 Mr. Speaker, let me start off by saying that I believe that this initiative is a commendable initiative and the government deserves being commended for this initiative by reducing this initiative. And I accept that the initiative has been very carefully thought out. I am willing these matters as well as the speaker that there are limitations and there are so many limitations, some of which have been addressed by members. I think I just heard a member for you, for North for example, pointing out the debilitating consequences and effects of COVID and other limitations of finance, resources and so on. But perhaps one of the greatest limitations has to do with the thinking of the agencies that we have to deal with. As in this case, for example, the Caribbean Development Bank offered that matter to the World Bank because they have very strange notions of social assistance, social support, social rehabilitation and it's never ever easy to have to cope with these agencies and their very bureaucratic approaches to dealing with real problems or the problems of ordinary people. They are in fact exceedingly jaundiced in their views and the burden that we have to carry is the burden of technocrats, the way they think, the way they reason, the way they deal with issues. And sometimes a very difficult responsibility is cast on governments to maneuver themselves through that maze to get the support that countries need, governments need and persons need. So it's a limitation and I don't think we should be shy to talk about from time to time. It's a limitation that we should address because it applies to all governments, whichever government that is in office or in power. Mr. Speaker, the Minister for Equity helpfully clarified the heads under which assistance will go to the people of the country and I think we have been told that some 8,000 persons overall will benefit. He explained, carefully explained cash transfers and what they would mean. I think he indicated, for example, some 766,000 US dollars will go to public assistance. I was particularly pleased that the member indicated that persons with disabilities would be targeted. That again is commendable and I believe he pointed out that grants are currently 200 dollars per month and that will increase to a payment of 400 dollars for 6 months. Now, again I spoke of the limitations of governments that have to work with and all throughout his presentation. The Honourable Member made the point that this is assistance for specific period of time, 6 months being touted constantly. So 6 months really is not much time to play with but then we have to be reminded of the share cost because this is going to cost overall nearly 14 million dollars in 6 months. So again, sometimes we can't have all cake and eat it but I was pleased by the increase in disability grants for different reasons. The first of course is that this was a grant that the former government introduced when I had the honour to serve the country as Prime Minister and I recall that at the last budget sitting of that government before general elections we had increased the allocation, the monthly allocation from 200 dollars a month I believe either to 275 or 250 because we are always acutely aware that 200 dollars for the parents of challenged children, disabled children really in this age is no money at all with inflation at the current rate. So, Mr Speaker, this is really a drop in a bucket but again we have to give some small nurses but I say this Mr Speaker to make the point to really deal with the thinking of the former UWP administration and we heard so much from the leader of the opposition because you know when you are reaching out to touch individuals like that, people with disability people are challenged, you give them a grant for tokenism to recognise that there is a problem, there is an issue but what did they do? One of the first things they did was to actually remove the increase that had been introduced by the former government and brought it back down to 200 dollars. And you sit there and you listen, you listen and I am not going to repeat what the member of the country central has said because I think his response was admirable in all the circumstances and I think he is quite right there so much that he did not touch dealing with the management of the economy in that period 2016 and 2021. The fundamental reality is that if you had an economy who suffered a debt to GDP reduction of 24, 26% and we need to confirm what the exact figure is because we keep on airing this 24, 26%. The fact of the matter is that no government should be taking credit when there is a rebound because any economy that has suffered such a severe loss of GDP because of a particular situation, once that situation is remedied that economy is bound to recover. I mean that's an iron law. I mean you look at Grenada for example when Grenada was damaged by that hurricane the fact of an incoming government is to, an incoming government's responsibility is to notice that recovery well aware it will come and this is what this current government has been doing to notice this recovery to continue to notice discovery. I believe that it is on a natural path of recovery but to do nothing that will cause any danger or any harm to allow that recovery to continue to take place and to grow and develop and this is what's happening. So when the members from Niko South attempt to claim credit for this rebound in the economy, I mean he's really clutching straws because that's absolutely nothing to do with the former government at all. If anything that we are in has been due to the recklessness of that government and as I said a member for Cassry Central spoke about it earlier on. Mr. Speaker, I saw a recent statement in World War Regional Newspapers regarding the deliberations of the executive board of the IMF on the St. Lucia economy and following the article for consultation of our economy and the executive board commented on the fact that St. Lucia has been severely affected by COVID. In fact, it let off that discussion on that basis and after speaking of the severe impact on COVID then proceeded to address other issues like the impact of the war in Ukraine. And it is interesting the choice of language severely impacted and I want to spend a few minutes to dwell on that. I guess Mr. Speaker, my point of departure and I want now to link up the comments I made about the Caribbean Development Bank is this, that when banks and institutions are seeking to develop programs to assist countries to recover from debilitating economic events, there is a responsibility to really look at real problems. What are the real problems of people that needs to be addressed? And that's my issue, that there is a reluctance to really look at these very real problems and see whether programs could be devised to deal with those problems. Our bureaucrats are all guilty because a lot