AN OPEN LETTER TO SIR ANTHONY COLEMAN

Dear Sir Anthony,

Like most citizens of this little country I have been reading and watching
on television the revelations of the activities of the various "players" in
CLICO and the Hindu Credit Union with a mixture of horror and
fascination as your Commission of Enquiry (CoE) into their activities
continues. However, and without trying to be either rude or presumptive,
there is one particular factor that to date your CoE has not touched upon,
neither has there been any hint given that you  will or will not touch upon
it: what I am talking about is the failure of the Regulatory Authorities to
act, or to act in time.

Put another way, a question that must arise is could either the CLICO or
Hindu Credit Union debacle (or both for that matter) have been avoided
if, say, the Central Bank or the Ministry of Finance (or both) had acted
earlier? What about the Commissioner of Co-operatives? Could the
Regulatory Authorities have acted earlier to prevent what happened?
Should they have acted earlier? Were these debacles avoidable if the
Regulatory Authorities had indeed acted earlier?

Assuming (though certainly not accepting) that the answer to any of these
questions is 'yes' then the obvious question is what could they or should
they have done? And if the debacles were avoidable who in the Central Bank
was/is responsible? What about the Ministry of Finance? Who ought to
be taking responsibility? You see, if it's nobody's fault then nobody can
be asked to fix it and nobody will have to ensure that such costly
mistakes ever happen again. (You may not know it, but Nobody is a very
well known character in this country.  He is personally responsible for
more disasters here than anywhere else in the world. He used to be
in England but your compatriots threw him out of the country a long time
ago. Unfortunately for us, when you threw him out he landed up over here.)

My problem is that I happen to have a reasonably good memory, and I
remember that in or about the year 2000/2001 the then Attorney General,
Mr. Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, stood up in the Parliament of this
country and said that CLICO/CL Financial was insolvent! Now, I am
certain that you will agree with me that when an Attorney General (or
even a former Attorney General) speaks on a matter of national
importance that people ought to pay attention to what he says. If he is
wrong or foolish then the court of public opinion can and will deal
with him. But his office is so high and so important that a serious
accusation concerning such a behemoth as CL Financial is surely so
serious that it ought to be dealt with promptly.

And the point here is that it wasn't! I cannot remember any statements
at all coming from the then Governor of the Central Bank that the
Attorney General was wrong, that CL Financial was not insolvent.
Similarly, I cannot remember any statements either from the then
Minister of Finance. So? Was CLICO/CL Financial insolvent when
Mr. Maharaj made his accusation in Parliament? If so, then what did
the Regulatory Authorities do?  From where I sit they appeared to
have done nothing at all! Is this true? If the giant was solvent then
why didn't the then Governor of the Central Bank say that Mr. Maharaj
was wrong? Why didn't the then Minister of Finance say that his
Cabinet colleague was wrong? Surely the public and investors had
a right to know whether the accusation was true or not?

The then Prime Minister, Basdeo Panday, had a very close relationship
with Mr. Laurence Duprey. Mr. Panday was the godfather of Mr.
Duprey's newborn child. Did Mr. Panday "sit" on either the then Governor
or the then Minister of Finance (or on both)? What was the state of CLICO's
statutory fund at that time? Was it in deficit? If so, what was the Regulatory
Authority (which I believe is the Central Bank) doing about it? This
question is extremely serious for if the statutory fund was in deficit then
how long was it in deficit for? Did it ever go back into the "black" before
the eventual collapse? If not then what was the Regulatory Authority waiting
for?

With the greatest of respect, Sir Anthony, and without in any way casting any
aspersions whatsoever on you, hopefully you will readily appreciate that if
you do not find answers to these questions and publicise them, then, regretably,
you will have done only part of the job for which you have been entrusted. The
matter becomes even more acute when you understand that the man who was
the Governor of the Central Bank when Mr. Maharaj made his accusations
is today the Minister of Finance; and the person who the present Minister of
Finance has put in charge of CL Financial today was at the time that Mr.
Maharaj made his accusations the then Minister of Finance.

Put another way, Sir Anthony, you are going to have to deal with this directly
sooner or later. It can't be allowed to "drop off the table".

THE TRINIDAD & TOBAGO AIRPLANE

No! I am not going to talk about Caribbean Airlines/BWIA or any of the
recent disclosures about losses and profits (real or imaginary) or about
how much money CAL had or didn't have in 2010 ... although, there is

admittedly a lot there to talk about! I want instead to talk about our little

country, where we are and where we are going ... or think we are going.
Some time ago (in the sixties, I think) there was a book entitled "Spaceship
Earth". I cannot now recall the name of the author but in essence her
premise or thesis was that planet earth was like a spaceship barreling
through space. The planet had three compartments: first class, second class
and third class. Those of us who are 'travelling' in the first class
compartment are more than all right. Those of us who are 'travelling' in the second class compartment
have some problems, but are managing (if only just) to survive. But, she said,
there is a fire in the third class compartment and if we don't put it out soon
it will engulf all of the 'passengers' on the spaceship.

If the planet can be likened to a spaceship, then perhaps good old T&T can
be likened to an airplane with three compartments as well. There is absolutely
no question that those who are lucky enough to be in the first class compartment
are enjoying the ride. Champagne and caviar are the order of the day for this
flight and nothing, no expense and no luxury is too much for those passengers.
The second class compartment is gradually getting smaller and more cramped.
Quite a few passengers in this compartment are having trouble paying not only
for their seats for the flight but also for the food and drink on board. They are
managing and one or two of them are lucky enough to be upgraded from time
to time to first class. Unfortunately, for every one that gets an upgrade two are
downgraded to third class. As I said, this compartment is getting smaller and
more cramped.

The real problem comes with the third class compartment. This is by far and
away the largest section of our fictional airplane, but it is the one in which
there is the most potential for trouble which could cause our airplane to crash
killing or destroyintg all on board. Right now travelling in the third class
section of our plane is like travelling in the Wild West. Passengers are
shooting and killing each other, almost with gay abandon. So far only
the third class passengers and a few second class passengers are being
killed, but it can only be a matter of time before some third class
passenger gets the bright idea of going into the first class cabin and
taking whatever he feels like taking with his gun. It also can surely only
be a matter of time before some third class passenger decides to light a
match in the third class compartment and the fire then spreads to the
whole plane!

