Tuesday February 9th, 2010
- Last update:11 hours 41 min ago
Ramesh blanks UNC Congress
Published: 26 Oct 2009
Tabaquite MP Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj blanked the UNC's congress yesterday, and instead opted to spend the day touring his constituency. In an interview, Maharaj said he wrote the UNC executive last week, informing them that he already had pre-planned commitments in his constituency. He said he received notice of the congress only two weeks ago. "I wrote a letter to the UNC, indicating this, and I informed them that I will attend the congress meeting once I had finished my activities in the constituency, but I finished my tour in Caratal late."
Asked whether he believed he would be accused of putting his constituency before his party, Maharaj said no. He explained: “I don’t think my presence is essential. It is not the first congress that I have not attended, and the only thing I would have contributed is my presence. “There is a pre-set agenda, and when I weigh what is involved, I have decided that my constituents need my support. I have to see to the needs of my people.” (RS)
I COULD MAKE HEADLINE MORE
I COULD MAKE HEADLINE MORE ANTI UNC -
RAMESH JACK AND GYPSY BLANK UNC
As an unrepentant Pandayite
As an unrepentant Pandayite why would you want to do so? If I'm not mistaken Gypsy attended. Warner & Ramesh had prior commitments, although Warner did say he would not attend. But we don't take everything they say at face value. Pls don't complain of inaccurate reporting and then suggest same.
He should have attended. He
He should have attended. He would have been on hand to hear Mr. Aleem Abdool ask Panday to step down so that the PNM could be voted out. He would have heard the applause and see the raise of hands by all in favour of Panday's permanent absence. He woulda been proud!
DEMOCRACY IS NOW A NEGATIVE
DEMOCRACY IS NOW A NEGATIVE THING -
We ask for democracy, we get it then choose to portray it in a negative light. I remember a political analyst saying if Obama was able to negotiate world peace his opponents would say he put Arms Industry out of work. You asked for elections, you get a convention where a motion could be moved against the leader, this could not happen in either COP or PNM. You are dammed if you do and dammed if you don’t. You are hedging your bets whatever the outcome you have a problem. You remind me of the PNM who claimed that the UNC was causing crime because of the delay in the passage of the crime bills. UNC agreed and passed the bills, some are not even assented to today the crime situation has become increasingly worse. You claim that Panday is stopping the removal of PNM, and COP will then be able to solve the problems. If you get what you ask for I wonder what your excuse will be. At election time you sang a different tune, even with Panday there you were supposed to win the elections. After you did not win a seat, the tune changed toi if Panday was not there you would have won the election. I am waiting to hear the next great excuse, would it be we like it so.
PRINCE YOU ARE AN
PRINCE YOU ARE AN UNREPANTANT T&T NATIONAL -
I am proud of you and would not trample on your rights of freedom of expression. I see you as an unrepentant T&T national who just expresses a different perspective on the political landscape. I am sure your motivation is the best for T&T. You remind me of my father he is a COP sympathiser whereas my mother is old school she is a PNM sympathiser and none of us belong to a political party. I hold no animosity to either. I guess you would say it is the dysfunctional kind of family I come from. We represent all the major races in T&T, all the major religions and political persuasions that is kind of sick in a country of Racial, Religious and Political separation and even hatred.
PRINCE HEADLINES THAT ARE
PRINCE HEADLINES THAT ARE ANTI UNC -
Headlines that are anti UNC do not have to be accurate just sensational, that is the point. The headline about what Bravo father said was just sensational but this fell in PNM court, he has since refuted it.You would hardly see the same mistake in this paper when it comes to COP.