 Thank you very much, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, I had to say to my friend on my right that this one thing is guaranteed that I'm a creature of habit. So here I am after lunch on the second day speaking in my custom slot despite the variations in variations in delivery today. So Mr. Speaker, it gives me great pleasure to offer a few comments on the estimates before us. Mr. Speaker, from then to time I do listen to the statements made in the public. I do have review and read postings on Facebook and I do go places where you had debate of one kind or another. I'm a speaker in the past couple weeks in the run-up to this budget. I've had the opportunity to hear statements emanating from the opposition and perhaps what has resonated the most, Mr. Speaker, is the personal assaults on the Minister of Finance, the member for Kastres East and the Prime Minister. And you had a constant refrain that the government has no plan, the government has no vision. The Minister of Finance does not know what to do and in a Chilean style they have even argued that the Minister of Finance and the member for Kastres East does not even know what he has done, meaning that he did things but did not know the very consequence of the very act of what he had done. And on arrival to this afternoon a few months ago I understood that the leader of the opposition described the budget as a patch-patch budget described the government as a patch-patch government. Now Mr. Speaker, budgets have always attracted descriptions over the years, always attract descriptions. Some of these descriptions are famous and among us in this house some would remember the famous pronouncement of George Ordlam describing a Louisie budget as a bikini budget. In other words, what the budget hid, I'm using my own language now, was fascinating and what it hid was far removed from what it disclosed. Then too of course, again George Ordlam describing one budget as a belaylesh budget and that of course was made very famous by one of our Calypsoanians using that term, my good friend and St. Lucia's most outstanding Calypsoanian which I'm prepared to defend anytime, anywhere, the invader and he has used that to great effect in music. And then I remember in my own time describing a budget of the former administration when the leader of the opposition and minister of finance, I described his budget as a budget guafal and of course I was just telling my good friend that that language came from an ordinary citizen describing the budget as a budget that had a huge stomach that all it did was to fill up that stomach and with every living thing, the consumer living thing in its way, had a huge appetite but of course very little to come out of it. So when the leader of the opposition says that you're dealing with a patch-patch budget, I mean I guess he wants to go down in the annals of history as having crafted a term that resonates in time. But you know, the problem is that when you use terms, the terms must somehow resonate with the historical moment. It must capture the historical moment. If people are to latch on to these terms with the speaker, then somehow the term must not only remain in their minds but describe accurately and accurately the circumstances of the time. But Mr. Speaker, the problem with that description is that it just does not explain the budget that is before this house. That's the problem. The leader of the opposition, Mr. Speaker, has a huge difficulty on his hands and I have to commend a member for Sozel who understood the difficulty and in his own presentation he avoided as best as he could any attempt to criticize the logic objective, the purpose of the budget. He stayed away but meandered through some inconsequential items in this constituency. That's the root, I know this respect man, but that is the root that he took. He avoided it, he avoided confrontation, he avoided replies, he avoided creating any kind of mischief, any kind of speculation. Now to put it another way, that was his way of denouncing the speech that we heard earlier this afternoon. Well, I am now a deputy speaker that I apply the rules. I follow the rules. The rules say that you must use appropriate language to describe members of the House and I will never ever resort to unparliamentary language at this stage. This is an important period of my career. So I will use language that is appropriate to facilitate the circumstances. So Mr. Speaker, let's look at the statistics. Mr. Speaker, you have a forecasted growth rate of 6.96 percent. Now interestingly Mr. Speaker, the International Monetary Fund has forecasted a growth rate of 3.2 percent for 2023. And Mr. Speaker, interestingly too, that the government of St. Lucia has forecasted a growth rate of 7.3 percent for 2024, it's forecasted. The IMF in turn forecasted a growth rate at 2.3 percent a decline. Now the fact of the matter Mr. Speaker is this. We shall see who's right and who's wrong, but already you have an indication that what the IMF said was not correct and I shall come back to that in a minute. But I want to be faithful Mr. Speaker and I'm going to read out to you the press release, a paragraph of the press release issued by the IMF Executive Board which incidentally was made available to the Honorable House by the Leader of the Opposition. So I'm reading from his document as a speaker. This is what IMF says. The GDP growth projection in 2023 at 3.2 percent is lower than 2022 as tourism demand continues the recovery and the economy approaches the existing production capacity. Afterwards it is projected to gradually decline towards a potential rate of 1.5 percent in the medium term. Annual inflation is projected to remain high in 2023 at 4.3 percent and