|Letter: The poison of power|
|Published on April 26, 2014||
Email To Friend Print Version|
It is a fact that during the tenure of Stephenson King’s UWP, and up until November 2011, there was less hardship in Saint Lucia than there is today. With the additional millions provided through the payment of VAT, the Labour Party has failed to cushion the hardship that resounds in the empty pockets of the haves and the have-nots alike. What does Stephenson King know about fiscal management that Kenny Anthony doesn’t?
But the Labour Party claims to have won the general elections of 2011. Many Saint Lucians know better. There are several unanswered questions regarding many of the seats allegedly won by Labour, such as that of Ezechiel Joseph, which was won by 60-something votes in the initial count and lost by two votes on the following day. We all know that anything that is wrought in deceit cannot prosper. This is the natural law of nature. By the sweat of thy brow you will eat bread, the Bible says; so when Labour used its resources to take the elections by any means necessary, it was not doing so on merit. As a consequence, the Labour Party will have to suffer the consequences of its actions.
Whilst the Labour party is scrambling to retain the favour of disgruntled supporters, many of whom are among the hardest hit sufferers in the current crisis, up comes Allen Chastanet, clueless but determined to become prime minister, and apparently by any means necessary. He followed closely the antics of the Labour Party and captured the convention of July 2013.
But throughout the length and breadth of Saint Lucia are the ousted delegates whose names were deleted from the list of voters because they intended to vote for Stephenson King. Those deleted delegates are everywhere in every constituency, and are willing to bear testimony to the fact that they were removed by the chairpersons of the constituency branches who Chastanet had wooed with an expense paid package at Coconut Bay and other promises of God-knows-what.
These King loyalists were replaced by Johnny-come latelys and fly-by-night Flambeaus, whose only concern was the price of their vote. Chastanet’s campaign was rife with propaganda, some of which were leftovers from the Labour Party campaign of 2011, being reserved by Chastanet’s supporters against their own members. It is believed that Chastanet’s main henchman paid certain unscrupulous and drug addicted journalists to write and publish defamatory material against their own, who were unprepared to be taken by force.
So having taken the convention, Chastanet seeks to divide to rule. He, a loser, having failed to wrest the Soufriere seat from Labour, strides in to declare at a meeting in Gros Islet, that he was not willing to work with some elected members of the United Workers Party. Such an announcement was in poor taste coming from a loser! The question is why would Chastanet go so far, having no seat of his own and knowing in advance who the elected members are, to contest and take the convention and then to declare that he was unwilling to work with those who he already knew were constitutionally elected members of a party to which he was nouveau!
What entitles any one to be so bare-faced, and who else can be blamed for the dysfunction and breakdown of the UWP other than Allen Chastanet? So obsessed is he with becoming PM that his father has set up a talk show on DBS, which he uses to sell his son and to chastise and malign those whom his son hates. As for Allen, besides being a foreigner to the truth, he suffers from a chronic case of “foot in mouth disease”. Whenever Allen Chastanet opens his mouth, words fall all over each other before he has a chance to arrange them in a coherent and sensible order.
I watched Allen Chastanet try to apportion blame upon Richard Frederick for the current state of affairs in the UWP, whilst forgetting that he is a Johnny-come-lately who was rejected by the people of Soufriere. He has also forgotten that it was he and not Richard Frederick or Stephenson King who first announced that they would not work with him. As a result of his own pronouncement, who can blame Richard Frederick or Stephenson King for refusing to attend Mr Chastanet’s meetings? Yet the hypocrites who converge around Mr Chastanet to collect the crumbs which they perceive will fall from his table, see nothing wrong with his statement that he won’t work with some elected members, but find fault in the elected members response to the infamous foot-in-mouth statement.
Mr Chastanet was born in Martinique, a French country. He has lived in Saint Lucia for a very long time, yet he never bothered to learn the French-Creole, which in Saint Lucia is considered “the language of the people.” The only reason for his inability to communicate in Creole is because he never envisaged the need to communicate in what the uppity considers to be a “palawala dialect of the aged and ignorant”, so why should he bother to learn that? Today he would need an interpreter to communicate with the little old ladies in the countryside where he perceives a win at the polls to be a must!
But Mr Chastanet may be in for several big surprises and a very rude awakening. He and the currently constituted UWP may have to face much more than the Labour Party at the polls. Allen Chastanet may very soon awake to realize that he would have been better off never dividing the UWP, and should have kept his foot out of his mouth!
Vernita Carlene Octave
here to receive daily news headlines from Caribbean News Now!
This writer, and others of his/her ilk, seems to forget that every Saint Lucian has a right, under the constitution to be anything that he/she wants to be. And that includes Allen Chastanet and anyone else for that matter. King is where he is because of his incompetence, laziness, and outright inability. In fact, after the last general election, anyone with a modicum of decency and an inkling of intelligence would have resigned the leadership and walked away with what little pride he had intact. But not King. He decided to play the revolving door game, waiting for his "chance" to come back in through another back door.
Vervita Carlene Octave, if he/she exists, must realize that there is no place in this world for a 50s politician, which is exactly what king is.
1. What leader would at the height of a global recession succumb to opposition supported threats of strike action and cripple the country with a 14% payrise to public servants? Answer: King
2. Which leader would persist in appointing Bousquet as foreign minister even after he agreed with his advisors that it was in the best interests of the country (note not himself) that Bousquet should go? Answer: King
3. Which prime minister in the WORLD would bend down on a stage in full view of the world for an idiot like Wyclef Jean to jump over him in a typical showman's stunt? Ah, the indignity of it. Answer: King.
4. Which prime minister would succumb to the "threats" of someone with absolutely no political clout and appoint her ambassador to the UN? Answer: King
5. Which political leader would associate himself with possible the most controversial and divisive figure (bar one) in St. Lucia politics? Answer: King.
6. Which UWP prime minister would consider taking campaign advice from Rick Wayne, who recently showed his hand as far as the UWP is concerned? That is like letter the snake in amongst the pigeons. Answer: King.
7. Which leader would lose an election when 2 weeks away from election day his opposite number was on the verge of alcoholism because his ego could not stand up to the possibility of losing to a loser like King? Answer: King
8. Which losing prime minister would not fight strongly in the courts for very questionable losses in marginal seats? Answer: King
9. Which losing prime minister would "run away" during the days immediately following a general action, refusing to take calls from his "followers"? Answer: King
10. Would you pay King more that EC$2,500 per month for even his best effort?
There are plenty more questions one could ask. But the principal reason King is where out in the cold where he will remain is because he had no intention of working to be prime minister of this country. He is too damn lazy. When you consider that as prime minister when the country did not want Anthony back, and Anthony had resigned himself to a loss, the fact that King manufactured a defeat from a sure victory automatically disqualifies him. I believe that King's intention was to be leader of the opposition for as long as he could, fat salary, no responsibilities. He lowered the fence, Chastanet climbed over it. Game over.
So Ms or Mr Octave, stop your whining and face up to the fact that King is gone. Chastanet is merely the tool used to get rid of King and his sidekick. If Chastanet does not measure up, he will also go. No bones about that. This is the world that we live in now. 50s politics are over.