Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar was not in yesterday to see the group of chanting farmers that stretched the length of the eastern wing outside her St Clair office."Moonilal must go!!..." they shouted as her office workers peered down through the glass windows.Apart from the statement made by the six tractors which accompanied the displaced farmers, their placards were also expressive:
"Kamla, move Moonilal-bulldoze him!""Manifesto Pee-Pee on Farmers.""Kamla, Samba on Moonilal..!""Maloney says-no Moonilal!"Persad-Bissessar's return tomorrow will be to (yet another) management snafu which has called for her intervention.This time, in the portfolio of the man whom she praised last November as her "successor," as a "very important man in the PP Government" and a "good politician."
While the PM may have snagged investment opportunities overseas, it remains to be seen whether this will compensate sufficiently for the growing loss of confidence and credibility at home, particularly stemming from this week's episode involving heartland PP constituencies and issues.Monday's destruction by bulldozer of farmers' crops in D'Abadie and Chaguanas has placed Housing Minister Roodal Moonilal centre stage, and by extension the PM also, by virtue of his position as her first lieutenant in the Parliament particularly.And it has caused mucho conflict in the Partnership.The furor caused Persad- Bissessar (from far-off Brazil) to call a halt to the bulldozing, distancing herself from the situation.
As did Partnership members MSJ and COP.
Food Production Minister Vasant Bharath-whose work was compromised by the development-also distanced himself and continued to up to yesterday.And that was a day after Moonilal said he was pressing on with the housing projects and after meeting with farmers under the auspices of Bharath's ministry.
In a report in which Moonilal was quoted on Thursday, it was noted that the land issue was "discussed" at a recent Cabinet meeting-indicating that members were aware of what was happening.Moonilal, who has attempted to defuse the situation before Persad-Bissessar's return, has distanced himself from the bull- dozing and from knowledge that action was coming on Monday.He's pointedly noted things may "have been done differently" if he was present. But apart from personal stock leverage involved in the statement, it's debatable.Because Moonilal, while pointing toward HDC head Jearlean John's mandate to do business, has stood firm on fulfilling the housing project and unapologetic on crop destruction.
"How can I apologise for HDC's move to carry out the law," he asked Thursday, citing eviction notices.At Thursday's Cabinet, it was confirmed Moonilal's presentation on the issue had support from COP MP Anil Roberts, in whose Lopinot seat some farmers are located and where a housing project is planned.Despite Cabinet's apparent sanction, MSJ head, MP Errol McLeod, for one, said yesterday he stood by MSJ's concerns on the issue.Question marks still hang over whether the lands were fully vested with the HDC (or the State), if any vesting order was sanctioned by Parliament and about full planning approval.
Another expensive lesson...
That apart, the matter centres on PP's political image and portrayal as a people's party. Weight has been added because of the emotive issue of food at a time when prices are astronomical.And compounded by the emotional issue of a non-apology from Moonilal which farmers had sought.Moonilal has (rightly) dismissed any idea of Government being in a popularity contest.Other HDC quarters have argued that an ultra-small group of farmers have had a virtual monopoly on large acerages for years.But the administration's modus operandi on the issue may raise (further) questions about its management technique and future trends if Government was prepared to bulldoze its way through and destroy food so arbitrarily.
And thereby ploughing into the ground its carefully cultivated, glossy manifesto image.With fumbles, foul-ups and outright failure on various issues to its credit in 11 months-as well as frank operational concerns by Partnership leaders such as McLeod and the COP-the latest issue has raised further red flags for UNC hierarchy and handlers noting increasing divergence of views on contentious issues.And in this instance particularly, regarding whether the future gains from any housing project to retain Lopinot will outweigh any negative impact on PP's political stocks which may have been created.
That is: how many votes crushed pineapple and cassava could cost Government in the long run.The issue has embarrassed Bharath who took pains to cultivate farmers' trust in trying to boost food production and who had stood in front of a bulldozer at Spring Village in 2008 to protest PNM projects there.Bharath has loyally toed the Cabinet line on the issue, despite this mitigating against PP's campaign line.
While his Government's political integrity may be in question, his may remain intact having regard to his commitment to the farmers with whom he dealt.UNC/PP officials are concerned other frontline members may have lost touch overly fast with PP principle and its public and that Government's image is increasingly being held up as on level with the PNM's.Cold. Removed from the "ground." And reneging on election promises in manoeuvring into Government mode, rather than devising promised innovative plans away from the condemned PNM model.PP's image has not been helped by HDC statements that the housing projects were planned since PNM's tenure.
