THE People’s National Movement (PNM) has hit back strongly at the United National Congress’ (UNC) Monday night forum by its recent hosting of town meetings of its own-Conversations with the Prime Minister.

While the UNC focused on crime, the PNM’s focus was more comprehensive, disseminating information on their performance and future plans for the social and economic development of the country.

The PM claimed that this country was the only one to successfully renegotiate energy prices in its favour, significantly increasing revenues. At a subsequent event, the PM pointed to successful economic policy initiatives involving public-private sector development and challenged the private sector to get more involved in national development, using their immense financial resources.

The PM’s claim to excellent economic management has been supported by international financial institutions, in particular, the International Monetary Fund. Additionally, the Government’s handling of the Covid pandemic had gained the PNM high praise.

At the PNM’s second meeting, other ministers gave insights into the plans and projects under their purview. The Minister of Youth and National Service outlined a number of social programmes and initiatives to better prepare our youth for a decent life at the adult level. This was intended to steer them away from a life of crime.

For these programmes to have the greatest impact, however, entry requirements may have to be reviewed, and more direct approaches to targeted participants may have to be employed-or even consideration be given to compulsory enrolment. Despite expected complaints of dictatorship by some, most parents would welcome having their idle offspring forcibly enrolled in a skills training programme instead of them liming on the block to be recruited by gang leaders.

The Minister of Works and Transport brought the population up to date on his ministry’s initiatives. These claims of successes might serve to give the Government some leeway in the face of the unacceptable crime situation, especially with the PM’s subsequent plea for patience in dealing with the crime situation.

Notwithstanding the well-managed road show, many people were a bit apprehensive, if not uneasy, with the PM’s response-particularly to a rather respectful proposal by a member of the audience that the property tax be introduced with gradual annual increases in payments. The PM was visibly offended by this suggestion and responded that ‘land and building taxes had not been paid for 16 years, and don’t get me started on this’.

This response may have been interpreted by some as intimating that the proposal was deemed to be way out of line, even vexatious. At a previous meeting, the issue of assessment errors was also raised. Not doubting the veracity of the PM’s reply, one wonders if this matter could not be handled differently and more soberly, given that issues surrounding the fair assessment and easy understanding of payment notices for this tax are still viewed as complex or even confusing by many of the general public.

Given that there is a natural aversion to paying taxes-since the related benefits are never seen as outweighing the reduction in one’s disposable income-a calmer, more humble and measured approach in responding publicly to queries may pay greater dividends.

The last thing one would hope for is to have certain harsh responses being viewed as ‘bouffing’, thereby trumping otherwise good social and economic performance-what with increases in water and electricity rates expected and the crime rate still unacceptable. This is merely a word to the wise.

D Thomas Port of Spain