I write as a long-standing supporter of the People’s National Movement, but also as one who believes that loyalty must never require silence. A political party is not strengthened when its members clap at everything. It is strengthened when its members love it enough to tell the truth before the wider public does.
Having listened carefully to the recent address by the Leader of the Opposition, I was left with mixed feelings. There were certainly important issues raised. Crime, the economy, energy, employment, local government funding, infrastructure, foreign policy and governance, but only sparingly. In fact, the speech itself framed these as the areas to be examined, and there is no doubt that any responsible Opposition must hold the Government to account on them. However, the question is not whether criticism is necessary. It is whether the criticism was delivered in a way that builds confidence in an alternative government.
On my own review of the speech, roughly 39 per cent of the content dealt with criticism of Government performance and policy. That is expected in an Opposition address. But what troubled me is that an even larger portion, about 42 per cent, fell into what I would describe as mudslinging, loaded language, ridicule, and personal attack. At times, the speech sounded less like a national address and more like a rally designed to excite those already convinced.
That may satisfy the diehard base, but it does little to win back the 100,000 PNM voters whom the speech itself acknowledged stayed home in 2025. Those voters do not need noise. They need reassurance. They need to hear that the party has reflected deeply, corrected its weaknesses, and is ready to govern with seriousness.
The most important missing ingredient was not criticism. It was proportion. By my estimate, only about eight per cent of the speech was devoted to proposed solutions or a forward programme. To be fair, there were some proposals: restoring CEPEP/URP-type employment, reopening youth programmes, repairing Caricom relations, reviewing taxes and fees, and rebuilding confidence in the energy sector. These are useful starting points. But they came too late and too briefly, like a small lamp placed at the end of a long tunnel.
A modern Opposition cannot simply say, “The Government has failed.” It must say, clearly and repeatedly, “Here is what we will do differently, how we will do it, what it will cost, and how ordinary citizens will benefit.” That is the standard the public now expects.
The PNM has a proud history. It has produced leaders of national weight, built institutions, and helped shape T&T’s development. But history alone cannot carry the party back to office. Nostalgia may warm the room, but it does not repair trust. The present leader must show that she is not merely the custodian of an old brand, but the architect of a refreshed national offering.
What the country needs from the Opposition Leader now is discipline. Less sarcasm. Fewer personal shots. More policy. More humility. More evidence that the party has listened to citizens who became disappointed, disengaged, or doubtful.
A strong Opposition is essential to democracy. But strength is not measured by how sharply one can insult the Government. It is measured by clarity, credibility, maturity and readiness.
As a PNM supporter, I want my party to return to government. But I want it to return better, wiser, and more connected to the public mood than before. The next major address should not be remembered for who was attacked. It should be remembered for what was offered.