then declined to around 2 percent in the medium term. The current account deficit is expected at 0.8 percent of GDP in 2023 and by all accounts this is phenomenal because as I've said before in this House normally economists expect that the correct percentage of the current account deficit should be really about just 1.5 percent. So the current account deficit is expected at 0.8 percent of GDP in 2023 and it's projected to close over the medium term driven by the continuing recovery and tourism unquote. That's the IMF in 2024, March 7th, 2024. Now, Mr. Speaker, I have read it but to make a point that there are people in this House in this country who believe that the judgments of the IMF are sacred, that the IMF can never be wrong and there are people, I'm betting you Mr. Speaker, there are people right now who will not accept the government estimates of the growth rate but will accept the IMF estimates of the growth rate. That's what's going to happen, Mr. Speaker. But this is a good lesson for all of us around this table and for the citizens at large that we must never ever believe that the IMF is infallible, incapable of errors or that on the other side the IMF always gets it right. That's not so. That is not so at all and so while we await the final judgment what we do know is that the forecasted growth of the IMF is far below what the government has forecasted and the government will forecast with a certain degree of certainty and could never make a mistake with a gap between the tours wide as it is without being sure of what it was going. And when I look back, Mr. Speaker, the crowning growth rate, I think after independence, was a 7.5 percent achieved by a labor administration in 2006 when we were booted out of office. That was a crowning growth rate and I suspect if of course we were to benefit then as a former government benefited by the recasting of figures of growth rate etc. then it would have been higher. But my point is, my point is, oh it's climb to 10 points, something my point is that this government actually is approaching that growth rate and if it succeeds in eclipsing that growth rate then of course the present benefit has to go to the government and to the minister of finance. So, Mr. Speaker, they're almost caught up with that growth rate. But let me return to the statistical summary and they need repetition. The current surplus is 156.9 million. The recurrent surplus of 66 million and Mr. Speaker, let's you be worried, I'm reading from the budget summary, Mr. Speaker, and you can consult your budget summary while I speak. The primary surplus is 104 million. There's a primary balance expressed as a percentage of GDP at 1.5 percent and an overall balance as a percentage of GDP of minus 1.6 percent. Now, may I make a suggestion to the ministry of finance as we go through those figures because you see, when we come to parliament and side those figures, unless we spend time to explain those figures, the population don't understand what those figures mean and perhaps in the notes that they present they can always take the opportunity to explain to people what these figures mean and what it means for the government's management of the fiscal policies of the government. The question is, and this is the point, how does the opposition handle this? How does the opposition react to this? Well, the easiest way is to present it though exists. So in a budget reply, you don't make no reference to it and it's a tactic that has great value. What you do in effect is not to mention those statistics again, argue those statistics, so it sticks in people's mind and then you go in a different direction and mention all other things that are irrelevant. The member for library is looking at me as if I'm preaching something that is wayward and but that's a well-known technique of lawyers, among others, that X says why you ignore what X says and go and talk about something else and totally mislead and confound. So that's the position, you can ignore it but then you cannot argue and say that the economy is on autopilot, perhaps even suggesting that it is guided by an unseen hand, an unknown and unseen hand. Surely you cannot again present an argument in 2024 that economy experience its last boost of growth as it recovers to return to the pre-pandemic levels. That growth rate was exhausted since last year and the year before. We have gone past that. We have gone past that. But even if you want to argue on its merits that that is a case, then how on earth are you going to explain a growth rate of 7.3% in 2024? My goodness, if you have to argue that in 2024 that 7.3% growth rate do exist or that you have to attribute it to growth rate following the pandemic, then in effect what you will have to concede and admit that never ever before in the history of St. Lucia has an economy enjoys such growth in such a short space of time because now you are talking about growth rate in the 20s and possibly reaching the 30s. That's a pretty commendable leader of the opposition. How do you deal with those realities? Nostalgia creeps in sometimes as we got sometimes because when these presentations are made in the house and I regret I didn't have the opportunity to listen to the leader of the opposition. I really wanted to. I miss him too often. I would have liked to have listened to him this morning so that we can contest the issues on the merits. But let us wait for the policy debate. It will be an opportunity at the policy debate to contest these ideas. But you know, Mr. Speaker, even if I were to concede some measure of credit to the leader of the opposition, I have to take it all back. I'm compelled to take everything back. After all, Mr. Speaker, this opposition is known to be