1 Leave of Absence 2018.06.05

SENATE Tuesday, June 05, 2018 The Senate met at 10.00 a.m. PRAYERS

[MADAM PRESIDENT in the Chair] LEAVE OF ABSENCE Madam President: Hon. Senators, I have granted leave of absence to Sen. The Hon. Jennifer Baptiste-Primus who is out of the country. REVOCATION OF APPOINTMENT Madam President: Hon. Senators, I have received the following correspondence from Her Excellency The President Paula-Mae Weekes: “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO By Her Excellency PAULA-MAE WEEKES, President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. /s/ Paula-Mae Weekes President. TO: MR. GARVIN SIMONETTE WHEREAS by Instrument dated 28th May, 2018, I appointed you to act as a temporary Senator, with effect from 29th May, 2018 and continuing during the absence from Trinidad and Tobago of Senator Dr. Lester Henry. In exercise of the power vested in me by section 44 of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, and acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, I, PAULA-MAEWEEKES, President as aforesaid, do

UNREVISED 2 Revocation of Appointment (cont’d) 2018.06.05

hereby revoke, with immediate effect, your appointment to act as a temporary Senator. Given under my Hand and the Seal of the President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago at the Office of the President, St. Ann’s, this 4th day of June, 2018.” SENATORS’ APPOINTMENT “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO By Her Excellency PAULA-MAE WEEKES, President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. /s/ Paula-Mae Weekes President. TO: MS. ALISHA ROMANO WHEREAS Senator Jennifer Baptiste-Primus is incapable of performing her duties as a Senator by reason of absence from Trinidad and Tobago: NOW, THEREFORE, I, PAULA-MAE WEEKES, President as aforesaid, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, in exercise of the power vested in me by section 44(1)(a) and section 44(4)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, do hereby appoint you, ALISHA ROMANO, to be temporarily a member of the Senate with effect from 5th June, 2018 and continuing during the absence out of the country of Senator Jennifer Baptiste Primus.

UNREVISED 3 Senators’ Appointment (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Given under my Hand and the Seal of the President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago at the Office of the President, St. Ann’s, this 4th day of June, 2018.” “THE CONSTITUTION OF THE REPUBLIC OF TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO By Her Excellency PAULA-MAE WEEKES, President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago and Commander-in-Chief of the Armed Forces. /s/ Paula-Mae Weekes President. TO: MR. NDALE YOUNG WHEREAS Senator DR. LESTER HENRY is incapable of performing his duties as a Senator by reason of absence from Trinidad and Tobago: NOW, THEREFORE, I, PAULA-MAE WEEKES, President as aforesaid, acting in accordance with the advice of the Prime Minister, in exercise of the power vested in me by section 44(1)(a) and section 44(4)(a) of the Constitution of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago, do hereby appoint you, NDALE YOUNG, to be temporarily a member of the Senate, with effect from 5th June, 2018 and continuing during the absence out of the country of Senator Dr. Lester Henry. Given under my Hand and the Seal of the President of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago at the Office of the President, St. Ann’s, this 4th day of June, 2018.”

UNREVISED 4 2018.06.05

OATH OF ALLEGIANCE Senators Alisha Romano and Ndale Young took and subscribed the Oath of Allegiance as required by law. PAPER LAID One Hundred and Seventh Report of the Salaries Review Commission of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago in relation to the Office of Director, Maritime Services, Ministry of Works and Transport. [The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (Sen. The Hon. Clarence Rambharat)] JOINT SELECT COMMITTEE REPORT Anti-Terrorism (Amdt.) Bill, 2018 (Presentation) The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (Sen. The Hon. Clarence Rambharat): Madam President, I have the honour to present the following report as listed on the Supplemental Order Paper in my name: Report of the Joint Select Committee appointed to consider and report on the Anti-Terrorism (Amdt.) Bill, 2018. URGENT QUESTIONS UTT Campuses (Closure of)Sen. Taharqa Obika: Thank you, Madam President, to the Minister of Education. In light of reports of the University of Trinidad and Tobago’s pending closure of some of its campuses, can the Minister indicate which campuses are earmarked for closure? The Minister of Education (Hon. Anthony Garcia): Thank you very much, Madam President. Madam President, as far as I am aware and as far as the Government of Trinidad and Tobago is aware, no decision has been taken at this time to close down any of UTT’s campuses. What one might have read in the

UNREVISED 5 Urgent Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 newspaper is merely speculation. However, there are some campuses where some changes have been made, and I will be happy to share with you some of these changes that have been made but, let me reiterate, at this time no decision has been taken to close down any of UTT’s campuses. Thank you. [Desk thumping] Madam President: Next question, Sen. Mark. Sen. Ameen: Madam President, I have— Madam President: Sorry? Sen. Ameen: Sorry. I was trying to get a follow-up to the question. Madam President: Sure. Sen. Ameen. Sen. Ameen: Madam President, just to clarify, because in the past we had an issue like this. I appreciate the Minister’s response that no decision has been taken to close any campuses. Is any such thing under consideration at this time? Hon. A. Garcia: Madam President, there are considerations that are being examined now by UTT with respect to restructuring its operations, and when those discussions have been completed, in the fullness of time, we will be able to reveal to you what are the necessary changes that might be put in place. Thank you very much. Madam President: Sen. Ameen. Sen. Ramdeen, sorry. [Desk thumping] Sen. Ramdeen: Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, through you, having regard to the Minister’s response with respect to the changes that are proposed that were referred to by the Minister, could the Minister kindly inform the Senate how many employees will be affected in the different campuses to which these changes are directed or proposed? Madam President: No. Sen. Ramdeen, I will not allow that question. Next question, Sen. Mark. Port Authority Blacklisting by the US

UNREVISED 6 Urgent Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

(Measures Being Taken) Sen. Wade Mark: To the hon. Minister of Works and Transport. Given reports of the possible blacklisting of the Port Authority by the United States authorities for its failure to settle outstanding salary arrears owed to Port Police, can the Minister indicate what measures are being taken to avoid this situation? The Minister of Works and Transport (Sen. The Hon. Rohan Sinanan): Madam President, let me firstly say that I have no information that there is a possibility of blacklisting of the Port Authority by the United States authorities for its failure to settle outstanding salary arrears. However, Madam President, at this time, the management of the Port Authority is in communication with the Office of the Chief Personnel Officer to come to a negotiation position in which the Port Authority can engage the Estate Police Association. Those discussions are expected to commence this week. Thank you. Sen. Mark: Madam President, could the hon. Minister indicate to this Senate, what is the quantum of outstanding arrears of salary owed to the Estate Police of the Port Authority? We are not talking about any new negotiations, outstanding arrears. Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Thank you. Madam President, on the eve of the 2015 elections—and I am talking about, I think it is the day before the elections—the Port Authority Board and the estate police signed an agreement. However, it was not approved by the CPO, and the percentage increase was the maximum of 14 per cent. However, this was not approved in keeping with the process by the CPO, and that is what is being calculated right now and that is what is before the CPO. Until that part is not finalized, the quantum cannot be established of the outstanding. Unfortunately, the negotiations were fast-tracked the day before the elections, not in keeping with proper negotiation procedures. Thank you. [Desk thumping]

UNREVISED 7 Urgent Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Sen. Mark: Can the hon. Minister indicate whether the agreement has been properly signed by the parties involved—the union and the Port Authority management—and how many workers are affected? Madam President: No, two questions—those are two, so ask one, please. Whether it is properly signed? Sen. Mark: Could you indicate to this House whether the agreement has been properly signed off by the relevant parties involved in these negotiations? Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Thank you. Madam Chairman. Sorry, Madam President, both parties signed. However, it was subject to the approval of the CPO. So, as a layman, and based on the advice of the attorneys, unless the CPO does not agree, we do have legal questions about the agreement. Thank you. Madam President: Next question, Sen. Mark. [Desk thumping] Mount Hope Hospital (Facts Surrounding Alleged Suicide) Sen. Wade Mark: To the Hon. Minister of Health: Given conflicting reports alleging that a patient committed suicide at the Mount Hope Hospital last week Friday, can the Minister indicate what is being done to ascertain the facts? The Minister of Health (Hon. Terrence Deyalsingh): Thank you very much, Madam President. [Desk thumping] Madam President, before I get into my answer, it is incumbent upon me to offer deepest condolences to the family of this patient. It is somebody’s father, brother, uncle. However, I have a duty to the health system and the population to speak facts as far as non-disclosure of patient confidential information is concerned. I would therefore read a press release which was sent out yesterday, titled: NCRHA’s duty of patient confidentiality, June 04, 2018: The NCRHA wishes to express its concerns as it pertains to misinformation