of them basically they believe in the theology of the World Bank and the IMF so they are just as guilty because they have not really adjusted their economic thinking in that regard because they see things in very narrow prisms of dollars and cents. Mr. Speaker, I was hoping that I might have heard from the minister how we can reach out to some of our people who for example cannot pay their utility bills. I don't know what is the experience of honorable members but I can tell you Mr. Speaker, I have a monumental problem in my constituency. I am bombarded with requests to pay for water bills and to pay for what electricity bills. Why? Because Lucille has come back with a vengeance. You don't pay, they disconnect you. Wasco has followed suit with a vengeance. You don't pay, they disconnect you. The reality of this situation Mr. Speaker is that during COVID quite rightly these agencies decided not to disconnect persons to allow them to continue to use water and it was responsible of these agencies to do those things. We all knew that we were in this together. All of us had to suffer collectively and of course haven't even spoken about the banks because you know I have in the past spoken repeatedly about issues of banking and how it affects people's lives. In other words Mr. Speaker, loadable as this program is as the minister explained and as the minister of finance has explained but I still sense that the program is really not touching some of the fundamental issues that ordinary solutions have to face on a daily basis particularly with respect to those two entities, Lucille and of course Wasco. My question is this. We are talking of very poor people and I have seen some extraordinary bills. $4,000 for water, $3,000, $4,000 for electricity, and I accept Mr. Speaker that no government can ever take responsibility for going to pay people's water bills for them or pay electricity bills for them. I would not support that. I would not support that. And as much as I happened to have had the honor of leading a government that had a responsibility to the poor and leading a government that's sought to change the lives of persons and leading a government that reached to touch the lives of poor people by the institutions that they created whether it's for the poverty reduction fund that became the SSDF or whether it is the electrification program of the country, whatever it is, whether it was the elderly home care program that we are repeating today, whether it's all those things. That was the nerves of that government. So there's no question about that but at the same time, we do have to be very careful of embedding this dependency syndrome in the society where people feel that it is a government's responsibility to pay for everything, every living thing. I mean, I'm still astonished when I help people see them to want to argue that the government has not moved to touch their lives. The member of you fought north. The development examples, whether it is the laptop program or whether it is the program to pay CXC fees although I might have had a different approach in respect of CXC fees but that's besides the point of that matter, facilities fees. These are real programs that touch people in need. So there can be no question about the legacy, the thinking and the approach of the government. All that I'm saying is that there are some areas where I think that our people have very real problems that needs to be considered. Now, Mr Speaker, I have made the point that I don't think you can go and pay out people's electricity bills for them. All for that matter, go and pay their water bills. The government just doesn't have the ability and the capacity to do it. I don't remember if Miku South accepted or not the greatest disaster that occurred in this country is not just COVID, you know, but it is his management of the economy between 2016 and 2021. It is not an accident. No, no, no, it's not an accident. I said Lucia has suffered a debt, sorry, a GDP reduction of 24% or 26%. That's not an accident. It happened. It was exacerbated because of those policies. Antigua has a tourism-dependent economy. It didn't suffer to the same degree that St. Lucia did. Those policies have to create the situation that we are in and we have found themselves in. So, Mr Speaker, we need to be clear what we are dealing with and what has to be done for the future. But to return to this issue, Mr Speaker, as I have said before, I do not believe that any government should do a lot of money or just ask what is the bill that people know that's not paid or select what is the bill that's not paid and just do a lot of money. The government doesn't have the capacity to handle it. But on the other hand, I believe that the responsible ministers need to sit with these agencies and say, listen, we have to structure an approach to enable those people to meet their commitments to you. We have to file an approach and it's unfair that person have to be routinely disconnected on all fronts, whether it's electricity and water and they don't have the capacity because the reality is that the vast majority of these persons continue to be unemployed for reasons that we know. In other words, what I'm saying, Mr Speaker, is that we require interventions discussions with these agencies to say, listen, this is not the way you can. We're not going to wipe away those debts. We can't pay for those debts, but we need a more sustainable approach. Do you know what parliamentarians are left with, Mr Speaker? I either have to take the money I get as a back manager, sometimes, and help out. Or I have to end up calling Lucilleck and plead with the person at the end of the line who is responsible for unpaid accounts and seek to negotiate, and invariably negotiation requires you to pay down a certain sum of money before the person can be reconnected and in my experience, in the vast majority of cases, those persons fall again and lo and behold, they can't pay and they're disconnected one more time. This type in perpetuity. And they're back on your doorstep. So some more persuasion has to be applied, and I really want to urge that the responsible ministers engage those agencies in discussions to see what adjustments can be made. For example, if your $3,000 is unpaid electricity bill, why would you tell a person, do we have to pay down $600 or $800? And then you have to pay $300 a month. When you know the persons can't do it, what are they feeling? So, Mr Speaker, I call for these kinds of interventions as I call for such interventions, for example, with government agencies that are owed money, for example, by tenants, and they refuse to understand that they have to make adjustments to allow those persons to recover. The recovery from COVID is not going to occur overnight. It will take time, just as a government economy, just as a management of the economy will require a lot of dexterity, a lot of