preposterous to engage and employ absurdities in his arguments. And I don't know whether it is a situation that the government is hoping that it could be rescued by its theological outlook, that the truth is what you believe it to be. And maybe that is what is at play, the philosophy, the outlook, that the truth is not really the reality, but what you want to believe it to be. And that, of course, as we have learned over the years and over the months, Mr. Speaker, there are those who will accept that kind of logic and drink that kind of logic to their heart's content and delight. The truth is what you believe it to be. And what a predicament for a leader of opposition to have to answer to those groceries. And so, Mr. Speaker, there is another element that I want to touch on before I come to the substance of some of the issues. Again, nostalgia, Mr. Speaker, a little bit of nostalgia. And I don't remember that I know we'll concede the occasional nostalgia in these matters. But I warn you all, those of you who think at my age that put them on as they don't make a mistake, because they are prime ministers in this region, well older than I am, have no desire to be prime minister in my life. Again, I am enjoying my life as it is. It's the most enjoyable period of my life. But this business of believing that these are idiosyncrasies of age. Don't make that mistake. Never make that mistake. So a little nostalgia is good for the soul and from time to time useful to engage. I remember, Mr. Speaker, when St. Lucia achieved his first billion dollar budget, and I drew the attention of the then parliament and the people of St. Lucia to the fact that we had crossed a threshold of one billion dollars, I was ridiculed, accused of arrogance, of citing a statistic of no relevance to the daily lives of the people of this country. Day in, day out, and the member of a country's east remember what I had to endure. I believe there are two things you remember, but there are many others to remember. This declaration of a billion dollar budget, and mind you, there are people in this society who should have known better who engage in that kind of behavior. I watch this society with utter fascination. And you know one of the biggest problems that we have in this society is when we see wrongdoing being committed, we applaud those who do it and we refuse to correct those who do it and we are reaping it today. Wrongdoing is everywhere, but we applaud it and we justify it and find excuses for it. That's what our life has become. What are you on the opposition benches or what are you in government? That's the reality. It has become a national culture. We applaud those who say the wrong things, write the wrong things, do the wrong things, and we don't have the guts to marry you to stand up to them and say this is wrong. We pay a price. And you know, Mr. Speaker, I remember that occasion well, outstanding people in the society who parroted that garbage rather than an understanding what crossing that threshold meant. Today, Mr. Speaker, I am witness to the fact that our budget stands at an estimated 1,894,110 $800. This is astounding. This is astounding. And how times have changed, Mr. Speaker? How times have changed? We speak the language of billions of dollars. Mr. Speaker, I accept that the value of money has been eroded substantially. Money has lost a lot of value because of inflation. But I say that even if that is so, it remains a real significant achievement that we have a budget of $1.8 billion. We have come a long way. And I believe, Mr. Speaker, I'm not making any pronouncements. I believe it is my own belief that if this government perseveres, then in two years' time, we will see a budget of $2 billion. That, in my books, Mr. Speaker, will be an achievement if the respective balances remain as healthy as we have indicated in the budget summary. We have come of age. That is it. Now, Mr. Speaker, I do not intend to make a day of a litany of I remember. If I had to, then today I would be on my feet for the entire day. So I ask you to forgive this little nostalgia. But I go back one step. I recall that two years ago, when the Minister of Finance delivered his budgetary statement, in my budget response, I said to the government that the secret to the recovery of the economy in the short term was a significant investment in infrastructure. I don't know whether honorable members recall this. I said that was the key. Recovery, however, cannot and should not be left solely to tourism. Tourism don't have that ability to do so while it may provide you with the kind of statistics and while it can, of course, provide you with the foreign exchange that you need. I am therefore glad that this government has taken steps to declare this year as a year of infrastructure. But Mr. Speaker, decisions like that must have meaning and must have value. The declaration of the year of infrastructure should not mean that this is a year of the declaration of an opportunity for the big contractors. It must not be for the big contractors. It must be for the ordinary citizens, the army of masons and liberals and small contractors in our midst so that whatever allocations have been made and have been spent, that must be translated to touch the pockets of the small people in this country. That is vital so that they can buy in politically but more importantly, Mr. Speaker, the impact it is going to have on the downward trend of unemployment in the country. And look, Mr. Speaker, just travel around the country. I can tell you even that East Coast Highway from Kastri is down to view Fort. We need to build endless drains along the highway. Endless drains along the highway. Put people to work. Let them build and construct these