UNREVISED 8 Urgent Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 surrounding the death of a patient at the Eric Williams Medical Sciences Complex on June 02, 2018. It is very concerning to the NCRHA that the statements that are being reported in the media as we continue to improve for the benefit of the public, it is imperative that we maintain patient confidentiality. In this regard, we wish to inform the public that the NCRHA takes seriously its duty as it relates to patient information. As such, we are unable to divulge all the information regarding this incident, even if by doing so we can clarify or correct misinformation about this incident. We are, however, at liberty, to state the following facts. At approximately 3.40 a.m. and in full view of witnesses, inclusive of patients and staff—and we have witness statements—the patient in question broke through a glass louvre window to land in the outer corridor of an in-patient ward after exhibiting violent and aggressive behaviour. The patient then threw himself over a bannister on the second floor before a nursing and security team could grab hold of him. The authority continues to operate under its duty— Madam President: Minister, I am sorry, but your time is up. Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: You can circulate the rest. Madam President, through you, could the hon. Minister indicate, in light of what appears to be conflicting information arising from this incident, has the North Central Regional Health Authority, through your Ministry, launched an official enquiry into those circumstances? Hon. T. Deyalsingh: Thank you very much, Madam President. The way to do this, and I was going to say, is for the patient’s family to agree in writing for the Ministry of Health to divulge the additional information of the patient. We cannot tell the public, even under the cover of parliamentary privilege, what this patient was suffering from. We ask that the patient’s family allow us to clear up the misinformation

UNREVISED 9 Urgent Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 based on the facts that we have it, which will tell the country what the patient was suffering from, what he was diagnosed with and what we were doing to treat this patient. In the absence of that, it will continue to be allegations, and we ask next of kin to give us that permission which will tell the country the true facts surrounding this case. Even as we condole with the family, we have a duty of care to the public health system to protect its integrity. Unless the patient’s family does that, we have to accept that body blow and that is an unfortunate thing. People can make allegations, but because of patient confidentiality issues—because there is a patient charter, which speaks to dignity and confidentiality—we cannot respond to those allegations even under the cover of parliamentary privilege. So I urge the next of kin of this patient to give us, in writing, permission to tell the country what this patient was suffering from and why he may have behaved in that particular manner. I thank you, Madam President. Sen. Ramdeen: Madam President, through you, under section 4 of the Constitution, under the right to life, a public institution has a duty, an implied duty— Madam President: You have to ask the question. Sen. Ramdeen: I am going to ask the question. I am just laying the foundation— to set up an independent enquiry by an independent person to enquire the facts. I would like to ask the Minister— Madam President: Sen. Ramdeen, ask the question. Sen. Ramdeen:—whether any independent enquiry has been—[Interruption] Well, I am getting the answer from the Attorney General. Madam President: Could you just ask the question? I will deal with whatever is happening. You are asking whether there is an independent enquiry—

UNREVISED 10 Urgent Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Sen. Ramdeen: Whether an independent enquiry has been set up to ascertain, through the institution, the facts, notwithstanding any permission from the next of kin? [Desk thumping] Madam President: No, Minister. The time for Urgent Questions has expired. That is why I encourage Members to be very direct with your questions. Okay? So the time has expired ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (Sen. The Hon. Clarence Rambharat): Madam President, there are seven questions on notice, the first four of those questions, Madam President, were previously deferred and the Government is prepared today to answer two of them, those are Nos. 131 and 133. There are three other questions on the Order Paper, Madam President, the Government is prepared to answer today Nos. 138 and 139 and we are respectfully asking for a deferral of question No. 137 to the Minister of Worksand Transport. Thank you. Madam President: For how long, Leader of Government Business? Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat: Madam President, for two weeks. Madam President: Question No. 137 is deferred for two weeks. Sen. Mark, question 131. WRITTEN ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS Security at the Airport (Details of) 156. Sen. Wade Mark asked the hon. Minister of Works and Transport: Having regard to security at the nation’s airports, can the Minister indicate the following:

UNREVISED 11 Written Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

i. whether any contract(s) has been recently awarded to any company/companies to conduct surveillance works at the airports; ii. if the answer to (i) is in the affirmative, what is the security experience/knowledge profile of the company/companies; and iii. what was the procurement process used to award the contract(s) to the company/companies? Christmas Event at Botanic Gardens (Details of) 159. Sen. Wade Mark asked the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries: Can the Minister provide the Senate with a breakdown of the total expenses incurred, per year, for the Christmas event(s) known as “Family Nights Under the Lights” and/or “Movie Night Under the Lights” held at the Botanic Gardens in the years 2015, 2016 and 2017? Vide end of sitting for written answers. ORAL ANSWERS TO QUESTIONS The following questions stood on the Order Paper in the name of Sen. Wade Mark: Tobago Businesses (Request for Financial Support) 121. What assistance is being provided to Tobago businesses, having regard to the state of the Tobago economy and their request for financial support of approximately $750 million? T&T Objection to Dominica’s Fee Waiver (Action Taken)

UNREVISED 12 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

132. In view of this country’s objection to Dominica’s request for an OAS fee waiver, can the hon. Prime Minister indicate what actions he intends to pursue against the persons deemed responsible for the embarrassment caused to this country? Arrival of Galleons Passage (Details of) 137. In view of the latest date change for the arrival of the Galleons Passage to Trinidad and Tobago, can the Minister advise on the following: i. a definite date by which this vessel will arrive in Port of Spain; and ii. the date by which this vessel will begin to operate on the inter-island sea bridge? Questions, by leave, deferred. Assessment Report on Tobago Passenger Ferries (Continuation of Operation on Sea Bridge) 131. Sen. Wade Mark asked the hon. Minister of Works and Transport: In view of reports that an assessment conducted by a UK-based company on the state of the two Tobago passenger ferries revealed multiple defects to the vessels, can the hon. Minister of Works and Transport indicate why, after having such a report for eight (8) months, the vessels were allowed to continue operating on the sea bridge? Madam President: Minister of Works and Transport you have five minutes. [Desk thumping] The Minister of Works and Transport (Sen. The Hon. Rohan Sinanan): Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, I am advised that assessments by a UK-based company of the two passenger ferries were commissioned by an insurance company in 2016 and 2017 for the sole purpose of establishing the

UNREVISED 13 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 insurance risk associated with the ferries in order to settle the terms and conditions of the contract for insurance for these vessels and the insurance premium. I am further advised that these reports have never been officially made available to the Port Authority or the Ministry of Works and Transport, and do not reveal multiple defects to the vessel. Most importantly, Madam President, it must be noted that the vessels are classified by the DNV classification society, which determines the seaworthiness of the vessels to continue in operation. In this context, both ferries have been valid class certifications up to the time of their withdrawal from service for the purpose of dry-docking. I thank you, Madam President. Sen. Mark: Madam President, in light of the fact that this report was conducted by an insurance company to determine for purposes of insurance, the continuation of coverage, can the Minister explain to this House how he became aware that the vessel in question did not suffer from multiple defects? [Desk thumping] Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Madam President, again, the vessels are inspected by DNV classification society. All indications are that the vessels would have been classified up to the time of dry-docking. I became aware of the article in the newspapers of which I asked for a full investigation. What was sent to me by the Port Authority is a letter from the insurance company indicating that they did the inspection, as I have said before. However, that was not made a part of the official documents of the Port Authority. Thank you. Sen. Mark: Madam President, could the hon. Minister indicate whether thePort Authority or his Ministry had any access to this particular report which was published in the newspapers by this UK-based firm? Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Thank you. Madam President, after reading the article in the newspapers, I called for a report. It was indicated by the insurance

UNREVISED 14 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 company that unofficially they gave two managers of the port copies of the report which were never tendered to the board nor the Ministry. It did not become part of the files at the Port Authority. However, those two managers are no longer employed at the Port Authority. Thank you. Sen. Mark: Madam President, would the Minister be prepared to make a copy of the report which was submitted to him by the management of the Port Authority, based on his request on the newspaper report concerning defects surrounding this vessel? Would you be prepared to lay that report? Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Madam President, I am quite prepared to lay the response I got from the port, together with the letter from the insurance company where they would have submitted those two reports, unofficially, to two senior managers and were not made part of the archives of the Port Authority. And, as I said, those two managers are no longer employed with the Port Authority. Sen. Mark: Madam President, can the Minister give this House a time frame or a timeline for the tabling of the report along with the documentation that you have outlined? Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Madam President, what I am willing to submit is the report that I got from the port. As I said before, that report is not a document prepared for the Port Authority and it does not form part of the official document. I will give an undertaking to provide the report as per the request from the Port Authority as for the information based in the newspaper article. Sen. Mark: When? Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Madam President, I could get that ready for the next sitting of the Senate. Madam President: Next Question. Sen. Mark? Sen. Mark: Have I exhausted mine?