HDC head Jearlean John is unlikely to be successfully viewed as a scapegoat in the issue since John has had too much high-level government experience with the UNC and PNM (which set her in high esteem of certain UNC jefes to work for PP) to have been ig-norant of any dangers in such issues.Indeed, John has had more working government experience than Moonilal.While her "turnaround kid" reputation may categorise her as a good follower of instructions, the farmers' issue may arouse questions about her capability beyond that. Or, alternately, sympathy for assuming the so-called "fall guy" position in this.Moonilal though, who began his political career under labour leader/politician Basdeo Panday, might have been expected to have managed the situation slightly better than it panned out.
Moonilal reminded reporters Thursday that he had 10 years experience in labour.However, 11 months in government may have taught him another side of the coin where planning and execution are concerned.This, evidenced by his offers of alternative locations to farmers and a joint agriculture/housing team to plan housing sites.After Monday's crop destruction.It may be an expensive lesson for the cash-strapped State, since angry farmers are currently tallying compensation costs.If Moonilal had catered for a week of protest, it may stretch instead beyond that due to another meeting with farmers next Thursday and their bid to have Persad-Bissessar intervene.
COP split on issue...
If there has been lack of co-ordination among Housing and Food Production in the farmers' issue and Partnership units MSJ and COP have condemned the situation, the COP also appears fragmented on the matter. COPers Prakash Ramadhar and Carolyn Seepersad-Bachan were not at Thursday's Cabinet and leader Winston Dookeran did not speak on the issue, though MP Roberts did, it was confirmed.
COP deputy chairman Vernon de Lima, among COP members joining farmers' protest yesterday, took issue with Cabinet's sanction of the matter on Thursday.Meanwhile MP Roberts confirmed he's attended COP constituency meetings up to Wednesday in Arouca, Diego Martin, San Fernando, and St Augustine where activists have called for him to contest Dookeran's leader position when election is held, tentatively, July 3But De Lima says : "The farmers' issue shows it's time for the party leaders to remain outside the Cabinet in order to properly keep perspective."As we see now, once leaders are in a Cabinet they're bound by collective responsibility and cannot speak out when this is needed. We need to change formats."COP officials said the leadership election "may not be a one-man race."
... PNM lays low
The PNM initially rendered low-profile response on the farmers' issue, perhaps because the past administration also employed bulldozer tactics to clear Spring VIllage land in 2008.With leader Keith Rowley overseas, MP Amery Browne and la-bour officer Jennifer Primus attempted to make up ground on the issue, as did PNM senators.Senator Faris Al Rawi seems to be forging the new PNM direction-moving away from past alleged misdeeds.Al Rawi told Government senators if there was blame, he would admit to it, but meanwhile he declared, "I'm here to make to better..."After negative feedback following split PNM votes on former leader Patrick Manning's controversial motion, PNM threw new blood into the mix with former Senator Mariano Browne in the Senate.Still, PNM's efforts to get off the ground since May 2010 have lagged for various reasons.
The leader was being given time to settle in. A report on restructuring was pending. A new executive had to be elected.Latest is the PNM has to await Rowley's return so the executive can tackle stabilising its parliamentary caucus following the split on Manning's motion and subsequent action from MPs.Capping off the mixture of statements in that conflict was MP Alicia Hospedales' revelation that MPs were warned to abstain from voting on Manning's motion or face disciplinary action.That disclosure was followed by claims that Manning is "losing ground" in his constituency.Views are divided between pro- and anti-Rowley forces on Hospe-dales' comments.The former camp believes she should not have spoken since she broke caucus confidentiality-a PNM no-no.
They believe the issue of the motion was ebbing when her remarks-to defend her interest rather than party's-reopened it.Anti-Rowley forces believe Hospedales was right to explain her position, considering questions about her part in the motion.That quarter has also taken issue with the timing of the claim of waning San Fernando East popularity which followed Hospe-dales' statements.The various statements are proof that PNM's revamping may be facilitating-whether intentional or not-a new burst of "openness."Though its extent also raises questions of how much Rowley's team is in control of its "charges" -and the Opposition's national duties.