Commentary by Eugene Hamilton

In his address he stated that displaced workers of that industry in Trinidad were paid over two billion dollars as part of their compensation package

Here in St. Kitts Prime Minister Douglas who promised that our Sugar Industry would close over his dead body, reneged on his promise and closed the Sugar Industry to the dismay of everyone, shortly after forming the Government for a third term in 2004 and offered only two years severance pay to our sugar workers.

Did his offer compare favorably with the proposal from the Leader of the Peoples Action Movement? Was there anything that the Government could undertake to make the sugar workers and their families become Financially Independent having closed the industry, thereby "empowering our people and securing our Nations future?"

By comparison, the offer made by Lindsay Fitz-Patrick Grant, leader of the Peoples Action Movement was far superior to that which the Prime Minister was forced to offer in the final analysis.

Grant offered (1) Immediate cash disbursement of between $40 and $100 thousand dollars. (2) Three to five acres of land (3) Wages for three years after the closure of the industry.

Douglas offered only two years lump-sum payment and he had to be dragged kicking and screaming to do so.

A look back at what was offered and what was eventually paid by the Government suggest that every sugar worker was robbed of his due.

The Prime Minister himself said repeatedly that $42 million dollars was to be paid but his last budget shows that only $28 million was paid to the displaced workers. Yet in that same budget in paragraph 59 he disclosed that $72 million was spent overall on the displaced workers. This means that only 38% of the total spent by Government as a result of the closure of the industry went directly into the hands of the displaced.

Because of the myriad of figures that have been tossed around by the Prime Minister and because persons are still waiting for their second and third tranches as promised, I have to conclude that the Sugar Workers were robbed blind by the Government at the closure of the industry. And while they were being robbed, the Trade Union looked the other way.

Don't know if the Government Ministers and the Trade Union officials were privately eating Caviar and drinking wine, but it seems to me that the Sugar Workers were sold out, because here was an opportunity for the Union to make its mark in St. Kitts in this twenty first century. Here was an opportunity to do more than calling workers to march in hot sun on Labour Day. Here was an opportunity for both entities to offer financial independence to every Sugar Worker and his or her family. Here was an opportunity to encourage and promote indigenous investment with the same fervor that we seem to promote Foreign Investment.

Had the Government and the Union taken the advice of the Peoples Action Movement in 2005 when we proposed that 20% of the payout or $8.4 million dollars be used to form a Holding Company, incorporated as Sugar Workers Holding Company and that 50 acres of land be transferred to that Company by the Government, that company owned by the displaced Sugar Workers would have had a start up base of over $10 million dollars. Ten million dollars start up base, would have laid the foundation for sugar workers from Cayon, St. Pauls and Buckleys among others to become financially independent over time.  I specifically mentioned Cayon, because the poverty survey carried out by the World Bank, concluded that 33% of us are living below the poverty line, and specifically mentions Cayon as being amongst the poorest communities in the Federation.

Over 30 years ago a company incorporated in St. Kitts opened its doors with capital of $250.00 thousand dollars. In 2006 that same company reported a profit of over $60 million dollars. That company is the St. Kitts Nevis Anguilla National Bank Limited, now the largest indigenous bank in the Eastern Caribbean.

Can you imagine a company "Sugar Workers Holding Company" owned by displaced sugar workers, making $60 million dollars profit some 30 years from now? Don't you see how empowered the families of those workers would have been in the future? Don't you agree that this was an opportunity squandered by the Government and the Trade Union?

Why does this Labour Government continue to promote poverty over financial independence for our nation's people?

And now my fellow citizens, do any of you think that marching with political misfits on Labour Day can provide financial Independence, or can pay your water bill, your electricity bill, or your mortgage to NHC.

NHC, now that's another story and another Empowerment opportunity for sugar workers, missed by the Government.

A Government of the Peoples Action Movement will undertake a review of Governments policy on low cost housing with a view to reduce the crippling, unfair, burdensome, draconian, monthly repayments, being extracted from you by your Government especially since some of you are former sugar workers.

Our policy on reviewing the Governments policy on low cost housing is based on a number if things including the following.

A few weeks ago various media houses carried the news that Prime Minister Douglas had gone to Venezuela, with one of his objectives being to obtain a loan to construct low income houses in St. Kitts

Strange, since his Government amended Social Services Levy in 1997 from Social Services Levy to Housing and Social Services Levy, and simultaneously increased the deductions from wages by 50% for the purpose of carrying on its housing constructing program

Strange also because in his Budget Estimates for 2007, Prime Minister Douglas as Minister of Finance has a line item under income of $25 million dollars to be collected as Housing and Social Services levy.

Do we know that one third of this sum or $8.33 million dollars is to be directed for housing according to the amendment made in 1997.

Do we also know that based on the Governments claim that 2000 houses have been constructed for poor people by them, that at an average monthly repayment is $300 per month, NHC is collecting or ought to be collecting $600,000.00 monthly or $7.2 million dollars yearly from these poor occupants.

Well if we know those things we should realize that with $8.33 million from Levy and $7.2 million from NHC collections, Prime Minister Douglas and the Government need not raise any loan to construct election houses.

I say Election houses because the Labour Spokesman of February 2004 laid claim to a loan of $20 million for constructing low cost houses at a cost of between $30 and $50 thousand dollars each. That was eight months before the General Elections of October 2004 was called. Since the elections of 2004 the Government has not built any other low income house. Therefore any attempt to borrow funds to construct houses given the present income stream available to Government, can only be seen as an attempt to use the publics purse to influence the outcome of General Elections.

So, is the Government gearing up for another General election? Is the Government using its power to advance its narrow political, election, agenda at the expense of all of us?

Those of you who are displaced sugar workers who find yourself in the hands of NHC and who have been deprived of the opportunity to become financially independent at the closure of the industry, have much to be upset about. So why are you heading to the Labour Day march? After reviewing the facts dont you think that you will be marching against yourself and the wellbeing of your family?

You have been forced to contribute from your wages to build the house in which you live. The Government is raising loans, adding to the National Debt that you have to pay to build you that same house as we approach General Elections.

And to add insult to injury, that house which that Government says was constructed at a cost of 30 to 50 thousand dollars, was offered to you at $400 dollars monthly for 30 years, which is approximately $150 thousand dollars.

$150 thousand dollars for a $30 or $50 thousand dollar house built with your own money, that had no tiles, no cupboards, no paint and no internal facilities including electrical connection.

So what will you be marching for on Labour Day?

Ask yourself this question. What benefits will I derive from marching with Government and Union on Labour Day?

If you can answer that question to your satisfaction then MARCH ON and if you cant then it is time to seek out the alternatives.

SEEK AND YE SHALL FIND. Empowerment and a secure future

I AM EUGENE HAMILTON