UNREVISED 15 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Madam President: Yes, you have. Sen. Mark: Oh I see. Sorry. [Interruption] Time? We are here for a long time. [Laughter] No, no, no. I am being guided by the President, not Paula Gopee- Scoon or Sen. The hon.—the Minister I should say. Madam President, may I address you, properly speaking? Madam President: That would be nice. Sen. Mark: Yes, focusing. You see how I have turned, Madam President. Madam President: Yes. Sen. Mark, next question, please. Sen. Mark: Yes, Madam President, question 1—no, I have to go on. Madam President, which question I have? Madam President: 133. Sen. Mark: 133. Thank you Madam President. T&T Spirit Unserviceable State (Intended Action) 133. Sen. Wade Mark asked the hon. Minister of Works and Transport: In view of recent reports by a UK-based company that the T&T Spirit had been operating to an almost unserviceable state, can the hon. Minister of Works and Transport indicate what action, if any, will be taken against the persons responsible for the maintenance of said vessel? The Minister of Works and Transport (Sen. The Hon. Rohan Sinanan): Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, we could have taken all these questions into one. Madam President, I am advised that the report being referred to did not indicate that the T&T Spirit had been operating in an almost unserviceable state. Madam President, this question is not anchored in facts, and it is very unfortunate that the process of Parliament is being used to create public mischief.

UNREVISED 16 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

I am advised that the report in question was a confidential commercial document produced for the insurance of the vessels. Moreover, having regard to the fact that the report was not formally submitted to the Commissioners of the Port Authority or to the line Ministry, legal advice must be sought to determine whether any action can be taken against anyone. Further, Madam President, on the advice of the Port Authority and the Maritime Service Division, the T&T Spirit was sent to dry-dock for a comprehensive overhaul and has since returned to provide good service to the sea bridge. The Port Authority, in keeping with its maintenance policy continues regularly and preventative maintenance of the vessel as part of the standard operating procedures. In addition, the Ministry of Works and Transport is putting the necessary arrangement in place to ensure that the issues relating to the maintenance of the vessel in Trinidad and Tobago are ratified on the long-term basis. I thank you. Sen. Mark: Madam President, I would like to ask the hon. Minister a direct question. Are you accusing the relevant newspaper that published this report of being engaged in public mischief and, therefore, action by the Government is pending against this particular newspaper? 10.30 a.m. Madam President: Minister. Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Thank you. Madam President, let me just read back something here. Madam President, this question—unfortunately, that the proceedings of Parliament, I am accusing certain parliamentarians, not the newspaper. Because the article said the deficiencies that the insurance company saw to prepare their insurance premium. They did not say that the vessel should be taken out of service. The DNV classification is what allows the vessel, and once

UNREVISED 17 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

DNV is not satisfied on safety of the vessels, the vessels would be immediately asked to be withdrawn. That did not happen. Sen. Mark: Madam President, with your leave, I call on the Minister to either identify the parliamentarians [Desk thumping] that have engaged in mischief, or you withdraw—the hon. Minister that is—immediately, unconditionally, unreservedly withdraw, [Desk thumping] because you are casting aspersions on every parliamentarian in this House. Either you identify the parliamentarians involved or you withdraw that statement. Madam President, I ask you because that is imputing improper motive to every Member of this Senate on this side and the other place. [Desk thumping] Please, get the Minister to identify the parliamentarians or withdraw that statement. I ask for your intervention in this matter. He is imputing improper motives to us, Madam President. Madam President: Minister. Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Madam President, I have answered several questions in this House and the other House about the Port Authority and the questions continue to be coming in such a way to get something out from the Minister that does not exist. However, if the Minister and the Senator feel that—[Interruption] Hon. Senator: Senator. Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Sen. Mark feels— Sen. Mark: I will be a Minister shortly. [Desk thumping] Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Maybe in a different country. However, if the Senator feels that I have offended him, or any other Senator, I withdraw. Thank you. Madam President: Right. Good. Next question, Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: Yeah, because— Madam President: Sen. Mark, just direct the question to the relevant Minister,

UNREVISED 18 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 please; the next question. Sen. Mark: Madam President, I am now trying to exhale before I can speak, because I could not catch myself. I am catching myself, so please allow me. Madam President, I am to 138, Ma’am? Madam President: Yes, you are. Sen. Mark: Thank you very much. Health Risk Posed to Debe Residents (Action Taken) 138. Sen. Wade Mark asked the hon. Minister of Rural Development and Local Government: Can the Minister indicate what action is being taken to address the health risk being posed to residents of Debe, as a result of clogged drains in that Community? Madam President: Minister of Rural Development and Local Government, you have five minutes. [Desk thumping] Minister of Rural Development and Local Government (Sen. The Hon. Kazim Hosein): Thank you very much, Madam President, and thank you hon. Senator for your question. The Penal/Debe Regional Corporation has advised that it has embarked on a three-pronged strategy to mitigate the health risk being posed by clogged drains in the region. Routine cleaning and clearing of clogged drains under its remit: Since the beginning of 2018, the corporation has intensified its commitment to cleaning and de-silting drains which will affect flooding and associated health hazards by augmenting the manpower and programmes under its public health department. As a result, the corporation has cleaned and de-silted more than 1,000 metres of drain in the Debe district to date. Monitoring of drains’ condition in the region, and

UNREVISED 19 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 enforcement of the appropriate legislation and by-laws carried out by municipal corporation: A legislative and by-law enforcement initiative has been embarked upon targeting flood-prone areas where wanton breaches occur with respect to the provisions of the Municipal Corporations Act, Chap. 25:04, and the Public Health Ordinance, Chap. 39:07, and the Litter Act, Chap, 30:52. The litter wardens have been playing a major role in this area by issuing tickets to individuals who have infringed the Litter Act, Chap. 30:52, as amended. As such, during the period 2017 to April 2018 the following notices and orders have been issued to individuals in breach of the Act: . Twenty-nine fixed penalty notices were issued to persons for illegal dumping at the Ghandi Village site, M2 Ring Road, La Romain, where illegal dumping frequently occurs. . Forty-nine clean-up orders. . Forty litter removal orders have been issued. . Nineteen litter removal orders were issued for derelict vehicles. Education and public sensitization campaign: The corporation is in the process of implementing an educational and public programme regarding drainage, flooding and development planning control issues within its region. The programme is intended to educate the residents, institutions and stakeholders within the region on the laws, by-laws and regulations pertaining to building properties, filling of land, littering and dumping, and how these actions compound the issue of flooding in this region. In addition, each municipal corporation’s regional coordinating committees are established to ensure efficiency in the management of operations and coordinating of delivery of services. As such, the committee ensures there is coordination and collaboration among the relevant agencies responsible for the

UNREVISED 20 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05 execution, expansion work and maintenance in the respect of drainage and infrastructure. Thank you, Madam President. Madam President: Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: Madam President, could the hon. Minister indicate to this House whether the particular drains in question that are identified in the Penal area, have they been addressed in terms of being unclogged, particularly in light of the pending rainy season? Madam President: Minister. Sen. The Hon. K. Hosein: Thank you, Madam President. I have a list of all the drains that were cleaned, and these drains have been cleaned every three to four months according to the programme of works. I have the exact amount of money spent every month and the manpower used for these drains. I do not know if I should call the names of the— Sen. Mark: You could circulate it for us. Sen. The Hon. K. Hosein: Okay. I have them here and I will circulate them. Thank you very much. Madam President: Next question, Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: I am getting back at you, Mr. Minister. Sen. Sinanan: That is all right. Sen. Mark: I will be at you all the time— Sen. Sinanan: That is okay. Sen. Mark:—until I move you. Madam President: Sen. Mark, please. Sen. Mark: Sorry, Madam President. Madam President: Yeah, I know. I know— Sen. Mark: That is between both of us, you know; that is my friend, you know.