drains to improve that highway that we've been talking about. Put people to work. Put the masons to work. Put them. Make them quiet. Let them end the talking and the speculation. And so, Mr. Speaker, I just hope that the Ministry of Infrastructure will understand that the declaration of the year of infrastructure is not for the big contractors only but it has to be also for the ordinary citizens of this country. And I will say more of this, Mr. Speaker, when I engage in the policy debate. And in that policy debate, I will want to address the issue of the capacity of the Ministry of Infrastructure to deliver projects. The Ministry's ability to respond to community emergencies. And I also want to look at, in that policy debate, at alternative models of delivery of projects in this country. In other words, what alternative models we can create to allow infrastructure projects to be delivered in the country free of the bureaucracy that is so readily apparent in the operations of the Ministry of Agriculture of Infrastructure. Sorry, Mr. Speaker. Now, Mr. Speaker, the Attorney General visited me just before the delivery of this statement this afternoon. And he's a man who, Mr. Speaker, is very careful with language and he avoids certain words. But he said enough to say to me that he knows that I'm garrulous. I speak a lot. I say a lot of things. That's what he was trying to tell me this afternoon. So he wanted to be sure that I'm not going to go through all of my moments of being exceedingly talkative and garrulous and say things I should not say. And I want to say to him, as I've said before, I have, and I'm saying this with all good intention, that I have often reflected, Mr. Speaker, about those parliamentarians who were backbenchers in my time. And sometimes I've wondered whether in my time I paid enough attention to them, to their constituencies. And when I look back, truth be told, both political parties have really not had much historical experience in dealing with backbenchers in our parliament. So this is a learning experience on all sides. And I believe the lessons have to be learned among the backbenchers and also by the government in office. And you see, I'll tell you why, Mr. Speaker, we are likely and we need to revisit our boundaries, the delineation of boundaries. And sooner or later we will have to increase the size of our parliament. What this means translated is that you're going to have more backbenchers in your parliament. You will therefore have to develop a culture to deal with backbenchers. And I personally believe, Mr. Speaker, that it would be a good thing if in the course of any financial year, if each minister holds a town hall in the constituencies of backbenchers to hear from their constituents, their views on the development of their constituencies, and how best the ministry can assist whatever they wish to be done in their constituencies. Now, I don't know if I have disappointed you to any general by taking that approach. Understand that, so I understand, so I understand, so I understand. So I don't know where do you want to start learning the initial lessons, I don't know. This gives me just the jumping up point to make an observation that I want to expand on. Mr. Speaker, I know the considerable resources being made with the ministry of tourism. And I'm referring to head 47 of the estimates because it discloses that some 3.345 million is allocated to community tourism. This is a respectful allocation, not bad. I believe that the ministry can do it three times that, really. But this is respectful for a start. But what I wanted to tell the minister of tourism is that, euphorians want a piece of that pipe. That's really where I want to go. In that regard, I want to issue an invitation to the minister of tourism to tell us how much of that allocation will go to Euphor itself. Mr. Speaker, that's my point. You all can cite where you all want to cite, but I know where I want to cite. In advance of that visit, I asked the minister to consider financing a consultancy to do a feasibility study on the establishment of a boardwalk alongside the beachfront of the town of Euphor, stretching from the fisheries complex in Euphor to the fish market, to the existing fish market. And I'll have more to say in a few moments because this becomes important when the fish market is repurposed and revitalized. But I'll have a few more minutes. I'll have to say more on this in a few minutes. The idea of a boardwalk to elevate the frontage of Euphor is dear to the residents of Euphor, the south, and will provide new economic and integrated economic opportunity for the people of Euphor south. And there are so many examples of boardwalks throughout the region. All we ask at this stage is, well, that's not to my taste on my liking. But I can introduce you to other boardwalks elsewhere, but at least a consultancy so that we make a start in this regard. I'm also aware, Mr. Speaker, that the least held by the Williams family of the property once described as a lot of support has expired. It would be good if the minister shares his views on how this property is to be developed. And of course, here from my constituents, the idea is about the future potential of this property. I believe that this is a site that is currently going to waste. It is not being utilized. And of course, the good thing is that the property has now reverted to the crown. And while Euphor south is in the focus of the minister, the question of what is to be done with Mullah Sheikh and his lighthouse deserves attention. Unfortunately, the national trust who holds the property or joining the lighthouse in trust has not been able to come up with any realistic ideas as to how the property can be integrated