they being grossly unfair this morning simply because there's a political head? All they want to push. Now, you cannot hold it against the UNC supporter if they are told by the party's political leader that the fiverr you all miss in parliament at the same point in time is more than passing strange and somehow or the other will conspire. So I have to ask you the question. Were you aware that your other parliamentary colleagues were not going to be there as well? [00:07:43] Speaker B: No, but my parliamentary colleagues were in the parliament. That's the thing. If you look at during the private member state function, when misses Pesat recess was speaking, Rodney Charles was present and supportive right next to them. And then when you look at what happened with the debate on emotion, you would see chief whip objecting to the debate being held because it is not proper procedure to have the debate after private members. You have the political leader in her response saying, none of us expected to be here after private members. And so my colleagues who were within the House, they left. And so, therefore, now to use that three persons were present and they left because they assumed that the house would adjourn at 06:00 p.m. Which is customary. Two persons who had sought leave for various reasons, two different, completely different reasons. And to take all of that and lump it in together into something sinister is very deliberately mischievous. [00:08:57] Speaker A: So from what you're saying to us, the contribution by Kamala Persad be Sessa and the chief whip, the opposition chief whip, suggested that they were not prepared to stay for the debate because that's not what the procedure was to have. [00:09:12] Speaker B: What I'm saying is that the question that the suggestion that was some plan and some plot to absence yourself from a vote when you, both the chief rep and the political leader would have stated that this was not a customary approach. Also ignoring the fact that two Fridays ago on a special majority vote where a two thirds requirement was required on the debate on the change to the cop appointment of the copyright that you have members presence along the party line. So you are ignoring fact and then creating, you know, suppositions and putting that to the public. And I find that to be really, you know, if it is that you wish to engage in this type of campaigning, the only responsible thing to do is to call the internal election, but don't call the hostage UNC spaces where we are all members of the UNC to openly campaign against other members. So I think that part you shouldn't be allowed to do. [00:10:34] Speaker A: Let me break it down. So I'm trying to try to put it in a way that the average individual will understand after the private members motion time or whatever it is, ended at 06:00 and the government moved to start this debate on the AG and the auditor general, whatever it is, the extension of time, both the opposition chief whip, who is David Lee, and the political leader Kamala Posadb Sessa got up and said that this is not how we do business. None of us were expecting to be here to discuss this and debate this and all of that kind of thing. And then she went to the event that the UNC had and criticized you all for not being there for something that she said she was not prepared to be there for. [00:11:25] Speaker B: Correct. And, you know, further to that, I mean, in terms of simple organizational communication. Right. When you. It would be, it would have taken nothing to send a message or to say this is continuing with members can remain, etcetera. Right. And so therefore, you are seeing this idea that you will take something now and like I said, as an open campaign against individuals because you disagree with their call for internal elections, despite saying that you agree that the elections would be called. [00:12:01] Speaker A: Yeah. I can tell you this from looking in from the outside, these conflicts and these disparaging remarks don't serve the party well for a political leader to be. [00:12:13] Speaker B: Absolutely, I agree. [00:12:15] Speaker A: For the political leader to be in the newspaper today on page 86 and the headline is questioning whether or not MP's know how to read the order paper. One would ask if Kamala Posadi Saysa is speaking about her MP's or somebody in the PNM because of the statement. But MP, there's, there's, there's something that you have and probably the other four need to accept as well. There are people who don't believe all they know. There are people who listening in this morning to what you have tried to explain as how the sequence of events unfolded. And they didn't want to hear what you had to say because they believe that you're lying. And they believe that Rushton, Parry and Doctor Rai, Ragba and Rambali and Charles and all they conspire, because all they do, like Kamala Posad Besesa, and because all they call for internal elections and all they know, swimming against the tide, everybody conspire Friday and pull our hooks on the nation. And now they're trying to defend it by lying to the public about your excuses. What do you have to say to those people? [00:13:17] Speaker B: I can say this, right? The fact is that what we're seeing is prisons using information for political convenience. And the reason I, you know, I took the interview, but I also want to put something out to the listening public and in particular to UNC members. Today, April 30, is the 35th