UNREVISED 21 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Madam President: Yes, but if it is between both of you, then take it outside, [Desk thumping] but I am not—[Interruption]—I do not— Sen. Hosein: We have a Vice-President. Madam President: Sen. Mark, please. Sen. Mark: I understand you, Ma’am. I understand you. I will take it outside. [Laughter] Hon. Senator: On the pavement. Sen. Mark: On the pavement. Thank you, Madam President. And my friend is all exhilarated, I do not know what his exhilaration is about. Madam President, may I ask this question now, through you? Madam President: It is question 139, Sen. Mark. In all your exuberation and exhilaration you are losing focus. Question 139 to the Minister of Works and Transport. There, I have done it for you.[Desk thumping] Sen. Mark: Thank you. Thank you very much, Madam President. Boarding Cabo Star (Safety Measures) 139. Sen. Wade Mark asked the hon. Minister of Works and Transport: Can the Minister indicate what measures are in place to ensure the safety of drivers and cargo whilst waiting to board the Cabo Star leaving Trinidad for Tobago? The Minister of Works and Transport (Sen. The Hon. Rohan Sinanan): Sen. Mark is my friend, and in 2013 when he was supposed to be the President of the Republic I was going to the swearing-in, you know. [Crosstalk and laughter] When he bought the suit to be sworn in, just before they changed their mind, I was going to be there. [Desk thumping] Madam President, I will get back to the question. [Crosstalk]

UNREVISED 22 Oral Answers to Questions (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Madam President, the safety of the drivers and the cargo is of paramount importance. In light of these measures for vehicles waiting to board the Cabo Star leaving Trinidad for Tobago the following is in place. The truckers using the MV Cabo Star, which is located at berth three, are required to access the vessel along Dock Road. The loading of the vessels may at times result in a queue. At this area there are security officers stationed at Dock Road within the Cruise Ship Complex and at the ramp at berth number three. There are also two security officers on the vessel during each sailing. Cargo operations, bulk cargo, pallets and flatbeds are placed on the vessel. In addition to the security in the operation space at the Cruise Ship Complex, there are security personnel on the ramp where the cargo is being offloaded from trucks and vans. I thank you, and I await your supplemental. Madam President: Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: Hon. Minister, you would have known about the recent incident involving a trucker whilst they were awaiting to board the Cabo Star, could you share with this honourable House what additional measures have been introduced in order to tighten security whilst these truckers are awaiting boarding of their vehicles on the Cabo Star? Madam President: Minister. Sen. The Hon. R. Sinanan: Sure. Thank you. Madam President, the incident referred to by Sen. Mark is an incident that happened along Wrightson Road where the national police is responding to activities, and consultations have been taken with national police whenever there is a queue extending all the way to Wrightson Road that additional security is mobilized for the truckers. Thank you. JOINT SELECT COMMITTEES (APPOINTMENT OF)

UNREVISED 23 Joint Select Committees (cont’d) 2018.06.05 (Appointment Of) (cont’d)

TRINIDAD AND TOBAGO REVENUE AUTHORITY BILL, 2018 The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (Sen. The Hon. Clarence Rambharat): Madam President, having regard to the correspondence from the Deputy Speaker of the House in relation to the establishment of a Joint Select Committee to consider and report by July 31, 2018, on the Trinidad and Tobago Revenue Authority Bill, 2018, I beg to move that the Senate concur with the House of Representatives in the establishment of the Committee and that the following six Senators be appointed to serve: Mr. Franklin Khan Ms. Allyson West Mr. Robert Le Hunte Mr. Wade Mark Mr. Taurel Shrikissoon Ms. Jennifer Raffoul Thank you. Question put and agreed to. INCOME TAX (AMDT.) BILL, 2018 MUTUAL ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANCE IN TAX MATTERS BILL, 2018 AND TAX INFORMATION EXCHANGE AGREEMENTS BILL, 2018 The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (Sen. The Hon. Clarence Rambharat): Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, having regard to the correspondence from the Deputy Speaker of the House in relation to the establishment of a Joint Select Committee to consider and report by June 30, 2018, on the Income Tax (Amdt.) Bill, 2018, the Mutual Administrative Assistance in

UNREVISED 24 Joint Select Committees (cont’d) 2018.06.05 (Appointment Of) (cont’d)

Tax Matters Bill, 2018, and the Tax Information Exchange Agreements Bill, 2018, I beg to move that the Senate concur with the House of Representatives in the establishment of the Committee and that the following six Senators be appointed to serve: Mr. Clarence Rambharat Mr. Lester Henry Mr. Daniel Dookie Mr. Saddam Hosein Mr. Stephen Creese Mr. Paul Richards Thank you. Question put and agreed to. REGISTRATION OF TITLES TO LAND (AMDT.) (NO.2) BILL, 2017 The Attorney General (The Hon. Faris Al-Rawi): Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, before I begin, is it that the Senate has agreed to do all of these four related Bills together? Sen. Mark: No. No. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Sen. Mark, Sir? Sen. Mark: No. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: No. Okay. Thank you. Madam President, I beg to move: That a Bill entitled an Act to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000, be now read a second time. Madam President, I took the caution to ask that question a short while ago because before us on the Order Paper, without breaching the rules of anticipation, are four intimately intertwined Bills which, sensibly, should be managed together. And, in

UNREVISED 25 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) fact, in the history of this particular amendment, this particular Bill, when the land package, as it was referred to, was laid in 1999 by then Attorney General Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, all of the legislative measures were taken together, because there is a fluidity in it. So, such is the desire of the Senate, and apparently the dictates of the Opposition, we will proceed. Madam President, the Government is very pleased to carry forward much- needed amendment to the land laws of Trinidad and Tobago. Let me put it in very simple terms; land, as everyone knows, is a definite resource, particularly when one occupies an island state of two beautiful islands, as we do between Trinidad and Tobago. It is a resource which identifies history, wealth, continuity. It is the very land which we stand on and the land under our seas which provide us the manner in which we live, be it exploitation of oil and gas or fishing, or agriculture. The fact is that for generations, each of us as we came here, learnt to pride land. Regrettably, however, the management of our land resource has been something which has been stuck in a time warp. Land as a resource has now fallen into a very significant issue and that is corruption. Land is one of the definite resources which relates to some of the other problems which we face in this country which is crime and criminality, because if the system of registration of land is not a proper and transparent system, if it is open to abuse and influence— improper influence—you can find land, and the mechanism for registration of land being used to hide the proceeds of crime. That is a very significant issue for our country right now. Trinidad and Tobago is wrestling, and has been wrestling for quite some time with the issue of criminality, and in pursuit of the Government’s agenda to deal with corruption as it feeds the monster that is crime, this package of laws and this Bill that we seek to

UNREVISED 26 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) have support for is directly associated with that. So for the listening public, let me put on record that our system is definitely an archaic system. Effectively Trinidad and Tobago manages its land resource under two pieces of primary legislation. The first one is the Registration of Deeds Act, Chap 19:06, which is Act No. 18 of 1884; that is now 174 years old. The second principal piece of law that we treat with our land resources on is the Real Property Ordinance, Chap 12:01, as it was before it became the Real Property Act, Chap 56:02, and that law was brought to Trinidad and Tobago in 1892, and it now stands 126 years old. We inherited in the 19th Century the English law. Attached on to the two laws that I have mentioned, of course, is the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act which was brought into effect in 1845; it is now 173 years old. And we also of course have the person who manages the entity which manages land in the structure of the Registrar General, which is Act No. 1903, which is an Act No. 49 of 1921. Effectively in the 19th Century system of law land, as it came to our country, brought through the English feudal system was that, and still is, all land, which is not allodial land, or land which is free of the State, all other land belongs to Norman the conqueror as he conquered the English dominance and domains and 1066. And a feudal system of land management was invested and inherited and managed and passed on such that the kings of England owned all of the lands seized, animals, beasts, whales, et cetera, and they in fact gave title by way of tenancy in chief, and then title in tenancy in common. Tenancies in chief were given to landlords and tenancies in common were given to folks of lesser status in society. Simplifying that position came about what is understood now as fee simple land, and fee simple land is land which can be inherited and which comes from the