There is trouble coming. If you lived through 1990 and 1970 you can
recognise it. You can see it. You can feel it. You can taste it. It's coming!
The trouble is coming because the economy is stagnant and absolutely no
hope for a better tomorrow is being offered other than platitudes falling
from the mouths of politicians on both sides. The trouble is coming
because the Rowley led PNM is not offering itself as a credible alternative
to the People's Partnership and the ordinary man sees and understands this.
The trouble is coming because the people feel that our leaders on both sides
really don't care about anything or anybody other than themselves. The
trouble is coming because there seems to be no hope!

Can it be turned around and prevented? Yes! There is still time. Will it be
turned around? Ah! That is the question!!

Jack The Saviour?

One of the bad things about living in a country like Trinidad and Tobago is

that nothing stays secret for very long ... if at all! One of the good things

about living in a country like Trinidad and Tobago is that you can usually

find out fairly quickly what went on in any given situation.

Now, I don't pretend to know absolutely, but if the reports that I am getting

about what happened yesterday at the Prime Minister's residence, La Fantasie,

the Partnership government owes its survival this morning to the efforts of the

UNC Chairman Jack Warner. It seems that the Prime Minister had indeed been

persuaded by her closest advisers that she should fire COP Leader Prakash

Ramadar for his comments on Sunday where he said in essence that the COP

would not necessarily tow the Government line in Parliament. Frankly, it

would have been impossible for any Prime Minister

to have tolerated that type of challenge and Mr. Ramadar was extremely

foolish to have made it in the first place. He ought to have known that such a

challenge to the authority of the Cabinet ... and ultimately the authority of the

Prime Minister ... could not and would not be left alone.

Now, it seems that five of the COP Ministers and Parliamentarians were

prepared to walk out of the Cabinet with Mr. Ramadar. Such an exodus, though

clearly not immediately fatal to the continued existance of the Government

would have hurt Mrs. Persad-Bissessar terribly. The moral authority of the

Government would have been very, very badly damaged ... and quite likely

damaged fatally.

And it is at this point, if my sources are correct, that the erstwhile Jack Warner

stepped in. The old Jack correctly recognised that this crisis would effectively

destroy the Government's moral authority if it was allowed to go to its logical

conclusion, and that the UNC's chances of winning another term would be

severely (if not fatally) dimnshed. Mr. Warner apparently used his not

inconsiderable negotiating skills to bring both sides together enough for

the Prime Minister to go on national television last night at the peak

viewing hour of seven pm to announce that no Minister had been fired and

that no Minister had resigned.

The fact that the meeting then continued until about two am tells us that even

if the cracks have been managed to have been papered over for now that

deep divisions and hurt feelings still remain. Prakash Ramadar has been

forced/persuaded (it doesn't matter which) to climb down Whether he stays

"climbed down" remains to be seen. My spies tell me that the person in

the COP who has been pushing Mr. Ramadar is his deputy Vernon DeLima.

If that is true, then Mr. Ramadar is going to have to be cery careful as to

what advice he accepts from Mr. DeLima in the next few days, for (if that

report is true) it would mean that Mr. DeLima is not as committed to the

Partnership Government as perhaps he ought to be and is prepared to sacrifice

his Party's inclusion in the Government for what he perhaps believes to be a

matter of great principle. The truth is that if that is indeed a fair reflection of

the truth and what Mr. DeLima believes then there will be further clashes as

Mr. Delima clearly would believe that the Marlene Coudray affair is worth bringing down the Government for.

In the meantime, the Government survives for yet another day. What a pity

that the great promise of May 2010 has now degenerated to this. But at least

the Prime Minister should thank her lucky stars that she didn't "cut Jack's

throat" as it was rumoured some months ago that she was being urged to do.

 

THE BEGINNING OF THE END?

It is difficult not to come to the conclusion that the People's Partnership
Government is in serious trouble. The on going 'brouhaha'  between the COP
and its senior partner, the UNC, over the Marlene Coudray affair has now
escalated out of all proportion to the original sin of poaching the COP's
San Fernando mayor. The truth is that the defection of Marlene Coudray from
the COP to the UNC was simply another nail in the coffin of the terminally ill
COP which has been whithering on the political vine long before the UNC gave
them a wiff of oxygen in the 2010 general elections, for without the UNC's
helping hand the COP would have lost any and every seat that the Party would
have contested. Frankly, it must be difficult to be in such a position where you
are part of a team that didn't really need you to win. Oh! Undoubtedly, the COP
coming together with the UNC helped the UNC win even bigger, but the truth is
that in 2010 the UNC would have won without the COP's help.

Fast forward two years later and we now have a completely different scenario.
Prakash Ramadar has allowed himself to be boxed in on an issue that of itself
really ought not to have been allowed to blow up into such a big mess ... but it has!
Now he is in a such a position that if he climbs down from the limb that he has
found himself on he will look ridiculous, but if he doesn't then his days in the
Cabinet are clearly numbered. He is damned if he does and damned if he doesn't!
The Prime Minister cannot (and will not) take his threat to vote independently of
decisions taken in Cabinet that the COP does not agree with lightly. Talk about
principles!? The whole principle of Cabinet Government is that if you are a
member of a Cabinet that takes a decision that you do not agree with, then you
have a simple choice: resign or shut up. It's a little like being half pregnant: a
physical impossibility!

So the erstwhile Mr. Ramadar will either get his marching orders fairly soon, or
he will march out of the Cabinet before they come down. Either way he is dead
meat, for he can't hope to win that St. Augustine seat again. That seat is a solid
UNC seat and if Mr. Ramadar holds on to it until the next general election (and
my bet is that he will) he will be ignominiously routed at the polls. To make
matters worse for him, many of his constituents have been complaining that
they don't see him ... a complaint made about his colleague, Carolyn Seepersad-
Bachan, the member of Parliament for San Fernando West, and the real reason
why the COP is so upset about Ms. Coudray's defection. (The plan was for the
UNC to run Ms. Coudray in San Fernando West in the next elections).

But while the COP has gratuitously shot itself in the head with this very stupid
quarrel it has also managed to damage the UNC horribly. All indications are
that the UNC "honchos" haven't yet understood the damage that has been inflicted
on them, but they will find out soon enough. The country is rapidly coming to the
conclusion that they don't know how to govern and that good governance is
not high on the UNC's list of priorities. To a large extent this perception is being
caused by the stagnating economy which the COP's Finance Minister has failed
to fix. (Whether it is Mr. Dookeran's fault that the economy is in the doldrums or
not the point is that he has to take responsibility for it.) Add to this fact the
very public infighting over the Coudray matter and you have a mix that is causing
a great sense of unease in the population.