anniversary of our political organization. What we have to be resolutely focused on is what we can do to improve our political organization or political institution. There are spaces that we can reach out to the public. We can create inclusive policy making, and we can prepare ourselves in a deliberate manner to get ready for the 2025 general elections. This type of propaganda politics, this type of who is attacking and whatnot, it serves a little none of us, and it certainly does not serve our readiness for the general election. The easiest way for us to go through the process is that the election date is called, our members are allowed to participate, and that the campaign is done in a respectful manner that is focused on policy, so that those who are seeking interest of the UNC can come forward and discuss what they intend to do for the party, not any individual within the party, but the UNC institution, the institution that is celebrating 35 years today. And I think that can be done. It is my firm belief that despite all the things that have been happening, that it will take place and that good sense will reveal that is all that we can go for. [00:15:10] Speaker A: As I said, you know, there are people who will be all over the place on this. And some of these controversies, I don't know if they're necessarily warranted, because when you listen to the manner in which this topic was brought up at the UNC's event, was it on Sunday or Saturday? Whichever day it was, it was on Sunday. Forgive me if I am of the impression that this was engineered and it wasn't off the cuff, somebody sitting. And he crawled as the impression was given that somebody sit down in the crowd and they just shout out, tell them about the vote on sat on Friday. And I supposed to believe that the opposition leader would, if she didn't want to talk about it, that one prompt made her go through this entire discussion that, quite frankly, I didn't think needed to be had in the public domain. That's just me. Politics is a strange thing. Politicians operate in a manner that sometimes it defies logic, but it clearly shows how deep rooted the divisions in the UNC are now more than ever on the issue of Natick's elections and how a line has been drawn in the sand and you've found yourself with the other four mp's who are making this call on one side, and there are many others on the other side who, for whatever reason, do not think you all should remain with the UNC. [00:16:43] Speaker B: Well, you know what I find interesting, right, is where we're saying, because even this question of division and dissent and whatnot, a call was made, internal elections to take place when their constitution, according to the public record misses, has said that elections will take place when they are constitutionally due. And so the, the actions show that there's a division, but the words show that there is consensus. So why, if the elections were always going to take place when they are constitutional due, is there any level of animosity? Simply all you could have said when Russians poke out, but that they will be called when they're constitutionally due. And so the elections will take place on or before June 2024. That would have been it, the end. But instead, like I said, there have been deliberate attempts to complicate what is a very simple issue, because to me, on face value, there should be no disagreement if the call was made for internal elections. And then those who can't call the internal elections have said that they will be called. That is a settled matter. But the actions since then seem to belie the fact that maybe no elections were they never intended to call any elections. And that is why there seems to be disagreement. Because on face value, it seems that there are agreements. [00:18:08] Speaker A: Yeah, you see, MP, unfortunately, and I continue to use the term unfortunately, because these, these disagreements or whatever you want to describe them as, they don't necessarily engendered the kind of atmosphere that can see these matters being resolved or whatever. And there's another thing that. Well, I'll ask you the question, you'll give me the answer. I have my own view on it. But why won't any of these five mp's at this event that the UNC had on Sunday. Okay, forget the five mp's, because maybe you can't speak for the other four, but for yourself, because people are asking that question, and it's a justified question. If there was no. If there was no conspiracy for all five mp's to stay away on Friday, why, why all five stay away on Sunday? Or why did you stay away? [00:18:58] Speaker B: Well, there were several other MP's not present on Sunday. [00:19:03] Speaker A: Yeah. Oh, really? [00:19:04] Speaker B: Focuses on five. [00:19:05] Speaker A: Well, I was. No, I, I wasn't aware of that. The impression being given is only this five stay away. [00:19:11] Speaker B: Well, I wasn't so at all. You know, I don't think so at all. And so, you know, again, the, the statements about breaking Bishop, whatnot, those things that Edmund was made before Sunday. Right. They were just heavily publicized by Sunday. And so because I had an, I had a sense of exactly what we have played out on Sunday. I mean, I was in two minds. My intention initially was to attend because I have a great love for the United National Congress and for the political institution. But then you have to also consider what scenario are you putting yourself in? And if you can have five of them and whatever, you