in the development of Euphor south. And you know, we waste our history, I think. We rarely do waste our history in this regard. We always seem to be interested in sugar mills, old sugar mills. But mind you, I have a sugar mill at Larissus. I have two sugar mills, by the way. I have one at Larissus and another one down lower down there. And they're respectable sugar mills, you know. But my point is that that area of the lighthouse, Mr. Speaker, was once a tracking station for American missiles when American missiles were being tested. But that history has gone the way. The very building that was used is still there. And I will not tell you, Mr. Speaker, what the building is being used for. But I know you're a man of considerable imagination. And I leave it to your imagination to put the pieces together, Mr. Speaker. If you want to be reminded, then do pay a visit at your leisure, Mr. Speaker. So these are the issues. And one of the problems that we have, and I'm saying this so that the National Trust can hear me loud and clear, is that when the government of St. Lucia places its patrimony of the people of St. Lucia in the care and protection of the National Trust, the National Trust has to understand, it does not mean care and protection into perpetuity, that no investment must be introduced abroad to these areas to make use of those sites or whatever historical remains on those sites. And the National Trust has to get its act together because you cannot hold a constituency in Purgatory for so long. It can never be justified. So I want that to resonate with the National Trust. Mr. Speaker, allow me to return to the Ministry of Infrastructure, Transport and Port Services. And I did say to my good friend the Attorney General that I wouldn't be saying much in this address. And so it is I will concentrate on safe ground, my constituency. Mr. Speaker, last year when I spoke at the estimate debate, I lamented a lack of attention to the roads of the Air Force South. And colleagues will remember that I've done so for three years in a row. I lamented in particular the plight of the residents of Cedar Heights. I lamented the unpaved section of the Bruceville Main Road. I lamented the failure to complete the paving of the St. Jude Highway and the lyrical road from the bridge to the Heineken Bridge. I lamented. And I just want Mr. Speaker to highlight why those roads are important, quite apart from the fact that it is necessary for the citizens to benefit from good roads. But you know, the roads in that area have deteriorated so badly that ordinary motorists on their way to Sozel, or to Soufra, who have to go through Vufort, do not use those roads and rather they use the highway through Vufort. And that is causing some of the congestion that exists in Vufort at this time. So it is vital that the roads be repaired. And while the Ministry of Infrastructure is thinking about repairing roads, I must say I probably have the laziest roundabout in this country. Probably the worst roundabout in this country. Unique. Well then take it to the library and put it up on the top of on the top of the library here to and you tell me if it's unique on the hill up there. Take it to the library. You shout in no, no, no fast. I don't think of it as a good place for it. Come to think of it. And while this Ministry is talking about all these fancy roundabouts, I'm going to invite the Ministry of Infrastructure to look at a roundabout in Vufort at the top of New Dock Road. Vufortions don't deserve this. And I wish I could tell you the number of times I have dialogue with the Ministry of Infrastructure about replacing that roundabout. That's the roundabout that carries a flag of solution around independence. And this is your second town, you know, Mr Speaker. This is your second town. And it is being treated that way. So, Mr Speaker, we have opportunities to make use of the talents in the Ministry of Infrastructure. While these roads are not itemized in the Capital Works program of the Ministry on the Head 43, there is reason for optimism this year. When the Minister reeled off the impressive number of roads constructed in other constituencies, I say, hey, that's it. I must be on the list. I heard him talk about the number of roads in Vufort North. I heard him talk about a number of roads in Grozile. Then I heard him even talk about Austin Hill in Denver North. I said, bound to be in that. I said, bound to be in that this year. Bound to be in that this year. And then I heard the announcement, Mr Speaker. I heard the announcement this year and listened to the words of the, not his direct words, but the invitation was clear, that Vufort South was sure changed when the St. Jude Highway was only constructed to the brewery and nothing else was done. And St. Jude Highway remained as is, my research remained as is. And therefore, attention will be given to these roads. I also heard him say that Cedar Heights will be given attention. And Mr Speaker, I'll tell you why I am optimistic. I am optimistic and I'm going to use again a phrase that we have used in the political lexical of our parliament. And those who are in this parliament, if followed it when you were younger and will remember this phrase. No, no, no, no, no, no, no. A phrase where a famous parliamentarian, I believe it was the then deputy prime minister, Sir George Mallett, he stood up and announced that as we speak construction is underway. You remember? Now tell me which project it was? Border layer. No, no, no. It wasn't border layer, but it was a prison, a new prison. As we speak, lo and behold, no prison was ever being constructed. But as we speak today, I am honored to use the phrase, as we speak, to say that as we speak construction is