Now I know that quite a few of the UNC boys (and girls) have done the maths and
realise that if all the COP MP's walk out that they will still be left with twenty-one
seats ... a working majority. But, (and it is a big'but') they will find out soon
enough that having a majority in Parliament means nothing if you don't have a
majority in the country behind you. If the COP walk out or are fired (and the truth
is that it won't really matter which) the UNC are going to be severely damaged.
A lot of people who used to support them will "park" and will wait to see what
will happen next. Unfortunately for the country, Keith Rowley's PNM is neither
an attractive nor a viable option. You might say that the PNM has gone to sleep.
But all that could change if (and it is a big"if") the PNM were to get a new
leader in the morning. If the PNM choose the right leader then Kamla will be in
very serious trouble. If they don't ... well, the UNC  could prove the old saying
accredited to Winston Churchill: Politics is much more dangerous than war; in
politics you can get killed many times ... in war you can get killed only once! In
other words, the UNC could live again! But for now, they have a really big
problem!

THE CONTINUING TRIVIALISATION OF GOVERNMENT




Is it perhaps asking too much of our leaders that they stop dealing with trivia and get on with the serious business of running a country. The latest brouhaha to dominate the headlines ... the meeting of the leaders of the various Parties that make up the People's Partnership to discuss the Coudray affair ... is a classic example of how to waste time by pretending that you are doing something important when in reality you are not.

I simply cannot understand the leadership of the Congress of the People (COP) on this Marlene Coudray matter. What was so important about this woman and her deciding to switch her allegiance to another Party that they actually threaten to break up the Partnership... and then they don't, but say that it is "important to get it right so that it doesn't happen again" ? I am sorry, but to me it just seemed like a lot of sour grapes and trying to cover up your embarrassment that a high profile member of your Party decided to leave you and go somewhere else. So what? Are you (the COP leadership) saying that the UNC has an ethical responsibility to turn away any COP members who wish to leave the COP and join the UNC? And so what if she really was a COP appointed mayor (for there seems to be some doubt on that in that she is reported as saying that the COP leadership didn't really want her)? So what? What is so absolutely critical and important that the Mayor of San Fernando has to be a member of the COP? What exactly is/are the philosophical difference(s) between the COP and the UNC that would make the same person acceptable yesterday but not acceptable today?

You see, either the COP is in a partnership or it isn't. If it is, could somebody please explain to me the critical importance to the COP (other than the very obvious embarrassment suffered by Ms. Coudray's rather sudden departure) of having a COP mayor? What makes this such a big issue for them? And why is this issue so much more important than the floundering economy, the visible lack of job creation and the obvious lack of confidence in the TT dollar which has now slid to US$1 = TT$6.43 (down from $6.30 on 24th May, 2010)? Or is it that the COP "has" the Ministry of Finance, and although by any measurable yardstick the present Minister of Finace is woefully failing, it would be an act tantamount to sabotage to criticize him? So, rather than focus on the real problems in the country, it is far easier to focus on matters of trivia and cloak yourself in the self righteousness of "ethics".

The Lord knows that we need as much ethical behaviour as we possibly can get, but He also knows that He helps those who help themselves. Instead of sounding like little children who have lost some of their marbles in a game, Messrs. Ramadar, Toney and DeLima should wake up and smell the coffee. It's the economy stupid! (With apologies to Bill Clinton). Deal with it!

RETHINKING (AND RATIONALISING) OUR NATIONAL HOLIDAYS



Having just thoroughly enjoyed the long weekend occasioned by the celebration of the Spiritual Baptists Shouter holiday I got to thinking about the public holidays that we enjoy in this country, why we have them and what (if anything) we should do about them. You see, including Carnival Monday and Tuesday (which are not officially public holidays but which may as well be, because the entire country shuts down workwise) we have sixteen public holidays a year ... seventeen if you recognise that Ash Wednesday is for at least 75% of the country a 'dies non' (i.e. a non-working day)!

A lot of our public holidays (Christmas, Easter, Divali. Eid ul Fitr, etc.) are religious holy days and obviously can't be changed. But the truth is that we have a fair number of public holidays ( such as the Spiritual Baptists holiday) that could and should warrant another look. Don't get me wrong: I am not advocating the doing away with any of these holidays (except perhaps for the Corpus Christi holiday which I will deal with later). I am of the view that each and every holiday that we have is important in its own right, but that there are several holidays which do not need to be celebrated on the actual day.

Look: we have the following holidays that often fall in mid-week, and which, when they do cause havoc with productivity: Spiritual Baptists Shouter holiday (March 30th)
Indian Arrival Day (May 30th)
Labour Day (June 7th)
Emancipation Day (August 1st)
Republic Day (September 24th)
Now, apart from the obvious historical reason for each of these holidays as holidays in their own right, wouldn't it make more sense if we moved the holidays to an appropriate Monday in their respective months? For example, we could have the Shouter Baptist holiday on the last Monday in March. Indian Arrival Day could be on the last Monday in May. Emancipation Day could be celebrated on the first Monday in August ... and so on.

The advantages to the country would be twofold: first of all because these holidays would no longer fall in mid-week there would be increased productivity. The reality is that when any of these holidays fall on say a Tuesday or a Thursday many persons take the opportunity to have a four day weekend. Next, because we would be increasing the number of long weekends a lot of people would be encouraged to travel inside the country ... Tobago, for example, would benefit from the number of Trinis who would want to go over to the sister isle. I don't have the figures, but I will bet dollars to doughnuts that every time there is a long weekend that travel to Tobago goes up!

As an adult, how often has your birthday fallen during the week and you have decided to celebrate it on the Friday or Saturday night? Get the point? We need to be mature about our holidays. There are good reasons for each and every one of them and we should be proud of them. Amongst other things, each one serves in a meaningful way to remind us of our history ... and yes, it is important to remember who we are and where we came from. But rationalisng the actual days of celebration would not ... could not change that!