know, you create a space of wondering, you know, whether or not you, you engage in this kind of. I mean, I had no intentional occasion in this public discourse either, until there was a suggestion that my absence was somehow sinister and done in a way that was detrimental to the party and that forced my response. And for me personally, I am trying to conduct myself in a manner that is responsible and that will not in any way bring the institution that I have great love and respect for into any kind of distribute. And so that was my intention from, you know, absenting myself on funding and, and that is personal decision and not part of any group decision. And so that. But going forward, there must be a space where you can mentally issue and things can be done. Like I said, in a respectful manner. I heard one of my colleagues, as part of his platform, speak to, you know, you have to disrespect them and that kind of thing. If you think about party development, if you think about national development, it really is just so irresponsible. And so, because I anticipated exactly what would take place. I mean, this is a party animal. In the year that the founder of the party passed away, you could have made this a celebration of the organization, the work of the founders. None of those things took place. And so, you know, looking on, because you can anticipate certain things you would have, you would be forced to be in a position where you may have to absent yourself from certain things to avoid, you know, any kind of confrontational scenario. [00:22:00] Speaker A: Well, one of the things that's clear is that there are elements of the UNC who will use any opportunity to cause a scene. And we saw that played out clearly with pundit Donny Samlao. When he went to a UNc event. He had expressed some views that some people didn't agree with. And he was sure, well, it stopped short of abuse, physical and other wealth. Definitely verbal. I don't know if the party has condemned that officially or not since then, but you can tell clearly that it's not the ideal situation, because for these MP's, who have been vilified by some already in a very public manner, including some of your MP's as colleagues, to put yourself in that. If it were myself, I would think a hundred times before going there. And it shows how. It shows how politically immature the supporters and some high ranking officials of the UNCR. Because I take, I take. I take people back to the internal elections of the PNM. When Penelope Beckles challenged doctor Keith Rowley, there were events after that convention and this and that and the next. And Penelope Beckles was there and she was embraced by the party and by the membership and by nobody, didn't cushion run she and insult she and say, run them and disrespect them and all that kind of nonsense. [00:23:30] Speaker B: Correct. Because you understand the importance of building your institution and what is required for building the institution. And I want to just say one thing, though. The voices that are shouting loudest right now, in terms of expeller, etcetera, those are in the minority. They are just a very low minority. And so that when you are in spaces, as I am, whether it is within my constituency, various other events that I may attend, you know, once you know you are doing writing by the party, by the organization, we support you and stand by you. And so that you find that, I mean, there is a space where persons who feel a certain way are using their amplified voices to style on other people. But the surest way to get a sense of the temperature of the party is to call the election. So therefore, all members, all financial members, have the opportunity to vote and have their state. And the delay of saying, yes, elections will be called then not calling it, then using UNC platforms to drive what would be an internal platform narrative. Because what you're seeing in the setup of this division is an idea of them versus me. Or them versus current executive versus anybody else. But that is internal campaigning. And if you want to do that, call the election because it is within your power to do so, and then do it properly under the internal election spaces and select members of their democratic state. But don't not call the election and then engineer spaces for blatant campaigning that I find this very ridiculous. [00:25:35] Speaker A: And following that, I'll open the phones a bit and give our listeners the opportunity to interact. If you joined our discussion midway, we are speaking this morning with Tabukit MP Anita Haynes. Alain and we're discussing some of what transpired last Friday, explanations, some of what transpired since then. We'll get back to that. As I said, when we come back, the best insight, instant feedback, accountability, the all new talk radio Freedom 106.5. So for those of you trying to call in and with your comments and your calls and your questions or whatever else, I ask that you keep it as brief as possible. Hello. Good morning, Satish. Good morning to you. [00:26:16] Speaker C: I want to ask Miss Haynes this morning. I saw her press release yesterday with respect to what was said by the political leader. Did she do a press release indicating her issue with what is happening between the government and the auditor general at this point in time? And if not, why did she choose to respond to the leader, your leader, and not respond to an issue that is affecting this country? Thank you. [00:26:44] Speaker