underway in Cedar Heights and that a road named Calabas Street is currently on the repairs. As we speak. As we speak. The minister of infrastructure has hope for redemption. There is hope for redemption because as we speak, this road is under construction. And I now await, Mr. Speaker, attention to the other roads to bring relief to the residents of Cedar Heights where we have had to suffer so much over the years. And Mr. Speaker, I told you at the last sit-in at repetition is a very good thing. Remember that, Mr. Speaker? Glad you remember that, Mr. Speaker. I told you, Mr. Speaker, that repetition is an important tool of all good teachers. It's also against? Not, no, we'll have a different interpretation of the standing orders with the speaker. And it is only so if there's repetition in one contribution, not in successive contributions over a period of time. So you see, you can see it very enough. That's an important step. My point, Mr. Speaker, is this, that we have to do something about completing the Bruce Will road, the top of the Bruce Will road from Bruce Will to the main road. The people of Bruce Will, despite all their woes, despite their troubles, their pains, they have stood by me and stood by this government year in year out. No community has been as heavily bribed as you thought, as Bruce Will to vote against me. And no community has accepted the bribes to the extent that they have and have repeatedly voted for me despite the bribes. And your representative, Mr. Speaker, always tell the people of Bruce Will, they come to you, they give you money, take it. Let me know how much they give you, but take it. That's the investment that has been put into that. Now, Mr. Speaker, I am not going to go into the issue of whether they were bribed on election day or not. I'm not going to go there. I'm talking about bribery in general. So, Mr. Speaker, they deserve the day and the sun. Now, yesterday, Mr. Speaker, I think Tuesday, Mr. Speaker, was interesting. The Minister of Finance made reference to plans to construct an entertainment center for the world south. You recall, Mr. Speaker, I feel surprised, I expressed some surprise. And I know my friend on my right wants to find out about this entertainment center and what is this entertainment center that is coming to view for it. You see, Mr. Speaker, the former administration in its tenure had in fact announced plans for an investment group from Trinidad and Tobago to construct a cinema complex and entertainment center for view for itself. That project, I mean, never materialized. So, when the Minister of Finance mentioned this entertainment center, I said, don't tell me that project is resurfacing. Because the plan was to use the area designated for an administrative center for this so-called complex. Mercifully, it didn't materialize. But I'm glad that better use was made of the lands in Juvo. And I now notice that a parcel of land made available to Brian the head has been cleaned. And I understand that more and other facilities will be constructed in that area, which is a far more purposeful use of the land. So, that is a welcome development. And I am happy that it is a view forcian who is making that kind of investment in that kind of... And let me say this to this Honourable House. When you look at Juvo and the history of Juvo, and I'm telling you this so you can understand Juvo because the psychology of Juvocians are not understood. Modern-day Juvo was not constructed by merchants and investors from castries or from the north, you know. Modern-day Juvo, what it is today, was done by viewforcians. They are the ones who have developed the infrastructure, put up the buildings and engage in business in Juvo, not the merchants in the north. That is the big difference, Mr. Speaker. So, an investment by the Daher family is certainly welcome. But you could well imagine, Mr. Speaker, since the announcement by the Minister of Finance on Tuesday, I have been bombarded with calls from constituents. All anxious for details, someone to know if there was the possibility for them to invest or if there were new economic opportunities that they too can participate in. So, I had to meander somewhat, Mr. Speaker. But then I subsequently realized after discussions with the Minister of Finance, what he had in mind and really what he was describing. And of course, this is a project that I welcome, I have championed and I am looking forward to because it has the potential to catalyze. What the Minister of Finance meant was a project to repurpose, revitalize and transform the existing geofoam market into a venue for cultural performances and fine dining experience. Let me explain what the concept is. And I have, Mr. Speaker, the attention of the member for himself. I'm sorry, because he was dying to know what this project is all about. Mr. Speaker, I see you looking at the clock. How many minutes I have, Mr. Speaker? 18? 