UNREVISED 27 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) king, and this now stands as the closest evidence of what is absolute ownership in the laws of Trinidad and Tobago. This system differs completely from the model which prevails in the European system or civil law countries where there is a concept of absolute ownership. So we have in the system of fee simple land two structures which flow from that. You can have freehold title, meaning that you pass on land without covenants in a strict form where you do not have to have a landlord or a reversion resting somewhere else, and we have leasehold land. And into these two types of arrangements, freehold and leasehold, we flow the two systems of registration, firstly under the Registration of Deeds Act; secondly, under the Real Property Act. The Registration of Deeds Act, however, as it came first in time, is risky. Under the Registration of Deeds Act all that one has to do is to satisfy the conditions of registration. It must be something done on 8½ x 14” bond paper. It must meet certain formalities. But what is described in that deed as it is registered is not a certification of the thing itself. So if you do a deed between party A and party B in respect of land, it treats with the transaction between those two parties but it does not constitute any form of guarantee as to the substance of the transaction. And under the Registration of Deeds Act a system of title searching has developed in the conveyancing practise where attorneys-at-law work with a specific formula, which is called moving from a root of title, they take a transaction between A and B; A wishes to sell, they historically go back into the transactional records of Trinidad and Tobago until they find something called a root of title. A root of title is ranked in order of priority as to what is a best root and what is a lease root, and then you move forward from that root, checking the

UNREVISED 28 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) transaction for that particular piece of land between party A, party B, party C, party D, if somebody died, if the probate was done properly, et cetera. And that is how the Registration of Deeds formula treats with the thing which is passing between Mr. A and Mr. B when they are transferring land. In 1892 when we came forward with the Real Property Ordinance, Trinidad and Tobago borrowed from the Australian model which was referred to as the Torrens system, named after Sir Robert Torrens. And in 1892 a system of voluntary registration came about which said lands are going to be registered under a new system. This new system will involve something called a Certificate of Title, which is a grant from the State that says, this is the certificate to the piece of land that you own. Every transaction which related to that Certificate of Title was endorsed on the back of the Certificate of Title in something referred to as memorials. So if there was a transfer it was a memorial of transfer, if there was a mortgage there was a memorial of mortgage, and you would refer to where in the books and records you could find the mortgage or the conveyance or the inheritance. And one certificate of title is kept at the registry, and another certification of title, referred to as the duplicate certificate of title, is kept with the person that owns the land, whether equitably or legally, meaning a bank who has a mortgage may have the certificate of title lodged there. So this system, the Robert Torrens system came to Trinidad and Tobago in 1892 and it was also introduced into Jamaica. Because the system was a voluntary system of registration we found out statistically that Trinidad and Tobago in fact saw, if you took all of its land mass, only about 15 per cent of the land mass was locked into the voluntary Real Property Act system. Because it was really only

UNREVISED 29 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) people that had a title that was difficult under the Registration of Deeds formula that came to the State and said, I want to fix my title, I want to quiet my title by bringing the lands under the provisions of the Real Property Act by an application through court, and then the State would give you a Certificate of Title, and that Certificate of Title would clean up the entire transactional history and you would therefore have a good title. There is no such thing as bad title to land. There may be defects in title and you can fix it through various mechanisms. This being the system we ended up with two concurrent system: 15 per cent of land mass under the Real Property Ordinance system, and the rest of it, 85 per cent of our land mass under the registration of deed system. Trinidad and Tobago recognized some time ago that this was an inadequate system, and in recognizing that, in fact, the land reformation process began as far back at 1977. In 1977 reform started and it was in recognition that the United Kingdom system of registration, which we were working on, the 19th Century system, was in fact radically transformed in 1925 in the United Kingdom. In 1977 we went about work, we looked to formulae, and in 1981, under the hand of Professor Wiley, a very interesting package of seven pieces of law were brought into effect in Trinidad and Tobago. They are the: State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act, the Land Law and Conveyance Act, the Landlord and Tenant Act, the Condominium Act, the Limitation Act, the Trustee Act and the Succession Act. This 1981 Professor Wiley package was something which was always on the edge. In fact, while I was at law school we had to buy the little blue book by Wiley because the laws were soon coming, soon coming, but never came. In fact, the laws, while standing on the books of Trinidad and Tobago, have never been proclaimed, and they were not proclaimed because there was then the

UNREVISED 30 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) indication that Trinidad and Tobago was not in fact ready. It was going to constitute too radical a transformation of the laws of Trinidad and Tobago to have these laws put into effect, because the mapping of land, the management of land, the certification of title was going to be too difficult, and the Law Association, in particular, resisted the implementation of the land package. In the period 1996 to 2005 there was the agricultural sector reform programme, and it was in that particular period that we saw the birth of this particular law as it now stands. In fact, in 1998, God rest his soul, Mr. Justice Gayapersad, who has just passed away, and who really gave a great deal of his life to Trinidad and Tobago, he sat as the chairman of the Law Reform Commission. And under the stewardship of Attorney General Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj, he and the Law Reform Commission were tasked with a package of laws, and that package of laws, which this Bill seeks to amend now, involved the promulgation and creation of the Registration of Titles to Land Act, which we now seek to amend, as well as the Land Adjudication Act, the Land Tribunal Act, and the State Suits Limitations Act which we will come to treat with in other debates in the Senate. These laws were also not proclaimed, and they were not proclaimed largely again because of the state of readiness of the legal profession, the bankers, the willingness to buy into the situation, and, very importantly, because the regulations were not dealt with at the time of the dealing of the legislation. 11.00 a.m. Enter now the 2003 committee established to review the package. That committee went to work under a PNM Administration to review the particular package, to finalize amendments, and those amendments were in fact completed on the review completion on April 04, 2005.

UNREVISED 31 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

In the year prior, in 2004 to 2005, there was a lot of consultation on it, but very importantly, in the year 2008 an implementation strategy for this land was earmarked and launched. The Government went to work to ensure the creation of the regulations, and very importantly, for the adoption of the manner in which we would demarcate land, survey land, register land, and an excellent project under the IDB, the Inter-American Development Bank, was set into motion. And that project involved the request for grant of US $100 million for Trinidad and Tobago, and US $7 million for Tobago to treat with the registration and implementation of these laws. In the last 10 years—10 years—this system of development with the IDB continued. The loan has been perfected; it stands ready. The Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries—and I am sure the hon. Minister will speak to this—went into the GIS mapping and the cadastral mapping of the land of Trinidad and Tobago. I think it safe to say that Trinidad and Tobago is now in the position where it can implement the benefit of the law by the utilization of technology, in particular the geographic information system and the cadastral information management system. But this runs alongside a state of readiness, which I have had the pleasure as Attorney General to push at high level and full gear, which is the manner in which the Land Registry of Trinidad and Tobago is improving itself, and is moving to an entirely electronic platform. [Desk thumping] And I will come to that in great detail a little bit later, but it is important for hon. Members to feel comfortable that not only does the system make sense in law, but it can be operationalized, because we have taken care as a government in treating with the law to make sure that we operationalize the laws at the same time.

