 I think it's a speaker that in time you follow this occasion of such an important motion to let my voice and support the affirmative resolution to remove, so to speak, or alter the value added tax on selected materials in the construction, aviation, and other goods. But Mr. Speaker, before I proceed, allow me just a minute to thank the residents of Tuapitor for coming out to construct a concrete rule measuring 350 feet long, 15 feet wide by 15 inches thick, almost pouring 100 cubic yards of concrete reinforced concrete last Sunday. Mr. Speaker, I think it is necessary to thank them because that rule of course government pretty close to over $350,000 to $400,000. But we purchased the material, final concrete from Renault. We purchased the fabric rest reinforcement. And the people came out from 5 o'clock in the morning until 3 o'clock in the afternoon with somebody cooking food. And the rule was completed in nine hours, with almost 25 persons working. Mr. Speaker, I want to, in that regard, to bigger chariots, small axe cable, cutlery, Sabina for cooking the food. Also Alvin Badaw, Cyborg John William Nicky Treven, Vincent Deva, Nana Leslie Lincoln. I also wish to thank Al Bertha for coming out to encourage. And of course, my friend, the poet and primers who is different people, they were all there. This was not an S&P or UWP initiative. It was the community of Tuapito that came out to work. One of the greatest robberies, Mr. Speaker, as it relates to social development, one of the greatest robberies of all time, it is the robbery of the spirit of Kudmej Zanushe. And it was replaced with the spirit of the reliance on orders to do every and every and anything. Kudmej has the power to do a lot much more. And this was regained in the community of Tuapito, lonely the community of Tuapito. The spirit of Kudmej. Mr. Speaker, as it relates to the substantive motion that is before us at this time, the removal of that unselected materials. Mr. Speaker, my brief contribution must be understood from a philosophical standpoint that we are a government that believes in the principle of equity and social justice. Mr. Speaker, I need to explain that if St. Lucia today was a king being shared, that this government would approach the sharing with the understanding that everyone, everyone, everyone, red, yellow, black, all white, receive a slice of that king. Well, Mr. Speaker, if St. Lucia today was a government that shared, that this government would approach the sharing with the understanding that everyone, everyone, everyone, everyone, everyone, would receive a slice of that king. But the sub-fact, Mr. Speaker, is that the following slavery and colonial mischief, which had no conscience, that this cake has been shared and a few have a large, large slice. In fact, they have more on everything. The larger number of people who believe that they have the biggest piece, but of course they're lost. But most of us and most of our people are struggling for the crumbs left on the table, and there are even some who are under the table trying to get their hands on top. Mr. Speaker, we are part of a world economic system that encourages consumption by poor people. We, the people, are always struggling. We also know, Mr. Speaker, that the fact that we are struggling, some people believe that we ought not to take time to celebrate. And this morning, Mr. Speaker, we all celebrated the presence of the Carnival Queen, our Calypsoians, and those persons who have participated in the activities that is led by the minister responsible for the creative industries. Mr. Speaker, while I support that we, as struggling people, must put our priorities right, I have no problem, and I support that people must take time to enjoy life. So I have no problem with those who are celebrating at this time, singing about their woes and problems in Calypso, or in the various socas of musical genre, or those who are parading on the street, celebrating in their own way what life has to offer. But, Mr. Speaker, I want to anchor my brief support for this initiative, in that the system, the economic system, encourages consumption. Mr. Speaker, no new system economic, a whole lot of people, the system that encourages people to spend their money. So Mr. Speaker, there are two areas of consumption that is very, very pronounced in the life of ordinary people. And I dare say that it's in mortgages, in securing our homes, and healthcare. In fact, Mr. Speaker, our country poverty survey shows that the most vulnerable area, the strongest index, or area that strikes poverty in, is in that in what our homes look like. In fact, after looking at so many indicators, I remember Mr. St. Catherine says, if you want to identify a poor person, is to look at their home. It's either in plywood, or plywood and concrete, and there is an absence of certain assets in the home. And then you could look at other areas, one of illness they cannot afford to take care of themselves. So mortgages is a serious area of consumption. Mr. Speaker, why am I saying this? And of course you would understand why, how I will get to the point that this government is doing something very historical and important. Mr. Speaker, 40% or the two lowest quintile of our population is involved in consuming, or they have a housing program that is the poorest on the island. It shows that they are struggling to provide shelter for themselves. And they cannot do it comfortably. And therefore there's something happening. What is happening to our people? What is happening to the population of vulnerable people? And that brings into focus the issue of transient poverty, how people get out and get back into poverty. Mr. Speaker, the issue of mortgages and healthcare. So Mr. Speaker, you go to the bank and you get a mortgage, 45 years. And just as you are about to finish your mortgage, illness visit your home. And now you must come up with monies that you do not have to address the issue of