skill, a lot of patience. My Mr Speaker, I have stood in this house and also said that I will not be a hypocrite to what I have preached and what I have said before. I have said so. I believe I will hold on to my faith unless there are overwhelming reasons why I have to change my mind and if I have to change my mind, I will say so why I am changing my mind. That has been my position. That is why, Mr Speaker, I was very pleased by the comments made by the member for the North regarding COVID. But you know, Mr Speaker, in opposition, I have said and I will say again, we need an independent assessment of how we handled COVID. The question is whether, as a country, we took the right decisions, whether we handled COVID beyond criticism, whether we gave the best medical care that was available, whether the medical care we provided failed us and failed our people. To date, Mr Speaker, over 400 persons have died in the closure and when we look at those statistics and we reduce them to a per capita basis, it is a significant number of deaths. All of us have been touched by COVID. I lost relatives. So like a lot of other people I understood what the pain was. And it is still for me an issue that we are allowing those deaths to recede into memory, into history. Human beings have a strange way of dealing with issues of death. It really fascinates me how we handle and deal with issues of death. I mean, it is unbelievable sometimes that those persons who have lost their lives, the families who have suffered, we have just pretended they don't exist or they don't have any real pain of one kind or another. This country has never really said to those families, we feel for you, we know what you went through. As a country, we have never done it. And I remember pleading and saying, listen, we need to come together as a country just in memory of those. That was too much for us to do. We never did it. But I maintain my position, Mr. Speaker, that our handling of COVID, we need an assessment. You know why, Mr. Speaker? Because we must develop the will, we must develop the courage to change those things which we did wrong for the future to build a more resilient healthcare system. And people are searching for all kinds of praises about how they handle COVID, et cetera. But while they are searching for praises, they are also not saying what it is that they did wrong to unleash such pain and suffering on this country and the people of this country. I have great admiration for the doctors. I have great admiration for the nurses. But I know we also did a lot of things wrong. I know there were those who didn't have the courage to treat COVID patients. And all of that. We can't pretend that those things did not exist. And so, Mr. Speaker, my view has always been that as we address those issues of COVID and consistently with a view that we are severely impacted at some point, Mr. Speaker, that we do this review so that we can strengthen our health systems and to ensure that those issues are not repeated. I believe that a member of Euphold North also is absolutely correct to draw attention to the future of COVID and those who suffered with COVID and the complications that could arise. It is a huge issue, a monumental issue. And it's really the tip of the iceberg that you read all the reports, both from the region and elsewhere. And it means as sooner or later that we have to come to terms with the history of resources in the healthcare sector and how we resolve it. And I'm really very glad that the member is alive to those issues and that some discernible progress is being made on that universal healthcare UAC front. I think this is going to be vital, but at the same time, we've got to prepare for that wave and also to prepare for the future. So, Mr. Speaker, in summary then, this is welcome initiative. The government is to be, in my view, commended. I accept the imperfections in the instrument. I accept that the government finds itself in a difficult position because it's dealing with unimaginative bureaucrats and decision makers in the region and elsewhere. I already have, at this stage of my life, no need to make any apologies for anything that I say. I think about it very carefully and when I speak of those bureaucrats, they know exactly who I mean and what I mean. So, I mean, let's pretend that they don't know what I mean. They know the service and they're unrealistic in the expectations of people, unrealistic in respect of what the governments require, unrealistic of what the future holds and insensitive to the real needs of individuals. I mean, when you really look at this program, and the minister did a great job, you could see how carefully the program is hedged with all kinds of petty little requirements all over the place, and it's going to be interesting to see how it's going to be administered. I can't understand how a program like that, 14 million, you're spending 1.5 million in an administrator program like that? Well, you should be spending 1.5 million in an administrator program like that. What is it with a program like that that the Caribbean Development Bank is imposing on the government? 1.5 million? You know what 1.5 million can do for me? You thought you can give me the money to pay those electricity bills I'm talking about? What are you talking about? What are you spending 1.5 million? What do you think? And they're the greatest enemies of progress because you see, Mr. Speaker, what has happened is that they have become ossified in their thinking as technocrats. You know these regional technocrats don't understand the world of students, you know? They don't know, you know. They don't know what is facing these islands. They don't know what is facing the world. They don't even understand the political imperatives that apply. That's a tragedy, Mr. Speaker, and these are the issues that we have. But then, Mr. Speaker, that doesn't absorb us from looking at our own problems, and that's been the burden of my contribution to say, look, even if we want to be constrained by these people in terms of what we can do and how we can help them and how we can touch lives, we need to also be imaginative of how we deal with their own problems. And I end with the plea that I made. Both Lucillec and Wasco needs to be engaged to see how we can help out the poor in this country rather than putting them in despair because simply they can't enjoy the basic utilities and facilities which they ought to have. That is what I mean when we sometimes have to look at very real problems. They can't, these agencies cannot be allowed to do what they want with people's lives and politicians and are not supposed to speak to these issues. We are elected by people to speak about all of these issues. And I hope, Mr. Speaker, that we can do this quickly and that somehow some respite would be provided to those who have been denied those services. Thank you, Mr. Speaker.