18, Mr. Speaker? Okay, Mr. Speaker. Mr. Speaker, like many community market places throughout the world, Mr. Speaker, the whole market in the town of Eufort many years ago was emblematic of the vibrancy of the whole town of Eufort. And some of us can remember on Saturdays going to Eufort town and going by the old market. I mean, the level of business activity was extraordinary. One of the best markets in the world. Well, I mean, in the region, sorry. And Mr. Speaker, the tragedy was that once the town moved northwards and the area on New Dock Road and Natooni was developed, then commerce moved north. And that has been the challenge of the old Eufort town. Everything moved north. Banks moved north. Services moved north. Restaurants moved north. Businesses moved north. The result of this is that SNS? SNS didn't move south. That's another story where we talk about that. So, Mr. Speaker, that really was the reality. And there have been numerous efforts, Mr. Speaker, to try to revitalize that part of the town. It would be a monumental tragedy if the old market was left on its own just to decay and to waste away. And given what has happened, Mr. Speaker, the fact that business and economic activity have moved to Clark Street and to the New Dock area, we have had to find a solution to bring some life and energy to that part of the town. Mr. Speaker, what is proposed is that the old Eufort market is repurposed. It calls for a combination of restoration and the installation of new features to both rekindle the nostalgia of the venue, Mr. Speaker, in its original intent, while adding new commercial value in gentrifying both the venue and immediate environments. So, the intention is to allow it to become not just a market, but as a site for cultural performances and indeed a fine dining tourism venue. And I'm happy that technical assessments have been made. And in a sense, this is an interesting idea, an imaginative proposal to transform the market to bring it to life. And when I spoke to the minister of tourism to say to him to explore by consultancy the possibility of a boardwalk with you for the whole idea was to connect the fisheries complex by a boardwalk to a boardwalk that will be built just outside of the old market as part of that dining experience. Again, remember for libraries watching and listening intently. You see, I have great love, respect, and admiration for library. Really great love, admiration, of course. I mean, it was my base when I went to school at the secondary school. But, and I know the member for library has pussy-fed in Billigay market in library. I sometimes wonder what he tells his cabinet colleagues because every other word he uses is probably saying library market, library market, library market, library market. While the member for it then we notice Austin Hill, Austin Hill. He replies, library market, library market, library market. And, you know, he suffered under the tenure of the former government. Not even his friend Bradley was able to save him because the fellows cancel his market. I apologize because all members cancel his market. So now he's going back to the basics and he's building his market. But I said all of this to say that the view for proposal, albeit that it is a proposal to ex design an existing structure is far more imaginative than what is going to be constructed in library. The member knows nothing about the concept of a boardwalk and he can't. And I want to assure the government is in Lucia that the money that will be expended on that project and you thought will nowhere come close to the cost of the of the market in library. Nowhere, but that's the reality. Sometimes you have possibilities that far exceed the expectations of individuals. So, Mr. Speaker, this new facility will be able to facilitate multiple vendors by design. It will provide new restaurant dining and entertainment infrastructure. It will introduce new value added such as merchandising and social media connectivity all on the one thematic concept. It will be augmented with installed landscaping, stylized lighting and dining infrastructure for cafe, daytime and evening cuisine, along with repurposed entertainment areas and ancillary structures, including front of house and backstage all without altering the existing structure of the market. And as I said, there would be a boardwalk. Now, Mr. Speaker, as you can see, the overarching goal of this project is not only to reestablish the old view for market as a viable cultural and commercial space, but to use my words to reinvigorate, reinvigorate and identify that quarter of the town, hopefully to reorientate it to a back to town experience and that it can be seen as a potential tourism modifier. Now, Mr. Speaker, consider all what you are getting and I am advised. Remember, you have 10 minutes left. I am advised, Mr. Speaker, subject to your admonition that the total cost of this project is just 1.5 million dollars. Just 1.5 million dollars. Inexpensive, Mr. Speaker. It worries me, Mr. Speaker. 1.5 million dollars, 1.581 is the estimated cost. Now, let me enter a caveat. Mr. Speaker, this project is not an excuse for providing if you fought with an administrative complex. It is not an excuse. The administrative complex is designed, among other things, not only to provide government offices and space, but also to give you fortunes, the second town in this country, a theater that they have long been denied. So, it is a temporary facility to reinvigorate that part of the town of your fought, but it is not an excuse not to construct the administrative complex that the people of your fought have been asking for. I say no more, Mr. Speaker. I leave it there. Now, Mr. Speaker, I want to touch very briefly on two other sectors, because time is of essence. Mr. Speaker, connected to the view for the market, the fisheries complex, the plight of fish afoken before south, and I draw attention to head 41 at page 628. Mr. Speaker, an allocation of $850,000 has been made for quote, repairs to fishing facilities. I know that of this amount, some will be spent to undertake urgent repairs to a leaking storage container, which needs, I understand, to be properly housed. Additionally, a new perimeter fence will be installed and repairs will be undertaken to the boat landing strips on the slipway or ramps. Yeah, Mr. Speaker, this is welcome news. And, Mr. Speaker, I had to turn to my neighbor, my colleague to my left, the member for Denry North, for Denry South. And I had to whisper to him, am I going to get these facilities this year? He