UNREVISED 32 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

So, Madam President, we come to this Registration of Titles to Land Act, and it was important to demonstrate the historical journey to getting here, as we now stand many years later, 173 years later from our original systems. We now stand 18 years later from the actual law’s passage, and it reminds me of the echoes of our recent debate on the DNA legislation, when we come to the point about when is the line to be drawn. The Government proposes the amendments to this particular law as a long- term solution, because we have a very important short-term and medium-term solution which will join this Parliament’s agenda very shortly. We recognize that implementing the system, rolling out the process will take a moving mechanism across Trinidad and Tobago over several years, until all title is brought under the Registration of Title to Land Act. That will take a few years. In the meanwhile, we recognize that there is a neat fit to treating with the system of abuse of our land, the system of corruption and fraud that has infiltrated the process, by certain short-term remedies which we will be bringing to Parliament hopefully within the next couple of weeks. It has already had consultation. So this is long term, and whilst the grass is growing, we have another pasture to feed the horse, and that is the short-term and medium-term agenda, as we seek to bring amendments to the Registration of Deeds Act, the Conveyancing and Law and Property Act, the Real Property Act itself. We seek amendments in a separate package which will come next. So let us look now to this particular journey in the Tenth Parliament, and now as we stand in the Eleventh Parliament. I know my colleagues opposite are very interested in this, and in fact it was under the hand of the then Minister of

UNREVISED 33 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Legal Affairs, the hon. Member for St. Augustine as he is now, Prakash Ramadhar, that we saw the introduction in 2011 and 2012 of a Bill, which is similar in terms to this one. Both of those Bills regrettably lapsed. One lapsed on 17th of June, 2011, and the second Bill, which was in similar terms to the first, lapsed on 10th of July, 2013. This particular Registration of Titles to Land parent Act is sought to be amended today by 23 clauses. The 23 clauses before us treat with some minor issues and some major issues. In treating with the minor issues, I will go through those, and in treating with the major issues I will explain those, because there are a few of them that are quite novel and that require some deeper explanation. So, Madam President, as we proceed into the Bill, I ask hon. Members to read the amendments proposed in this Bill in light of the formula of the parent Act. The first clause of course is just a simple one. Forgive me, permit me to put on record, the objectives of this Bill are to treat with the quieting of title, meaning where there are disputes in relation to land ownership, boundaries, et cetera, this Bill is intended to quiet title and put certainty for the benefit of Trinidad and Tobago. Permit me to put on the record that Tobago is the area that the Government intends to start this law in, because Tobago is the area that has the greatest title being unquiet. Their title system is in a mess, quite simply, and for years it has not been dealt with. After hurricane Flora passed through Tobago in the 1960s, almost every person living in Tobago says that their titles were lost, because people stored their titles in a church, in a trusted area. And Tobago, coming from a plantation- type environment and then the “lottification” and positioning, going down through families, et cetera, as the estates began to dwindle and the land allocation went out,

UNREVISED 34 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Tobago finds itself in a very interesting scenario, where people have lived on the land for generations and cannot go to the bank to mortgage it. They cannot go to the bank because they do not have title to the land, and the method by which they can secure their title is easiest done under the Real Property Act. They would have to apply to the court to bring the lands under the provisions of the Real Property Act. They would have to go to court, file affidavits, do title searches, have the Commissioner of State Lands come, speak to the land titling of Trinidad and Tobago, deal with that process, have a judge determine the evidence, have witnesses speak to how long you have been on the land, how you developed, show a degree of connection to the land, which is exclusive to connection that somebody else may have, because there may be a competing prior title. You have to treat with the state lands limitation periods, whether it is 30 years for state lands or 16 years for private lands. After you go through that process in court, one thing is for certain you would have spent a lot of money and spent a lot of judicial time. The Real Property Act itself finds itself an inappropriate remedy to this situation, because it just cost too much and takes too long. The people of Tobago have been crying out for this particular point, and in particular the THA, and this particular Bill before us is intended to bring to life the laws which have sat on the books of Trinidad and Tobago for 18 years. Start with Tobago, register land in Tobago and then allow Tobago to be bankable, allow Tobago to have land inherited, allow Tobago to settle its title and quiet its title. [Desk thumping] And that is a very important campaign promise that we made, and it is a commitment which is very deep in the hearts of all of us I am sure, as hon. Senators stand.

UNREVISED 35 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

So back to the Bill. In the 23 clauses, as we look to clause 1 of the Bill–it is really quite simple. It is intended, the Bill as a whole, to treat with the objectives, to clarify and secure land tenure, to identify state land, to establish a modern land adjudication and registration system, to have all land in Trinidad and Tobago registered under one system, to establish a new register which will record and guarantee title and allow for simple and secure dealings, to establish a Land Tribunal, as we will come to in another Bill. So those are the effective main policy objectives. The Bill itself, clause 1 and 2 are the standard positions. Clause 1 is the titling, clause 2 is the interpretation of certain sections. When we get to clause 3, we are looking to the amendment to section 2 of the Parent Act. Sorry, clause 3 amends section 3 of the Act. In section 3 of the Act we are introducing into here the phenomenon of a land adjudication officer, we are tying it to the interpretation provisions which appear in the Land Adjudication Act, which we will debate at another time in this Senate. We are removing the reference to a Certificate of Title, and we are instead calling it a Land Certificate. Why? Because Certificate of Title is the terminology used under the Real Property Act, and it could cause confusion, because clause 22 of the Bill specifically in introducing a new section 85 of the Act as we propose, really abolishes as we bring lands under this Registration of Titles to Land Act, we are abandoning on a piecemeal basis the Real Property Ordinance which would have prevailed previously. We treat with the definition of a condominium. I ask you to note that we still have the Condominium Act 1981. We are working on amendments to the Condominium Act. Members will recall that we treated with the Valuation of Land Act, and we dealt with the Property Tax Act, and we also identified the

UNREVISED 36 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) feature of a condominium as an important landmark on Trinidad and Tobago’s property management structures, and therefore we have treated with the condominium by way of specific definition. We have treated with the removal of the definition of court. In the Act it says “court” is Court of Appeal, we are now removing it to say that the court is not defined as the Court of Appeal, to allow for the magistracy, the High Court and the Court of Appeal to be preserved by way of access. We are treating with an encumbrance being a propriety right held by one person over land, because we have defined land in a very specific way. Again, it allows for parity between the Valuation of Land Act, the Property Tax Act, the Registration of Titles to Land Act, as this one is, and we have left it as land because property, of course, is a wider concept. Property may be intangible, it may be tangible, it may involve intellectual aspects as opposed to real aspects. We treat with maintaining the concept, but clarifying as to how this Bill, how this Act is going to really be giving indefeasible title. Real Property Ordinance, Real Property Act, RPO as we call it, gave you a certificate of title and that was almost viewed to be bulletproof, indefeasible. Of course, you are not indefeasible in the light of fraud or certain types of misrepresentation, or certain types of gross errors which can vitiate the concept of indefeasibility. But this Act allows for a closer version, as you would see in section 34 and section 35 of the parent Act. You will see the management of an indefeasible title, and we give the certain exceptions. I stick a pin here. The manner in which trusts are treated in Trinidad and Tobago is the subject of proposed significant amendment by this Government. The breach of the principle of trusts, the priority of the equity lying

UNREVISED 37 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) over the law is something which has allowed for an abuse in this country, and hon. Members will see legislation to be introduced into the Parliament very shortly to treat with that. So whilst this Bill gives recognition to indefeasible title, as it is contained in the Act, we propose to recognize that there is a caveat for trusts, but we are going to treat with that in a separate round of amendments. So, I am just bearing in mind that this indefeasibility of title and the abuse of trusts is going to be treated with in a separate fashion. Sen. Ramdeen: Madam President, I want to thank the AG for giving way. AG, while you are going through, you do not have too much time, I do not want to take too much time in asking this question. What you are aimed at by this legislation is getting to one system of registration of title. And we have two systems now, registered and unregistered under the different systems. As part of your contribution, would you just simply spend a few minutes on just saying—you said it is going to be done piecemeal, we will end up at the point where we would have a total registration at one point in time. Would you just explain in a few minutes of your time, if you can, how you propose that the Government treat with it in a piecemeal basis to bring the two systems to coalesce together in one system at the end? Thank you. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Thank you, that is a very important observation, Sen. Ramdeen. I welcome you back. We missed you for the several weeks that you were out. It is good to have you back. So, the long-term system is this registration of titles Act. In this long-term system we intend for all land in Trinidad and Tobago, through the land adjudication process, through the land tribunal process, to eventually be registered under this Act. But bearing in mind that this is going to take some time to get