A: Response? [00:26:46] Speaker B: Yeah, I would respond quickly. I was put in a very unfortunate position where I had to respond because it was as position was directed at me personally. However, you would also look that I've been raising just last week on special needs and the government's feeling to create us. If an inclusive is for special needs students within our schools. I continue to advocate for success, for my constituency, for education, and return all those spaces. And I think that is also a clear, easily verifiable record. And so any suggestion otherwise. Again, we'll just second of the call. [00:27:27] Speaker D: Hello. [00:27:28] Speaker A: Good morning. [00:27:29] Speaker D: Good morning. Sadish. Sadish. I have a couple questions for you. [00:27:33] Speaker A: You wouldn't be able to ask a couple. Ask one. [00:27:35] Speaker D: Okay. All right. One. The PnN people, Anita, the PnN people don't do what you are doing. The UNC accepted you as a novice. They gave you an opportunity, and now you have become an immokaram against them. Why didn't you deal with this internally within the party instead of going outside? [00:27:54] Speaker A: Okay. Thank you so much for your call. Dealing with it internally as opposed to public. [00:27:59] Speaker B: I respond, I responded, public statement. I could only respond to a public statement publicly. There's no other way to respond to a public statement. And on the question of the UNC and my space within the UNC, I want to mention that I've made resolutely committed to the building and strengthening of the United National Congress. There may be persons who believe that that building and strengthening is somehow an attack on them, and that is something they have to deal with. But I am resolutely committed to the United National Congress. [00:28:37] Speaker A: Taking a call. Hello. Good morning. [00:28:39] Speaker D: Good morning, Miss Hayes. [00:28:40] Speaker A: Morning. [00:28:40] Speaker D: Satish. [00:28:41] Speaker C: Miss Haynes, why are you refusing to throw the party line? Thank you. [00:28:48] Speaker B: I have not refused to toe the party line. That is an inaccurate statement. [00:28:53] Speaker A: But you see, you see how public perception. I'll put forward two suggestions. You see how public perception is twisted with the narrative on this entire thing. Or maybe it's deliberate that people are making these statements, because that I've heard before, and I can't understand where people are coming. Just trying to figure it out on my own. I can't understand why people are accusing all five of you of not being willing to toe the party line. And there was a vote recently where you all voted in line with the party and all that kind of thing. But I assume it's another weapon in the arsenal to. [00:29:36] Speaker B: I will add to that. Right. And again, like I said, has been very deliberate to complicate a very simple issue. I have asked for internal elections to be called when they are constitutionally due. Rashdon Parry, Roger Charles teenage mumble. They all ask for the elections to be held when they are constitutionally due to ensure that members can have their state. The political leader has said that elections will be held when they are constitutionally viewed. So therefore, everybody is, in fact, doing party elections. [00:30:08] Speaker A: We may not have time for another call. Unfortunately, we're going to have to end the interview because we do have commitments just after the 08:00 news, how these things that are taking place and the outright attacks that are being leveled against you and the others who spoken out and called for the executive elections and so on. Now, the last time we spoke, you said that you were confident that you'd be treated fairly and that your work would speak for itself when it comes to nomination and being screened and everything else. A couple weeks later, are you still that confident? [00:30:48] Speaker B: What I will say is that the assumption is that the screening committee that we will all be facing is the same screening committee that exists. And so that, I think, is an assumption that is not a safe assumption. I believe that proper process would be to ensure that the internal elections take place so that the national executives that will be doing the screening has the mandate of the members of the United National Congress. So I'll leave that there. [00:31:19] Speaker A: And this is where we're going to have to leave it this morning. Thank you for being here with us this morning, giving us your side of certain things that are very much in the public domain. As I said to you, it's, it's going to be a tough, uphill task now, because even though you've, you've said what you need to say, and I trust that you ain't going to come with a lie to us or to listen. And to everybody else, there are some people who just don't want to hear what, what this side of the narrative is, for whatever reason. But I guess that's politics, right? MB, thank you so much for being with us here this morning. And I'll say to you again, as I said last time, I'm positive that we'll have to speak again in the not too distant future. Thank you so much for being with us. [00:32:01] Speaker B: Have a great day. Have a great day to you and your listeners. [00:32:03] Speaker A: And that's where we dropped the kitchens on our interview here this morning. Tabikit MP Anita Haynes the best insight, instant feedback, accountability. The all new talk radio Freedom 106.5.