assured me that this year these projects will be done and make this declaration in this house. And I hope that the younger members of parliament understand what it means when a declaration is made in the parliament of Saint Lucia. I hope they understand. When he said yes to me, I turned around and whispered to him, comrade, similar announcements were made for the past two years. I believe we understand each other, so I say no more. And I believe that the minister of finance has heard me. I believe that other members have heard me. And I believe that the honorable member understands that there will be a judgment day when pronouncements will come. But the fissures of before south will be relieved. And I have to say, Mr. Speaker, that this is in addition to other initiatives which were announced yesterday by the member for Soufra in her capacity as the minister responsible for commerce. Mr. Speaker, I am also very pleased by the initiatives that are underway in respect of school infrastructure. I am yet to hear what will be done with the roof of the former junior secondary school next trimetrile. It's a matter that merits some discussion. But I welcome in particular the indication that there is a new block which will be constructed for the plain view school and that the repairs will be undertaken to the science block at the view for senior secondary. I welcome, welcome those initiatives. May I however say to the minister that as much as those initiatives are necessary and as much as they're welcome and plain view is one of our top performance schools that deserve it, I want to strongly urge that electrical consultants be engaged to undertake a consultancy about the electricity services at the view for senior secondary. I hate to say it, Mr. Speaker, but I fair a major accident. And I want to urge the minister to take the first step this year to find some money somewhere and let a major electrical firm carry out an assessment of the entire block because of- You have five minutes left, remember? Mr. Speaker, if I did not know you better, I would say to you that you are complicit. You want me to end prematurely. But I know better, Mr. Speaker, that your integrity will never allow you to say that, Mr. Speaker. And you too must defend the standing order. And in and out of the chair, I too must defend the standing order. But let me say, Mr. Speaker, let me say, Mr. Speaker, you know, no set of estimates, Mr. Speaker, can ever be perfect. None whatsoever. It is impossible. It is impossible. After all, why on earth would you describe it as estimates of revenue and expenditure? Why would you use that description, estimates of revenue and expenditure? In the mind of the ordinary citizen, this is gospel. This, this, everything here is gospel. But it's not gospel. It is an estimate. And to use the words of a very distinguished permanent secretary, estimates are no more than statements or expressions of intentions, unquote. Now, I bet you all don't know which permanent secretary said that. No, not at all. Who? No, no, no, no, no. It's not that imaginative. Guess again, which permanent secretary in the pantheon of permanent secretary in Indonesia would say that? The bill was too clinical for that. Why? No, right, lack of imagination. I apologize. You're a banker, you lack. Those words were uttered by none other than Mr. George Theophilus. When he was pressed as permanent secretary as to why certain commitments were made by the then John Compton government were not honored. And then he made this pronouncement that, you know, estimates are no more than statements or expressions of intentions. John Compton was furious. So John Compton, I might add, was furious and lambasted George Theophilus for making what was clearly was an obvious statement. Now, I see your hand, Mr. Speaker, pondering, wondering if I am correct. I cannot show you, I am correct. But the Sir John Compton, you know, would understand why, you would understand why he would be most annoyed at such a statement because he then goes to the issue of credibility, of honoring what you say in parliament, but then we deal with reality. It might be, Mr. Speaker, why these estimates are not perfect? They are sound. Mr. Speaker, they are focused. And let me add, Mr. Speaker, they are realistic. They are reasonable and they are well structured. I applaud the minister of finance. If there is any criticism, and this is me speaking, it is that the estimates are unduly conservative in this approach. But I concede that we may well need this approach for the times that we are in. I concede that. And in my time, I have been known for some unusual approaches to constructing estimates. And there is not a weakness that an estimated book of estimates bearing only intentions can, of course, adopt conservative postures. Mr. Speaker, as I close, I know that our country will face some headwinds. The minister of finance will face some headwinds. Mr. Speaker, some of these headwinds, clearly we have to lead for the policy debate. I know, for example, the likely fate of the CIP program is a headwind. I know to the continued shock of petroleum prices is another headwind. The high cost of energy in St. Lucia is another major headwind. And still another, and the one we don't want to talk about, the challenge of revenue generation to meet the rising cost of providing services to our people and to finance their needs. These are major headwinds that we will have to address in the months ahead. I plan, as I said, Mr. Speaker, to reserve my comments on these matters for the policy debate. Suffice it to say, Mr. Speaker, in closing, I merely look forward to an interesting and fascinating policy debate. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.