Q: Mr Khan, what do you think was the most important lesson the electorate sent to politicians on May 24, 2010?
A: (In a relaxed mode in the conference room of the Balisier House headquarters of the opposition People's National Movement in Port-of-Spain Thursday afternoon) That they must no longer be taken for granted, that politicians have to account to them, transparency in the discharging of their public duties, that they do things that are in the interest of the masses of the population. They are also no longer respecting the legacy of a political party.
In other words "I am PNM or UNC or PP until ah dead no longer holds"?
It did not hold for the last general election because the media had portrayed the PNM in such a way that it eroded the party's core support...
Are you suggesting we sat down and decided to paint the PNM in a negative light?
No. No. Everything was stacked against the PNM; Udecott, the Guanapo church and really and truly the leadership style of the then leader Patrick Manning. Those were the three fundamentals that tilted in favour of the PP, but when you look at it 80 per cent of the PNM's economic and other policies were very defendable.
The media did not sit and craft a plan to overthrow the government. However, the government played into your (media) hands even though 80 per cent of the economy was going very good.
What in particular was it about the leadership style of Mr Manning?
While I don't want to be part of Manning bashing but as a leader he became too fundamentally flawed, disengaged from the people which the population roundly rejected. That doesn't take away from the good things he did, okay?
Mr Khan, the reason I asked that first question was because of the way the PNM handled the recent debacle in the parliament involving Mr Manning's motion when it was sought to portray abstaining and yes as meaning the same thing. On reflection, do you want to change your mind?
Based on the discourses given by the parliamentarians to the party's general council, I formed the opinion it was truly a question of miscommunication. However, if there are issues more fundamental than that, they would be discussed when the parliamentary caucus meets the party's executive next month.
From where you sit, are there more fundamental issues and do you think the public believed the miscommunication spin?
(Hesitating) There seems to be something deeper and whether it is fundamental to the operations of the parliamentary arm, I reserve judgement on that.
Mr Khan, there is a school of thought that Mr Manning is planning, to put it mildly, to play a greater role in the leadership of the party and is just biding his time...?
I think Mr Manning has served his time, he performed reasonably well and history will judge him. It will show (with a straight face) that he did more for this country than probably even Dr Eric Williams, and what he (Manning) did for tertiary education was what Dr Williams did for secondary education. Manning monetised the gas reserves, he went into the LNG and the whole myriad of physical infrastructural development is largely Manning's doing. However, he almost singlehandedly brought the party down, okay? We have recently elected a new executive and this is the team to take the party forward.
Mr Khan, political observers are saying that Mr Manning is behaving in a very indisciplined manner with respect to his parliamentary duties. Why is the party tolerating this apparent unruly behaviour when discipline has long been a well known hall mark of the PNM?
The parliamentary arm is disciplined by the Chief Whip and the Leader of the Opposition. The new general council at our first meeting has mandated the leadership to discuss with the parliamentarians if there are issues that are hampering their effective performance.
Do you agree with the supposition, Mr Khan, that Mr Manning cannot adjust to the hard fact that he is no longer prime minister, and that he has difficulty in accepting directives as an ordinary MP from people he once led such as Marlene MacDonald, not to mention Dr Rowley...?
Well, may be, may be not, you understand? If we are looking at a psychological issue with him only time and counselling would heal that. The fact of the matter (gesticulating with hands outstretched) it is he who has to understand the role he has to play.
Does he fully understand that?
I do not think he fully understands that but he would in the fullness of time. But if there are raw issues at the edges it is incumbent upon me (momentarily touching his chest) to sort it out.
Because, really and truly, if there is a war at all, it is between he and Dr Rowley and I as the party's chairman, had a very good relationship with Mr Manning when he was the leader and I am now building a good relationship with Dr Rowley..
So I am in the fortunate position to sort out...to heal... to be a peace maker for the want of a better word. I really want to give this a crack having served under both men.
How long Mr Khan, do you believe the party can tolerate this apparent indisciplined attitude of Mr Manning?
(Stroking with one finger his clean shaven chin) I would not call it apparent indiscipline. The jury is out on that one but let me tell you this: I also intend to have some private discussions with Mr Manning... that is all I am prepared to say on this matter at this time. As bad as some people may want to paint him, Mr Manning still hassome goodwill in the PNM so it is not something you can just turn your back on. It is a dissipating goodwill... it is not an organised goodwill that he could launch let's say a coup or an attack as you might say.
Can the PNM, as it now stands, win a general election if it is called any time soon?
It would still be difficult even though we came out of a wonderful convention.
When you were elected party chairman you told your audience the party had to expand its support base in terms of ethnic composition. Isn't that harking back to pre-May 24, 2010, when the electorate also said that we have begun to vote not along racial lines but on tangible issues like the economy, unemployment and so on...?
(Well, you see we are in a Catch-22 situation in this country. We don't want to talk about it but when you analyse the core statistics from the polling profile it is largely ethnic. All May 24 did was that the Afro-Trinidadian who supported the PNM decided that the party transgressed and they went with the People's Partnership. The East Indian community did not shift in any way; they stuck with their party, ok? What would be the proof of the pudding is if the PP continues to falter...
The PP is faltering...in what way?
Yes. They have made no significant dent in the crime spree, the economy is stagnant, there is liquidity in the banking system but yet there is no borrowing. All of this is because there is no strategic vision even on where they intend to take the economy...and so on. But the reason why the people have not yet started to hit the streets in any significant way is because this government is still riding on a wave of goodwill...They still have a lot of goodwill in the bank.
Mr Khan the international trend in governance is in the direction of coalition and is the PNM contemplating changing its stated stance of win alone or lose alone?
(Head slightly bowed and folded arms) If you look at the demographic of the whole thing you will realise that the PNM has a difficulty to win a general election when it is a one on one fight. When there is a three way split it is very easy to beat the opponent which means the third force is very real and who could lobby, successfully lobby, this third force could win the election. So hopefully, I see this not as part of party politics but I think one day we would have to look at it.
Really?
Yes. Because right now our policies and principles are more aligned to the COP than the UNC. The PNM has glamour, it has a good brand and if we could get back those qualities and think we can do it alone, so be it.But-even though I may be speaking prematurely-and this is a big but, when you break the corner and you facing the finish line and you realise it is not happening ...the PNM will not rule out anything at this time.