P.S.
I did mention that I had a question mark over the Corpus Christi holiday. The reasons for this are basically rooted in history. When General Abercrombie sailed into Port of Spain harbour and took over Trinidad from the Spanish, he did so because England was then at war with France ... it was the time of the Napoleonic wars ... and Spain was at the time under Napoleon's thumb, which meant that England was technically at war with Spain. During the period of the Napoleonic wars (which finally ended with Napoleon's defeat at Waterloo in 1814) there were many peace treaties signed (and subsequently broken) between England and France. One of these treaties was signed in the French town of Amiens in or about 1804. By the Peace Treaty of Amiens, England handed back every thing that she had taken from France except Ceylon (which is today the island of Sri Lanka) and Trinidad.

It is not difficult to understand why the English wanted to hang on to Ceylon/Sri Lanka. The island lies just South of India which at that time was arguably the most important colony of the British Empire. English merchant ships (as well as warships) would have to sail right past the island to get back to England. But why the English wanted to hang on to Trinidad has become obscured in the dust of history.

What had happened was that a fairly large number of the former French aristocracy in fleeing the French Revolution had ended up in Trinidad. When Abercrombie came in to Port of Spain they were overjoyed, but when England started talking peace with Napoleon they begged "whatever you do, please do not hand us back to that dreadful man". (You have to remember that they hated Napoleon. He had come to power as a result of the Revolution that had forced them to flee France.) The French at the time couldn't care less about Trinidad. When it became obvious that Trinidad was going to stay English, the French planters realised that they had another problem: the English were (gasp!) Protestant! They might be forced to give up their Catholic religion. So they had inserted into the Treaty of Amiens that the Roman Catholic holiday of Corpus Christi would be a holiday in the colony from that day on.

So that is why in Trinidad & Tobago, a country in which more than 50% of its population is not Christian, this rather obscure Roman Catholic Feast Day is celebrated down to today. Incidentally, I believe that we are the only country in the world that celebrates Corpus Christi as a public holiday! The only non Trinis that I have met who are Catholic who have ever heard of this Feast Day are Roman Catholic priests! So, the question is (or ought to be) is this particular Feast Day so important that we should continue to celebrate it as a public holiday? And, for the record, the question is asked genuinely and without prejudice, but is asked seriously. We ought to be able to discuss these sorts of matters without the unfortunate emotions that so often accompany them and obscure rational and logical thought.

LIFE IN THE TROPICS (cont.)-THE MARLENE COUDRAY AFFAIR





You must admit that life in Triniwonderland is always exciting and interesting. The powers that be (on all sides of tke political fence) are clearly determined that no matter what, they will keep us entertained and looking at the evening news to discover the latest machinations in the ongoing and never ending novella. The latest bit of "excitement" to hit the airways and the print media is, of course, the defection of San Fernando Mayor Marlene Coudray from the ranks of the COP and her election as a Deputy Political Leader of the very senior partner the UNC (in fact, the only political entity that really counts in that partnership) of the People's Partnership (PP) Government.

The Chairman of the COP cried 'foul' when the news broke that she was running for election as a Deputy Political Leader in the UNC and accused the UNC of 'poaching'! The hurt was even greater when it was realised that in order to run for office in the National Executive of the UNC that one has to be a member for at least 12 months! When did Ms. Coudray resign, was the question? And the other question, almost pleadingly and pathetically was, why didn't you tell us?

Most people (whether she did resign a year ago or not) do not believe that Ms. Coudray resigned a year ago. Frankly, although it is entirely possible that she did and that she is telling the truth when she says that she joined the UNC a year ago, it just doesn't have that 'ring' that would convince a reasonable person that such an outspoken person, as Ms. Coudray is known to be, would not have told the world as to what she was doing when she was doing it. Not to have done so is entirely plausible ... it's just out of character, and that is what most people have a problem with. But to prove that she is not telling the truth on this is just about impossible. It all boils down to what you believe and as to how important you think that this particular question is!

For my part, I see the question as to when she joined important only as to whether or not from her answer one could judge whether or not Ms. Coudray is a truthful person or is one who will bend the truth when it is convenient to her. And that is for us as individuals to come to our own conclusions.

The more important issue, for me at least, is what the move signals. A lot of people think that it is really a move by the UNC to prepare a challenge for the San Fernando West seat currently held by Caolyn Seepersad Bachan of the COP. Ms. Bachan is reputed to be quite unpopular with her constituents and the UNC hierarchy clearly must feel that this seat which has a large COP voter contingent could fall its way with the right candidate. Enter Marlene Coudray! In other words, the UNC is moving to take over the COP support in San Fernando West.

But Prakash Ramadar now has a very serious problem. He clearly doesn't want to give up his ministerial office ... even if he is currently 'low man on the totem pole' ... and appears almost desperate not to walk out of the Partnership. On the other hand, his chairman, Joseph Toney, who hasn't shared at all in the 'spoils' of office, seems determined to push the COP to leave the Partnership. In addition, the UNC moves clearly show that they understand that the COP support is critical to a victory at the polls and they are moving to undercut the COP at every chance that they can get. Mr. Ramadar has said on national television that Ms. Coudray must now resign as San Fernando mayor as that post was promised to the COP in the Fyzabad accord signed by the political parties that make up the PP. My bet is that the Devil will sooner turn down the furnaces in hell than the UNC will agree to that demand! But you have to admit that it sounds good on television! What he will do when the UNC and Ms. Coudray refuse (and they will, either by word, deed or both) is, of course, another question. He (Mr. Ramadar) is damned if he does leave the Partnership and damned if he doesn't. His choices aren't 'pretty'.

Meanwhile, back at the ranch, former COP leader Winston Dookeran is reputed to have a very lucrative job offer based in Barbados from the Inter American Development Bank which he would like to take up. The problem with that is his seat ... Tunapuna ... which is possibly and arguably the most marginal of all the marginal seats in the country. Most political pundits believe that if there was a by-election in Tunapuna today that the PNM would win it. Assuming (though obviusly not accepting) that this is true, then such a defeat would bolster the embattled Keith Rowley who is widely perceived to be a loser. A victory in Tunapuna would do a lot to turn this perception around and could well be a harbinger of doom for the PP.

So, what will Dookeran do? Will he use 'the Coudray affair' to quit the Government on "principle"? And will Ramadar follow him into exile and certain defeat when an election finally comes? The COP boys (and girls) have a lot of soul searching to do and a lot of hard decisions to make. One thing is certain though: the UNC boys (and girls) couldn't care less about the internal problems of their very, very junior partner. This, they have made abundantly clear. Mr. Ramadar and his COP colleagues are in a trap that in order to get out of, will require a political agility that so far has been patently lacking in everything that they have done or attempted to do. The COP leadership has been (and is being) discredited to an extent where it is doubtful that it can command the vote that it once had. This doesn't mean that that vote is lost; it's just parked and waiting ... but not for the COP!