UNREVISED 38 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) there, as we survey land, as we bring people forward to make their representations as to titling, et cetera, in the meanwhile we propose to utilize the Real Property Act and the Registration of Deeds Act and the Conveyancing of Law and Property Act, as they exist, and then begin to transition then into this. But importantly, recognizing that there are weaknesses in those laws, Registration of Deeds Act, Conveyancing and Law and Property Act, and the Real Property Act, we will be coming to Parliament in a matter of weeks to treat with amendments to those laws to manage the mischiefs which we have spotted in those laws, whilst we channel and funnel into this new registration of titles system. Madam President, again, may I ask what time I am due to officially end, the full time? Madam President: You finish at 29 minutes past eleven. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Thank you, Madam President. We are treating with the introduction of a definition for provisional title. Provisional title is critical to a very large section of Trinidad and Tobago. Some people call them “informal settlers”. Some people call them “squatters”. Provisional title is something that is to the heart of people who have lived on lands that they do not own in law, and may have done so in circumstances where they can be the beneficiary of the land if the system is made simpler and cheaper. Under the Real Property Act squatters have to find money to make the application to come under. Under this system of registration it is the State taking the obligation on a rolling measure to get to the land and do the survey, do the demarcation, do the registration through a process. This affects 250,000 squatters in this country, and that is no small number. This is something which people who are living in less than adequate conditions are surely dying to have addressed,

UNREVISED 39 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) because there can be no greater dignity to someone than the privilege of owning land or knowing the certainty of land, after all state services are accessed by way of land ownership at times, or possession which is dealt with. So this provisional titling is a critical feature. We have adding in the Senior Assistant Registrar because we have taken note of the fact that these positions of Assistant Registrar, Senior Assistant Registrar, are current features of the operation of the Registry, and exist under the registration of deeds system, et cetera, and to allow for that transition we are making sure that the Registration of Titles to Land Act matches up with the existing system at the Registrar General’s office. Madam President, we are next moving to clause 4 of the Bill. Clause 4, clause 5, clause 6, clause 7, clause 8 are all interrelated, and they seek to amend respectively section 5, section 6, section 7, section 9 and section 10 of the parent Act, and that is the introduction of Senior Assistance Registrar throughout these provisions to take care of the existing structure. Sometimes people ask, well why are you legislating structures? And I will tell you why. It is because the CPO’s office, the public administration in the Ministry of Public Administration and the PMCD, they often have a difficulty in finding terms and conditions which match up to salaries, because they are not defined in law. And that is why we have taken the approach in the judicial structures and in these structures to legislate positions so that we avoid the back and forth between salaries, terms and conditions and job descriptions, which will otherwise cause you have nobody working in the position. So we are legislating it here. We then move to Part III of the parent Act, where we treat with clause 9 of

UNREVISED 40 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) the Bill. Clause 9 seeks some degree of similarity between clause 13 of the Bill. In clause 9 of the Bill we are introducing a fourth element into the folios. Let me explain what section 13 of the Act does. Section 13 of the Act is really a core provision. It describes what is referred to as the “folio system”. A folio is that indefeasible originating document which gives you your title. And there were three folios existing in the Act: folio for every parcel of land adjudicated under the Adjudication Act; a lease folio, because remember there is freehold and leasehold land. You may own land by having a lease for 99 years or 199 years, or the whole of Woodbrook for 25 years or 30 years. That is the second type. Then you have an interest folio. An interest folio takes care of documents like mortgages, like other transactions, et cetera, but we did not have a condominium folio. In the high-rise or lateral multi-home development, it was necessary to introduce a condominium folio, so that we could aggregate that, because remember the Government’s intention is to come back with the Condominium Act 1981, do surgery to that Act to make it relevant. Because many condominiums exist where the management companies do not operate, where the owners cannot be found who own the freehold reversion. People cannot transact their business by having title, because their shares are in disarray. They find themselves with hundreds of thousands of liability in dollars for annual returns at the Companies Registry, which was not done. So the condominium structure is another type of landlessness, when they have been left to management that does not work. And therefore, another screaming element, apart from Tobago, apart from squatters, is the condominium structure in Trinidad and Tobago, and we just have to fix that, and it has been too long in the making; 1981 is when that law came about.

UNREVISED 41 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Madam President, the next position that we seek to amend is section 14 of the Act. In clause 10 we treat with an amendment there, and what we are doing here is making sure that we have the adjudication record and folio made clear so that there is no ambiguity. But very importantly, by the introduction of a new subclause (2) we are describing when the first registration happens, and we have clarified it to say: “The first registration of any parcel shall be effected by the preparation of a folio in accordance with section 13 and the signing by the Registrar of the particulars of the ownership and the particulars of encumbrances, if any, appearing thereon.” So we are making sure that there are anti-fraud mechanisms, so that it is not just any registration which went in, it must be registration and documentation of the particulars under the hand of the officiant who is the Registrar General who perfects that process. So the verification process is applied before registration is effected. Madam President, we next go section 19 of the Act which clause 11 seeks to amend. In that we have removed the words “folio or” in subsection (2), because we wanted to make sure that there was no confusion between the folio and interest folio. There was a duplication in language there, and we had to just tidy that up, and that is what that amendment is about. Clause 12 of the Bill treats with section 24 of the Act; again this is the change in naming. We are no longer using Certificate of Title, we are going to Land Certificate to avoid the confusion with the Real Property Act. We then of course move to section 29 of the Act, and this is an important one. Clause 13 of the Bill proposes to amend section 29 of the Act. Section 29 of

UNREVISED 42 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) the Act treats with: An instrument or document evidencing a dealing has legal effect and passes an estate or interest in land when a memorial is endorsed on the folio. Again, this an anti-fraud mechanism to ensure that there is supervision so that functionaries under the Registrar General cannot get it wrong. Clause 14 treats with a very important aspect, and that is to treat with an amendment to section 30 of the Act. Section 30 of the Act as it was originally drafted was inadequate. It only allowed the Registrar General to effect rectification or amendments if they were major defects. The language said: Where any instrument that has been lodged and registered in accordance with the provisions of the Act is subsequently found to contain material defects. —and then certain things went on. We have broadened the categories in a new section 30(1) to allow for the Registrar General to act in relation to any instrument presented for registration in the following cases: (a) “in formal matters and in the case of errors or omissions not materially affecting the interests of any proprietor.” It is similar to what we call in court “the slip rule”: (b) “in any case at any time with the consent of all persons interested…” So there is a voluntary transaction between the relative parties, where in the third case: (c) where upon resurvey, an area is shown to be incorrect and in such case the Registrar shall first give notice to all persons appearing. Again, to allow for self-generating solutions. And then importantly, upon the

UNREVISED 43 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) receipt of any order of the Court. So that the Registrar can perfect the order of the court without the delay of transactions in between. We then go to clause 15 of the Bill, and this is an extremely important clause. Clause 15 of the Bill treats with an amendment to section 34 of the Act. Now, section 34 treats with the conclusiveness of the Register. It said: “Subject to subsection (2), the title of every proprietor of land subject to this Act is, except in the case of fraud, absolute and indefeasible and accordingly shall not be impeached or affected in any way by the existence in other person of any estate or interest, whether derived by grant from the State or otherwise...” Subsection (2) said: “The proprietor of any estate…in land subject to this Act holds the same subject to...” —and then it traverses items (a) through to (o) inclusive. But section 35 was not made specifically subject to section 34(2). So section 34 of the Act said— Madam President: Attorney General, you have five more minutes. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: So section 34 of the Act said your title is indefeasible. Section 35 of the Act said that it was not subject to section 34(2). As we transition to the perfect title, it was important to make sure that we made it subject to section 34(2), because as we move to clean title and quiet title, you had to make sure that the items which were caveated out still form part. So there is still an obligation to search title so that you carry out due diligence through an attorney-at-law. Let me jump to a very important clause, Madam President—that is the search parameters. The searching of title is proposed to be amended here in a new

UNREVISED 44 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) section by clause 20 to an amendment to section 73 of the Act. We propose in this system that there is a difference between an official search for somebody who is about to buy property or mortgage property, and the public search. When you have an official search the transaction results in a standstill. You can still receive documents affecting the title, but they are not registered while the search is going on, with the consent of the parties to the transaction, i.e., the owner of the land and the bank or the person who is buying. We say in that official search parameter only an attorney-at-law or his clerk can have the official search. But we make sure to say members of the public can use the electronic system. They can order certified copies, et cetera. So we put the public aside to keep the transparency, but in the official search it is to make sure that we do not have a practical situation of fraud crawling into these transactions, where documents can find themselves part of the title in fraudulent ways. In putting this parameter to attorneys-at-law I should say we will be introducing very shortly a unified pin number for attorneys-at-law. Transactions are going to be linked, such that your birth certificate pin number, your marriage certificate pin number, your change of name, your practising bar code, all of those are dealt with in one transactions, so we know who the players are. Whilst we also introduce amendments to the real estate profession, which has been unregulated to date and which is coming upon us shortly. The suspension period once lifted after the 14 days suspension is done, all things received in the buffer zone, going in the order of priority that they came in, by time, by date, et cetera, and the title continues. So we are not disaggregating. We are not removing the public in any way, we are protecting the transaction from abuse of fraud and errors and omissions that can happen there.