cancer, to address the issues of the prostates, to deal with the issues of some problems that you cannot afford. And you now need to get additional monies. After 75 years of your mortgage, the bank still comes and sees your home or puts you under pressure. Mr. Speaker, our population over the years have been struggling with this issue. So the issue of mortgages and healthcare are real issues confronting our population. And we have not been able to overcome this problem. Mr. Speaker, I have said it before and I'll say it again. If those persons who believe in the data from the World Bank or from the IMF look at the GDP of St. Lucia, you would have seen over 40 years. The trend is that the wealth of the country is growing. We are doing well GDP-wise. But also, we have not been doing well as it relates to our poverty level. It has been between 24% to 25% of our population over so many years. We have reduced our indigents, thank God, chronic poverty. But poverty has remained the same. So Mr. Speaker, you would observe that persons try to cope with the issue of poverty through illegal means. And when persons try to do that, what happens? All sorts of other problems is associated when you try to solve your problems through illegal means. The underground economy, death and destruction comes our way. So what is this government doing? We are not just looking at today. The attitude of our government, the attitude of this prime minister, the discussion, the long nights discussing issues as to what we should deal with has to do with where do we see ourselves going? Because we did not invent the system that is currently governing this world. A banking system with mortgages, a healthcare system that is dominated by pharmaceutical societies and of course a democratic process that involves partisan and of course the division of our people. So of course Mr. Speaker, that this prime minister has recognized the cost of providing shelter is so important to our people. So critical as to where we consume that in addition to the provision being made under the national housing program and of course I believe this is one of the most innovative and one of the most impactful interventions in the history of my consciousness of governance in solution where over 10 million dollars has been invested in providing support to households. Mr. Speaker, the system is so unfair even before I speak on this 10 million dollars. If you are poor and you go to the bank for a mortgage, they say to you you are more at risk so the poorer you are the higher the interest rates. The richer you are the lower the interest rate. So at 15% the bank will ask a poor person to perform mortgage but if you have been doing well and you belong to the middle and upper class in the first quintile you're likely to get 5%. In other words, you are almost punished for being poor. If the 10 million dollars that has been invested for social housing program by this prime minister were to be provided to poor people in mortgages, they would not be able to afford the interest rates. But more than that Mr. Speaker, our prime ministers decided moving forward that he would remove that on construction materials. Reduce, remove that Mr. Speaker, the profit margin, average profit margin on a construction project is about 12 to 15%. That on materials is approximately is 12.5%. The percentage of material to labor on a construction project is about 50%. So when the prime minister remove 12.5% of that on construction materials, he is thereby reducing the overall cost of construction, especially to poor people because the materials highlighted in the schedule are those consumed by the ordinary solutions. Mr. Speaker, some persons may look at this and say that's nothing and the opposition may look at it and may want to argue it in so many different ways. But Mr. Speaker, the actions here is not in the reduction in that but in tracing the prime minister's heart. Where is he going? This is what you have to look at. You need to trace the prime minister's heart in his action because if this prime minister can today reduce that, by that amount, while he is speaking about the levy for supporting health, the two areas trace where this government is going. Mr. Speaker, I think this evening it's important for us to understand where we are going. We are not the inventions of all of the systems, the banking system. There are some things we need to conform to as a civilization, but it takes love and wisdom to understand that we can make certain changes in certain areas and the changes that is being advocated here in this motion to remove that on selected materials is one that is backed up by serious discussion. In all of the discussion, apart from construction materials, Mr. Speaker, an area that was zero or brought to zero was also that of sanitary napkins. And some persons may laugh at that. What is this? The prime minister is removing that on sanitary napkins. Mr. Speaker, on a monthly basis, people with children, boys and girls have to give their children money to go to school. It is not equitable to give boys and girls the same amount of money. When you know for a month the daughter who is going to secondary school must go through a situation that the son is not going through. And this does not only happen in poor families, also it happens in poor families as well as wealthy families. And when your people come to you and speak to you and tell you the issues they are confronted with and you ask them, what can you do? Of course, there are some people when it is a period of time that they also challenge in providing themselves with some basic services. I welcome this. Of course, Mr. Speaker, I am about to provide, my wife has decided to assist me in providing packages for young ladies in the constituency of Cassie's office that will also include some of those products. And that will make it happen when you remove that from it. Very, very important. So Mr. Speaker, with