Life in the Tropics continues!

DEAR GYPSY ( ....or how to take Carnival to the next level)


You have said that you want to take our Carnival "to the next level". This is a noble and highly commendable objective, and, if truth be known, something that could be done with a little "out of the box" thinking. On the basis that Einstein's theory of insanity (doing the same thing over and over again while expecting a different result) is correct, and on the evidence before us that nothing really new has been proposed to take us to this "next level", I thought that you might like some ideas to mull over. So here goes:

1) One of the great things about the Rio Carnival is that it is geared not only for the paticipants, but for the spectators as well. While it is true (and a good thing) that our carnival is more participant oriented, we really are not paying attention to the viewing enjoyment (if that is the correct phrase) of the thousands that do not participate but come down to see the Mas'.
Now, there are two basic problems here and both are probably equal, so it doesn't matter which is mentioned first. One problem is that there is always a back log or log jam of bands in the Savannah with it being not uncommon for the masqueraders in the various bands to be forced to wait for several hours before they can get a chance to cross over. The result is that the spectators often have to wait for long periods to see the various bands.
The other problem is that on Carnival Monday (Lundi Gras) most big bands are hardly ever up to strength and their masqueraders almost without exception do not wear their full costumes. The result is that the show on the streets and even on the stage on Monday is never quite what it should be. Visitors often express disappointment with Carnival Monday's presentations.
What about doing the following which would fix both of these problems. There are "X" number of bands who cross the Savannah stage ... let's say for the sake of argument and to make the point that there are ten such bands. Well, in order to prevent the "traffic jams" that build up at the Savannah why not give each band a number. Bands numbered one to five cross the stage on Carnival Mondays and bands numbered six to ten cross on Carnival Tuesdays. The log jams are seriously lessened and the visitors/viewers get "pretty mas' " on both days. Everybody wins and now you have a more attractive product.

2) The next problem has to do with the perennial complaint that the original idea of the Carnival costumes is slowly dieing with the modern bands being not much more than skimpy bikinis and glass beads. The jefes of the Rio de Janiero were faced with the same type of complaints ... and we have all seen the pictures of the even skimpier bikinis that pervade the Rio scene!! In any case, they came up with a rather ingenious idea: There is/was a type of old Carnival costume emanating from Bahia (yes, the same place as the girl in David Rudder's famous calypso) where the ladies would wear these huge hooped skirts. Now, every Carnival band in Rio has to have at its head a section of revellers dressed in these old fashioned skirts. Why not make it a rule that every single band that wants to go across any of the stages has to have a section at its front of old time mas' that they can fit into the particular band's theme, followed by the bikinis and beads. It would be one way of keeping the true mas' alive, and again would be very appealing for the viewers/visitors.

3) Then there is the problem that Peter Minshall complained about ... Carnival is street theatre. But it is degenerating into not-so-soft core pornography. I am the last person to be prudish about anything, but quite frankly, some of the pictures of revellers that were in the newspapers and some of the images that flashed across our television screens this year were outright lewd, vulgar and totally out of place for what is supposed to be a major tourist attraction. There are not a few tourists or potential tourists who will want to come with their children. The raw and vulgar gyrations that took place on stage left absolutely nothing to the imagination and really ought to be discouraged. Perhaps one way of doing this is to announce that if such vulgarity takes place on stage that the band in which it is allowed to happen will be fined a hefty amount. We must try and lift the mas' up rather than allow it wallow in the vulgarity that seems so regretably to be allowed to be taking over.

The short point of all this is that it wouldn't take a lot to turn our Carnival into a world class product. But we ain't there yet! And if truth be known, unless we do something soon we could see such a real deterioration in standards that we will soon lose our place in the Carnival world and the competition certainly is not standing still. Put another way, this is the twenty-first century. Isn't it time that we applied a little twenty-first century thinking to modernise our twentieth century festival?

P.S. I know that Carnival started a lot earlier than the twentieth century. But it really became a "big" or people's celebration in the last hundred years or so which is why I referred to it as 'our twentieth century festival'.

THE INTEGRITY COMMISSION ... and all that!




I have been looking on with interest and not little amazement as to the confusion (and 'confusion' has to be the correct word) surrounding the latest imbroglio to hit the Integrity Commission ('IC'), what with newspaper offices being raided, the predictable howl from the Media, the suspension of a Commissioner (Mrs. Gafoor) by the President and the appointment of a tribunal to investigate Mrs. Gafoor's conduct in refusing to recuse herself from the IC tribunal that is investigating former Attorney General John Jeremie.

The facts as have been reported seem to be these:
(1) Former Attorney General John Jeremie was/is being investigated by the IC
on a matter involving his alleged participation in the infamous 'land deal' with
former Chief Magistrate Sherman McNichols and the prosecution of former
Chief Justice Sat Sharma;
(2) For reasons that are not entirely clear, Mr. Jeremie had objected while he was
Attorney General to the appointment of Mrs. Gafoor to the IC.
(3) Mr. Jeremie, when the IC began to investigate him, objected to Mrs. Gafoor
sitting on the tribunal on the grounds that she might be biased against him as
he had previously objected to her appointment.
(4) The current Chairman of the IC, Mr. Ken Gordon, on the strength of Mr.
Jeremie's complaint only, asked Mrs. Gafoor to recuse herself in the matter,
a request which Mrs. Gafoor, a lawyer, refused.
(5) Certain matters that were discussed in IC deliberations were leaked to the press
in the person of Mr. Andre Bagoo, a reporter for Newsday.
(6) The IC asked the police to investigate the matter and find out who leaked the
information and the police did so with raids on Newsday's offices and the home
of the reporter.
(7) The President, at the fairly obvious urging of the IC,
suspended Mrs. Gafoor and appointed a tribunal headed by former Chief Justice
Michael delaBastide to investigate Mrs. Gafoor's behaviour and whether she
had/has done anything wrong.

And that is all that is in the public domain.

