THE EDITOR:
AS a citizen of Trinidad and Tobago, I have always looked forward to the day when I would have reached the magical age of 65 years.

As a senior citizen, certain privileges would have awaited me.

I would have stopped paying my Insurance company and still qualify for my benefits.

I would have received a “congratulation” note from NIB you have reached aged 65, to come in and receive your benefits.

There is one benefit, however, I have always looked forward to receive, yet, may never be able to receive my, as we say, “My old age pension.”

When someone reached aged 65, because he had nothing to show in his name, he is rewarded with his pension.

On the other hand, “Harry -- he is ambitious -- he has provided for his family needs.”

He drives a taxi.

He saves a little to ensure he is able to take care of his family needs.

He reaches age 65, unlike the someone who has nothing to show and given his pension.

Harry, because he owns a taxi and a small house, has been denied his pension rights -- all because he has something in his name.

This means for Harry to make ends meet, he now has to work all the days of his life without knowing what it is to enjoy his pension.

In our nation, to deny someone his pension just because he has something to show as against the person who has nothing to declare and receive his pension, this is what we call, “age discrimination” -- discrimination against those who may have as against those who have not.

We are waiting to be a world class nation by 2020.

Are you aware that in most of the already developed nations, such as Canada and the USA, regardless of status of life -- once you have reached the age, you are given your pension.

You have worked hard all the days of your life it is now your right to begin to enjoy the fruits of your labour, the twilight years of your life.

To deny this right is nothing less than a form of discrimination.

It makes the words of our anthem meaningless where, quote “Here every creed and race find an equal place.”

When one is denied his pension rights, its all because during his life he worked hard for what he has today and pay his taxes, this just cannot be right.

Politicians receive their due pension, teachers, doctors, receive same, why shouldn’t business persons receive same?

It is the right for all citizens -- once you have reached age 65, to draw your pension.

This is your right, it is our right.

To deny someone his pension is nothing but “discrimination” against those who have and those who have not.

May God bless our nation.


N.B.: In my humble opinion, public assistance and pension, they are not the same.

Public assistance is to assist someone with a disability.

Pension -- one should be qualified for his pension -- as long as the person reaches age 65, whether or not the person own a property.

THE EDITOR:
NOT so long ago, the then leader of the parliamentary Opposition in Barbados crossed over to the government’s side without much fanfare.

Prime Minister Patrick Manning sought to make fun of this in the presence of a CARICOM audience.

He quipped “Prime Minister Arthur, I see that you’ve lost your only leader of the Opposition, well we (presumably Trinidad and Tobago) can spare you one because we have two (general laughter) -- but you can’t have Panday, because Panday is mine -- (more laughter).”

Some might recall that when Basdeo Panday occupied the Prime Ministerial chair he used to taunt Patrick Manning, on the opposite side that, “As long as you are over there, I’ll be over here.”

As fate, political suicidal instincts and President Arthur N.R. Robinson’s doctrine of “moral and spiritual values” would have it, Patrick Manning has been able to turn the tables and return the “compliment” with a vengeance -- no pun intended.

It must, or at least should, be obvious by now that Manning and Panday are conjoined political twins and represent each other’s best political asset or trump card, if you prefer.

Basdeo Panday does not appear to have co-ethnic appeal and he doesn’t seem to care, if one is to judge from what his not inconsiderable detractors can easily interpret as insensitive, if not inflammatory, and often seemingly thoughtless public utterances.

It’s by no means uncharitable to suggest that those two political antagonists thrive on each other’s political bungling.

Yet the nature of our politics is such that there is a pervading impression that our options are limited to the proverbial rock an a hard place or between Tweedle Dee and Tweedle Dumb -- one might even add between Tweedle Dumb and Tweedle Dumber.

Be that as it may, Basdeo Panday appears to have settled for being leader of the opposition in perpetuity, leading his blind followers down into a blind alley or hoping for a miracle.

Patrick Manning is waiting for the moment when he is persuaded that Panday’s UNC has irrevocably self-destructed to spring a snap general election.

An independent member of the Senate suggested that our Republican Constitution together with the current so-called political configurations favours the emergence of a constitutional dictatorship.

I shudder to think what would be the case if a single political entity acquires a constitutional majority which allows changes to be made at the whim and fancy of the regime.

There lies madness, if not blatant tyranny.

THE EDITOR:
THIS is an open letter to the government, I will like to bring to the attention of the government, the pension issue of ex-TIDCO workers.

TIDCO was closed on May of last 2005 and is being currently run by a Board of Directors.

The board promised the ex-workers to expedite their pension payments within one year.

To date no payments has been made to anyone.

This million-dollar pension plan has already been wounded up by the CLICO group and is awaiting approval by the government to issue cheques.

Will these ex-employees suffer the same faith as the former IDC and TDA employees who waited for 10 years?

Please prime minister, act now, have this matter resolve immediately.

If these workers had a union they would not have been in this suffering state.

Is it that people must protest to get results?

THE EDITOR:
MTS has been risking our lives on a daily basis by having us transporting and guarding money without the proper safety equipment.

That is: 1). No bullet proof vests, 2). No proper vehicles which could withstand bullets/armoured vehicles, 3). No radio communication linked to a central command with a phone linked to the police.

It is time for us to stop guarding and transporting money without the proper safety equipment.

Let the CEO and all those other big boys guard and transport money without bullet-proof vests, radio communication and old vehicles which are not armoured.

Officers are being killed like pot hound dogs and big iron gates are falling on female officers but MTS is not doing ah dam thing about our safety.

Not even the CEO bodyguards have bullet proof vests.

The amount of $10.50 per hour plus $2 firearm allowance are not enough for risking our lives and added to that we are not given the proper safety equipment.

The bandits are watching us and it is only a matter of time before they start shooting and robbing us because of the stupidity and non-caring attitude toward security.

All those big boys do not care about us or if we starve.

All they care about are themselves, to victimise officers who stand up for their rights and for us to risk our lives and do not say nothing.

It is time we stop transporting and guarding money without bullet proof vests, armoured vehicles and communication equipment.

All officers working fire arm duties must stop doing so until MTS provides us bullet vests, armoured vehicles and radios linked to a central command with phone link to the police.

All you need to do is report to a location near to you or to a base and inform your senior that you are not working firearm duty until we get bullet proof vests, armoured vehicles and walki-talkies.

We will stay on that location for our shirt and MTS must pay us.

It is the law.

MTS must provide us with the proper safety equipment.