healthcare being addressed, the prime minister providing millions of dollars to a social housing program where people are receiving housing products, housing materials. And at this time, removing that on selected construction materials. Mr. Speaker, you do not need to only look at these actions but to ask yourself where exactly and you of course can see where we are heading to. With universal healthcare and a strengthened social housing program, we would be contributing to the two most significant areas of consumption of poor people. The one that takes us back down any time we start to raise our heads. So Mr. Speaker, these two areas, I must add that they, they put a lot of thought into it. Please, laham, sit to your posts. Say, let your car put you in a car. Exit to let my lad come and sit back and say I will come to you. I must say that I will, I must pay the bank to come to me. The money we have in this country is nothing compared to the current situation. Except for that, to take accordingly with the same money we have spent to save money. Mr. Prime Minister, I will give you an example. But all government is not following our example. We are not going to go. We are not going to pay this money. The other area, finally, Mr. Speaker, I'd like to share on this, where this is concerned, that we are not using a proximate test to administer the support of these interventions. Because a proximate test means that the Ministry of Equity must decide who gets plywood. And they may get some right or they may get some wrong. This is universal. It means that everybody who is poor can access plywood at that price. But the opposition, and I've listened to the minister, former minister of finance, and I will forever disagree with him on this. That why don't you leave it as it is, or increase that on construction materials, get the money and target who needs. Mr. Speaker, every time I hear this, I've laughed within myself. Yes, that we should not, we said that we should not reduce that. We should target who needs it. We should not put, we should not subsidize flour because the rich people also buying flour. You understand? This is his perspective on these things, Mr. Speaker. The prime minister must know that just the cost to target who needs flour is so much more expensive than the amount you're making available. Just to target exactly who needs the plywood will be so more expensive you almost need to create a targeting department with a new PS, with officers, and by the time you establish that department and loan money is to do it, you'll discover that you are paying millions of dollars just to serve $300,000 worth of persons. The universal approach to social intervention is the one that guarantees that those who need it most will get it. And this government is on the right path because what we are seeing right now, the people who are transient to poverty, those who are going back into poverty, and not those at the lower quintile, COVID has taken poverty issues into the third quintile. So we have the 20% of our population, okay? The second 20% are there, but just below that 40% are persons by the time they retire from government and they get the pension allowance and they start to be visited by illnesses start to go down below the poverty line. This is the vulnerability that we face. So a lot of us, and when I say us, Mr. Speaker, I'm not saying us by way of just to include myself in the conversation, we are not a wealthy country and while some of us may be more endowed or our bank accounts look healthier than our neighbors, the vulnerability exists and it is only when the stroke and the illness or the bank moves on us only then they will call our prime minister and say, Prime Minister, I have served this country so well, can you please intervene? And then the prime minister needs to have mercy or gris and intervene, no. The prime minister is taking interventions and is moving this country in a direction that provides hope for a vulnerable population. That is notwithstanding the economic system that we subscribe to, notwithstanding what the banks are doing, and I hope one day Mr. Speaker that the banks start to deal with mortgages the same way courts dealing with the high-end purchase. Once you pay 75%, they cannot take it away from you. But until then, we have to understand that we must take steps within a government to make life easier for people, to allow those who are using their sweat equity, those persons who are using their effort to provide themselves with a home and shelter for their children, whether it is within 25 years of their lifetime so that they can get time to move into a better place, that that is allowed by the prime minister making this thing, making provision for it to happen. So of course, like I said, Mr. Speaker, ideally would have loved that this cake of sandwiches should be sliced at this time, but that has happened before. What we are doing is to arrange the policies of government that it is equitable for those who are vulnerable. It is equitable and fair for those persons who did not have the chance and opportunities that some of us have, and we all can enjoy a better future. So I hope the minister, the member from Schroeserl, when he does speak on this, provides support for an initiative like this, if he is invited to or if he does. But whoever speaks on it on the other side provides support for this initiative because there is a time in our development when all is the only one, the other one on Facebook, okay, that everybody comes together and support our dear prime minister. I wish to thank the prime minister coming from the Ministry of Equity, Social Justice and Empowerment and the Minister of Housing for providing the social housing program. And I hope with this initiative, of course, far more persons will be benefitting from this housing program and Senrushans look forward to this support and the approval of this motion for Senrushans. I thank you, Mr. Speaker.