It would be foolish to comment on the rights or wrongs of the matter unless and until all of the facts are in. However, it might help our understanding a little if we went back to basics. A judge (or any person who is sitting on a matter in a judicial or quasi-judicial capacity) is disqualified from sitting where he (or she) has a personal or pecuniary interest. As to whether or not Mrs. Gafoor might appear to be biased against Mr. Jeremie because he had once objected to her appointment to the IC is the type of argument that lawyers love for it is not necessarily as clear cut as might first appear on the surface. A judge in the House of Lords once said in a famous case
"My Lords, I wish that the use of the word 'bias' should be confined to is proper sphere.
Its proper significance, in my opinion, is to denote a departure from the standard of
even-handed justice which the law requires from those who occupy judicial office, or
those who are commonly regarded as holding a quasi-judicial office, such as an
arbitrator".

Bottom line: what does all this mean? It means that without looking at or seeing or hearing all the details it is not possible for any of us in the public to say whether or not Mrs. Gafoor was right not to recuse herself or that Mr. Gordon was wrong to ask her to step down. Put another way, the matter is not as simple as all that and there is a lot of law on the subject of bias and perceived bias.

What I think that the IC should have done is that all of the Commissioners (Mrs. Gafoor included) should have gone to a Senior Counsel (a person like Russel Martineau comes to mind) who has a (well deserved) reputation of giving good and impartial advice as to whether or not the claim of bias by Mr. Jeremie could be substantiated. Assuming (though definitely not accepting) that the advice came back that Mrs. Gafoor was right in her assertion that she should not step down and that the allegation could not be sustained in law, then everybody would have been protected. On the other hand, if the advice came down the other way, it is hard to see that such an experienced jurist as Mrs. Gafoor is, would not step down. A lot of unnecessary pain could have been avoided if the IC had done this. Perhaps this makes the case for the Chairman of the IC to have a legal background?

Then now, we have the matter of press freedom. It is important to understand in discussing this aspect of this multi-faceted imbroglio that the only profession that enjoys absolute privilege as regards confidentiality is the legal profession. There is no law and no right of the press (or even a priest for that matter) to keep sources and/or information secret or confidential. The truth is that in other democracies priests have been jailed for refusing to disclose matters heard in the confessional and journalists have also been fined and jailed for refusing to disclose their sources. In other words, there is no right of the press to keep sources confidential and any action taken against the press in this regard is not necessarily an attack on press freedom.

I am not saying that this present case is not an attack on the press ... neither am I saying that it is. What I am trying to do is to strip away all of the hype ... from both sides ... and to present the facts and the law as simply as possible so that we can all understand it and understand exactly what happened and what the arguments are. Unfortunately, in this Trini Wonderland world in which we live all too often we don't see the woods for the trees. Because we don't analyse things carefully, we tend all too often to get it wrong. But then, blinding emotion has never been convinced by cool, calm and clear logic. And we Trinis are nothing if not emotional!!

TO FIU OR NOT TO FIU .... that is the question!!



Readers of this blog will know that I have in the past been quite critical of Winston Dookeran's performance as Finance Minister. The truth is that I remain critical of his performance and do believe that he could have done better and, perhaps more importantly, ought to be doing better. I am of the view that a lot of unnecessary pain is being inflicted on the economy of Trinidad & Tobago because of his failures to act on many fronts.

However, in the interest of fairness I came across some information over the weekend that a few people are very ... nay, acutely aware of, but of which most people haven't got a clue. It all begins with the Financial Intelligence Unit (the FIU) which came into being a little while ago amidst certain (inevitable?) contraversy as to the appointment of Ms. Susan Francois (... a lady for whom, incidentally, I have always had the highest personal regard). And this information tends to put a slightly different light on the general contractions in the economy that are taking place.

It seems that the International Monetary Fund (the IMF) and the Americans have been putting the proverbial squeeze on good old T&T especially as regards money laundering. The IMF has literally forced the Government to put measures in place that have put a most severe squeeze on the activities of our dearly beloved and protected Drug Lords. It is now (thanks in large part to the activities of the FIU) much more difficult to launder money. In the past, for example, a Drug Lord could have a shop in, let's say, a popular mall. He could use that shop as a front to launder, say TT$100,000 per day saying that this was his receipts. The bank would happily accept it even though if you made a trip to the mall you would ss hardly anybody in the shop and his alleged sales did not match his actual purchases. But nobody was complaining. Everybody was making money!

Indeed, the 'black' or underground economy was as big as the 'white' or legitimate economy. That, for your information, is about TT$50 billion a year ... or if you prefer it in greenbacks, a little under US$8 billion a year! A sizable sum in any currency!!

But now, the banks are being forced to question the deposits and to report them. The FIU is sending its agents to monitor stores (like the hypothetical one used as an example above) to see whether or not the stores are really doing the business that they say that they are. In addition, the FIU is reporting the results to the Board of Inland Revenue who are checking to see whether or not income tax is being paid. And the agents are sitting in front of the stores for weeks and can judge fairly easily that, for example,our hypothetical store is not doing $100,000 a day in sales.

The result has been severe pain for the Drug Lords who have legitimate debts that they can no longer service. If what I heard is true, for example, a certain Drug Lord owes some TT$900 million to a certain bank. He was more than able to service this loan in the past, but all of a sudden he can't. Money/cash is piling up in shoe boxes but he can't get it into the system. The result is that his legitimate businesses are going slowly bust! And he ain't alone!!

Put another way, just at the time that the legitimate economy is contracting, the underground economy is crashing! Trinidad & Tobago is getting a "double whammy" of bad news. Apparently, you can't even buy a million dollar car (Range Rovers, Porsche Cayennes, Mercedes Benz, etc.) without having to show the FIU where you got the money from to buy this (whatever "this"is) car. You can't buy a property without having to report the source of funds! Put another way, the easy days of money laundering appear to be over ... at least for the time being.

One of my cousins told me that he had met a senior FBI official recently who told him that T&T was the place to be a gangster. According to the FBI guy there is no other place in the world where it is so easy to steal and launder money. Hopefully, that will change now. But it is going to be painful. Taking even a portion of $50 billion out of the system will cause pain and suffering ... necessary as it so obviously is.

But, you know, Mr. Dookeran should have told us this. We shouldn't have to find out for ourselves. This is what openness and transparency is all about. And anything that hurts the Drug Lords has to be a good thing.

GLASS HALF FULL?





Almost every businessman that you talk to today will tell you privately that he is worried about the country and where we are heading. They will complain that the country is becoming uncompetitive and is falling behind in just about every sphere of business imaginable. They will tell you that there are glaring weaknesses in the schools and in the graduates coming out of the University of the West Indies, that crime is out of control and that clearly nobody has either the will or the capacity to get it under control. They will also complain bitterly about the stagnant economy and the obvious incapacity of the Government to get things moving. Most of all you will hear them complaining about what they perceive to be a lack of leadership and the stagnant economy.

To be fair, most of the complaints about leadership can basically be summed up like this: Rowley ain't cuttin' it. He clearly can't make. Like Manning said, he is like a dog that barks at every passing car in the hope that one day he will catch one. (This leads to the obvious question: what does a dog do when it does eventually catch the car?) But to continue: on the other side a lot of the businessmen say that they still like Kamla but that she has to take control of her Cabinet. They feel that there are some elements in her Cabinet who exercise undue influence on the Lady (the capital "L" is on purpose) and that she is being given poor advice. Further, they point to the rumours of corruption that are swirling around her administration and say that they believe them to be true. Labour is acting up and it is generally felt that trouble will begin after Carnival.

In other words, what is being said by many in the business community privately (and not so privately) is that they are most concerned about the future. They have absolutely no faith in the PNM under Rowley and feel that he (Dr. Rowley) is simply not a credible alternative. On the other side of the coin they feel that Kamla too is failing, though they prefer her to Rowley.

This perception is dangerous in that it creates a feeling of unease in the society that permeates through to all levels. In the past, the PNM was always there as the "default" political party. In other words, we could try ABC party or XYZ but if they didn't work we could always go back to the PNM. The problem is that under Dr. Rowley the PNM is no longer a credible "default" or alternative. The perception is that the PNM has turned sharply to its core African support and really does not care about being multi ethnic or multi cultural. Dr. Rowley didn't help this perception at all with his rather silly criticisms of the Prime Minister's trip to India and her touching the feet of the Indian President ... a gesture that is very acceptable in Hindu culture. Defenders of the Prime Minister have pointed out (quite correctly) that you didn't hear any of these complaints when the Pope visited Trinidad and then President Ellis Clarke ( a sincere and devout Catholic) knelt before him and kissed his ring!

In other words, it was felt/perceived by a sizable portion of the population that these criticisms of the Prime Minister were motivated more by race and ill will than by any honestly held opinion as to her action being an affront to our national identity.

So? What can be done? The present situation is not acceptable and contains within it the possibility of leading to some serious social unrest downstream. The only test of leadership is to lead, and to lead vigorously. The best way for the Prime Minister to get out of this deadly downward spiral that she is now finding herself in is to get the economy moving again. In order to do this she is going to have to deal with her erstwhile Finance Minister and give him the message: lead, follow or get out of the way. There are too many people now who see the nation's glass as being half empty. That perception has to change. We have to be shown that the glass is half full. If she doesn't do that ... and soon ... we will have a very long and dark night to go through.

WELCOME TO THE WILD, WILD WEST



Two completely separate incidents took place at the end of last week which have brought me out of a self imposed hibernation since Christmas. I had taken a conscious decision not to get involved in any of the (for want of a better word) 'scandals' that might erupt in the new year and to stay out of any 'cat and dog' fights that might result. But these two incidents have so upset me that I feel that I must comment on them, if only for the sake of my own sanity.

The first incident that I am talking about is the storming of the headquarters of the Public Service Association (PSA) on Thursday by a breakaway faction that is opposed to the leadership of the current PSA President, Watson Duke. The matter is now before the High Court and I have absolutely no intention whatsoever of commenting on the rights of either of the parties to that dispute. What concerns (and concerned) me is the behaviour of both sides ... which, quite frankly, was absolutely deplorable.

The second incident took place at the Commission of Enquiry (COE) into the collapse of the CLICO empire on Friday. In that enquiry, a very senior 'Silk' of some 33 years standing, decided that he could gratuitously insult a witness by asking him if he was a bisexual. Mr. Martin Daly was clearly peeved at a response that he had got from Mr. Mervyn Assam and threw the comment/question at him, thus abusing his position as a cross-examining counsel and setting an extremely good example of bad taste and low ethical behaviour.

My point in joining these two incidents together is that they demonstrate clearly that our society has now sunk to new lows that are reminiscent of the wild west where anything went and where might was right. If you were rich and powerful you could (and often did) anything. If you were fast with a gun you could (and often did) anything. And there are plenty of cowboy movies and legends about the ineffective, ineffectual, incompetent and often corrupt sherriff and his deputies. The famous "gunfight at the OK Corral" is one such legend that eventually was made into (I believe) more than one movie. The high and mighty in this society do whatever they want. And the "gunslingers" do the same! Nobody cares or has any respect for anything that is good and decent anymore.

In Trinidad & Tobago standards of good taste have gone through the floor when a so called pillar/exemplar of our society can make the kind of statement in a publicly televised hearing and not be thoroughly pilloried for it. Standards of decency and proper behaviour are now in the cesspit when the leaders of no less an organisation that represents all of the public servants in this country can behave in the disgraceful manner that the country saw on Thursday evening.

I am sorry. If the new rules are that might is right and that we can all say and do anything we want then please tell me so. Perhaps the best way to govern this country is that we disband the police force and allow all citizens to simply strap on a gun in order to defend themselves, blow up all the schools which are clearly not teaching our children anything about proper values and look to see where else we can do away with the trappings of a civilised and progressive State. All the money we are spending on these institutions is clearly going to waste, and you know what they say: if you can't beat 'em ... join 'em! Welcome to the wild, wild west ... Trini style!!!

MERRY CHRISTMAS




Christmas is always a wonderful time of the year ... even, I dare say, for those who are not christian. It is a time for family and friends and getting together to share ... especially in the way that every culture in the world shares memorable moments and occasions ... with food and drink and the giving of gifts. On Christmas Eve the excitement in the homes that are fortunate enough to have young children is so intense that many parents wonder if the little ones will ever fall asleep.

I have been doing a lot of thinking about Christmas this week ... not only about its religious and historical significance, but what the festival has come to mean in the hearts of millions of families around the world. When I was a little boy Christmas simply meant toys under the tree on Christmas morning. As I grew older, I began to appreciate the gathering of the family for Christmas lunch/ dinner (in my house we always had a very, very late lunch at about 5pm ... or, if you like, early dinner). I didn't notice the 'empty' chairs at first around the Christmas table ... those family members who had passed on or couldn't be there for whatever reason ... nor did I notice the hint of sadness in the eyes of my parents and older folk who had gathered. There were too many happy songs to be sung and I sang all of them!

But as the years have passed I have become more and more aware of the 'empty' chairs ... grown children in Australia, loved ones who have passed, and others who for one (good) reason or another simply cannot be there.

So, does this mean that those of us who have had the pain and sadness of losing a loved one this past year (or at any other time) should cry long tears at Christmas time? Well, if we want to. But I prefer to remember the words of the poet who said

"Life is real, life is earnest
And the grave is not its goal.
Dust thou art and to dust returneth
Was not spoken of the soul"

No. Christmas is a wonderful time ... and Christmas is (amongst other things) about life, glorious life. Remember those who have passed ... by all means. Shed a tear for them if you want. But on Christmas morning draw a deep breath and enjoy being alive. Christmas is a time for everybody to reflect, be happy and (most importantly) share with family and friends. It is, after all is said and done, a time for love.

Merry Christmas to all my readers and to your families.

IS LAVENTILLE 'FIXABLE'?



Driving to work this morning I was indulging in my usual 'surfing' of the radio talk shows when I stopped on one that caught my ear. The hosts were talking about the problem that is Laventille and how nothing seems to have worked there for the last fifty or so years ... if not longer. Everything seems to have been tried and everything seems to have failed.

Like most Trinidadians I am acutely aware of the human disaster zone that is Laventille. I am also very aware of all that has been done (and not done) and the fact that so long as we don't fix it that we are all simply waiting for the moment when it explodes ... again!

So? What to do? I am of the view that there is no short term fix. This is a problem that took decades to come to where it is today and that short of dropping a nuclear bomb on the place (and, no! I am certainly not advocating that!) `the problem will not go away with a social program here ( a la "Colour Me Orange") or a basketball court there (a la PNM). And although we profess to be familiar with Einstein's edict concerning the definition of insanity, successive regimes continue to do effectively the same thing (though calling it by different names) while expecting a different result. And, of course, the different result never comes!

When I was a young lawyer I was told by an old (and very wise) Queen's Counsel that if I ever wanted to understand a problem I had to go back to basics. That sage advice has helped me enormously as I have journeyed through the adventures that have made up my life. So, applying that advice to Laventille, what is the basic problem there? Answer: extreme ignorance fuelled by excrutiating poverty. I know that a lot of people are going to take offence at the label of extreme ignorance, but it is unfortunately true. I admit that I have no figures to back me up on this, but I will bet dollars to doughnuts that the level of illiteracy in that unfortunate place is intolerably high. I will bet that most of the gang members (if not all) are functionally illiterate. And I will bet that most (if not all) of the pregnant teenage girls can't read or write properly (if at all) either! So, how do you ... we ... fix the social problem that is Laventille? And while I will admit that the ability to read and write may not be everything in this world it does pave the way for a child's mind to be opened. No society in the whole history of mankind has ever succeeded with an illiterate and ignorant population.

The answer has to be by education. The only way out of poverty and to raise a society's standards is by educating the population. In this regard I must say that I believe that our education system is an abysmal failure ... that it is failing our society, not only in Laventille, but in the country as a whole. But that is grist for another post. Let's just concentrate on Laventille for the moment. The schools that cater to that depressed area need to be revamped so that the kids that are churned out at the end are capable, responsible and right thinking. Now, that's a tall order! Those kids already have the terrible hurdles of badly educated (if at all) mothers, terrible and totally unacceptable male role models, and politicians of all stripes (but unfortunately mostly in the PNM) who seek not to help them but to use them for narrow political and sectarian purposes.

But it can be done. It will take time ... more than five years, which is why it probably has never been done. Nobody in power now will get the credit for something that will take about twenty years to fix. But don't fix it now (and 'now' means now!) and it will only get worse. Don't the Chinese have a saying about a journey of a thousand miles beginning with the first step?

A QUESTION OF CREDIBILITY



"Prime Ministers tend not to lose all their credibility in one go ... Rather it erodes in fits and starts amid accumulations of misstep and scandal".
The Economist - July 14th, 2011


The Government is facing a serious credibility problem that is largely of its own making on the question of the allleged plot to assassinate the Prime Minister and three other Ministers. This follows on the heels of other missteps and scandals such as the Reshmi Ramnarine affair, Caribbean Airlines, the Sat Maharaj/School Principal matter, and (what feels like) a host of others too numerous to count. Why they didn't let the Commissioner of Police announce the alleged plot is beyond me. At least if everything fell apart later (as it did) then he ... and not the Prime Minister ... would have taken the credibility "hit".

This supposed plot to kill the Prime Minister et al was a classic case of misstep that could and should have been avoided from the very beginning. First of all, assassinations of Prime Ministers and Presidents are usually carried out by one of two types: a "crazy" or a small group bent on regime change. But a group of 16 or so plotters is anything but small, and, assuming (though not accepting) that the allegations are true, then the sheer size of the group is practically a guarantee that the plot would leak out. The alleged plotters therefore could not have been very competent.

Put another way, something is missing from the information that we have been given, for the story that we have been given really doesn't make sense. The apparent aim of the assassinations was to cause panic and confusion in the society? Really? For what purpose? Who would benefit from this? For somebody has to benefit. You aren't going to do something as serious as this just to create confusion and panic ... unless you are crazy. And theer is no allegation that the alleged plotters are crazy. So, what could the purpose possibly have been?

The creator of Sherlock Holmes put these words in the mouth of his famous detective:

"How often have I said to you that when you have eliminated the impossible,
whatever remains, however improbable, must be the truth?"

So, using Sir Arthur Conan Doyle's logic, what can we deduce from what we have been told? Remember, we were told (a) there was a plot to kill the PM, and
(b) the aim was to create panic and confusion.
Now, assuming (though again not accepting) that this is indeed true, who would possibly benefit from the resulting panic and confusion? Would it be ... could it be ... somebody who would hope that the UNC would turn to him(her) for guidance and leadership and that he(she) would then tell the Party who to appoint as Prime Minister and thus become the "kingmaker" with all the resulting power that flows from such a position because the new "king" would owe his position to the "kingmaker"? Who?

I agree that this scenario is highly improbable ... but you have to admit that it makes a certain sense if what we were told is true! I will also admit that there are other possible scenarios that I have not been able to imagine. But something has to make sense! And I find it difficult to believe that the Prime Minister lied to us about the plot. So, if she didn't, what is the piece of information that we are missing in order for the plot to make sense?