UNREVISED 45 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

The last clause to reflect upon really is clause 22, where we put the transitional provisions as to how we propose to move the system from the registration of deeds and Real Property Act system into the registration of title system. Madam President, in the merger of the portfolio of the Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs I want to say that I think I am the first Attorney General with significant conveyancing and mortgaging and transactional and corporate experience. For me, the land registry has been the golden pot. It is the golden pot to evidence where fraud is, where wealth is, where corruption is, where benefit can be, where families have their entire lives at stake, and that pot is the pot which will feed the anti-corruption package. [Desk thumping] It has been a very significant point of focus for me. It is an integral part of the system. We have many operational procedures which I have not been able, because of the constraints of time, to address. My learned colleagues will assist me in that. I will address certainly in the course of the wrap-up, the very important operational aspects, be they electronic, be they the land registry, the other systems to come, but I dare say it has been enough time. Madam Speaker, 173 years of system needs to evolve; 18 years of analysis paralysis needs to end. This position is giving people the benefit to their lands, of allowing squatters the privilege to access things which they are entitled to access, or quiet their title. Tobagonians to be satisfied, general interest of mortgagers and the wealth management in this country, it now takes a quantum leap today by perfecting the process. I beg to move. Question proposed. 11.30 am.

UNREVISED 46 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Madam President: Sen. Mark. [Desk thumping] Sen. Wade Mark: Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, how I intend to approach the intervention on our Bench, as I begin, would be to look at the absence of public consultation and people’s participation. I also want to look at the importance of the registration of titles to land and their benefits to national development, economic growth and social equity. I also would like to look at the whole issue of the linkage, which I found very strangely absent from the Attorney General’s intervention. There is a linkage, and I hope my colleague from the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries would see the linkage between land administration and management and the global agenda for 2030 and the attainment of the 17 sustainable goals, particularly there are five of them that are land or land related. I think that is a very important aspect of our discussion when we deal with land administration and management. I also want to look at the modular versus the integrated approach; that is another area. Then, Madam President, what would also be critical in examining this whole question of land governance and land administration has to do with what I would like to describe as the challenges that we face in doing business, the registering of properties as example, how long it takes and why it takes so long. Madam President, I think it is important to look at secrecy. I do not support the view by expressed by the Attorney General in terms of an amendment to section 73 leaving out ordinary people to access the Registrar General’s office; I believe in sunshine rather than darkness. And then, Madam President, one of the areas that I consider to be critical is for us to look at modernizing land administration using modern technology. Madam President, to come and tell this country and this Parliament that you are

UNREVISED 47 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) going to plug fraud and corruption, right, by going down the old road that we have here, is not going to achieve it. I would want to bring to the attention of my hon. colleague who is aware that in many countries including India and Denmark and New Zealand they use drones; in other words, modern technology, mapping, surveying, you know, in a very serious way. And then I also want to indicate that we have a couple of amendments that we would want to advance to strengthen the legislative framework. Madam President, you would appreciate that if we are to advance in this particular area of land administration, it is so important that we seek to appreciate under the Registration of Titles to Land (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill which is linked to the parent legislation, we need to fully appreciate that one of the central pillars of any modern system of land law is the registration of title to land. And land registration describes systems by which matters concerning ownership, possession or other rights in land can be recorded to provide evidence of title to facilitate transactions. Madam President, there are, to me, a number of significant benefits that we can derive from the approach that we are seeking to advance in this piece of amendment based on the parent legislation. When you—as my colleague Sen. Ramdeen said, what the Government is seeking to do is to deal with two areas of registration of titles and bring, at the end of the process, one particular outcome. So instead of going with the common law and deed registration, what the Government and what the law is attempting to do, is to go to what is called, formally, Certificates of Title that has now been deleted, and we are going now to Land Certificates. So, that is now the objective of the exercise that we have embarked upon here through these amendments. So the title register constitutes the evidence of title and replaces proof of

UNREVISED 48 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) ownership by historic deeds and documents and, therefore, if your land is registered, future dealings relating to it are quicker and more efficient because you have eliminated the requirement that is sometime often substantial, bundles of preregistration deeds and documents to be considered. So that is one of the advantages that you can see immediately, Madam President, with a united or unified approach to land certification rather than land registration from the perspective of the deeds. Then we go on now, Madam President, to a conclusive—once you talk about registration of titles, it is a conclusive registration process, and it tells you about the ownership of the land, and it provides a state-backed guarantee to titles of land. The Attorney General raised something about absolute title and provisional titles; we will talk about that a little later on. But, Madam President, what this does, it provides greater protection against a claim for what is called adverse possession of land by unauthorized occupier and this is due to the differing requirements for a successful claim in relation to registered land as compared to unregistered land. And when we deal with the registration of titles and you get what is called a Land Certificate, it provides a clearer picture of the legal state of the land by setting out the rights and covenants which benefit or burden the title in question. Madam President, I want to let you know that when we deal with the matter of registration and security of tenure, because at the end of day what we are seeking to do, from our perspective—and that was the vision and the philosophy of the framers of the legislation in 2000—was to move towards a home-owning democracy where every citizen regardless of his race, creed, religion or station will be entitled to a piece of property, a house that he can call home, that is what the

UNREVISED 49 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) objective was. And, Madam President, when did I some research on this matter, I was shocked to learn that the only country in the world where you have 90 per cent home ownership is a country called Mauritius, 90 per cent almost, of home ownership exists in a country called Mauritius, and the average in the world is 74 per cent, but in Mauritius it is 90 per cent. Madam President, the registration of title to land will enable security of tenure for all and effective management of land use and natural resources which in turn will facilitate economic growth of a nation, social equity and justice and environmental sustainability. These are all critical ingredients is we are talking about revolutionizing land administration and land management. Madam President, sound land governance is essential to achieving the 2030 global agenda manifested in that very important summit which took place at the United Nations in 2015. Land governance is about policies, according to the United Nations, processes and institutions by which land, property and natural resources are managed. Land administration, and that is what we are about today, it is about the registration of titles to land and that involves land administration, land management. It includes land tenure; it includes land use; it includes land value; and of course, land development. Madam President, there are, from my research, some six goals that are related directly to this land management and administration package that we are going to be dealing with over the next couple of days—six SDG goals. Goal number one is ending poverty in all its forms everywhere, and there is a target, target number four which deals with providing all men and women with equal rights to ownership and control over land and other forms of property; so they give

UNREVISED 50 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) a goal and there is a target in order to satisfy that goal. Madam President, goal number two talks about ending hunger, and that is related to target number five which deals with a land component. Then there is goal number five that deals with gender equity. Then there is goal number 11 that deals with sustainable cities, goal number 15, dealing with life on land, and goal number 16, which deals with peace, justice, and very strong institutions. So, Madam President, for these goals to be achieved, we need good land administration, we need good land governance and management, on a country-wide basis. So, we need to appreciate that what we are dealing with is not just simply addressing land administration from the perspective of ensuring that titles are given or land certificates are issued, it is much more than that. It is about economic growth, it is about economic development, it is about sustainable development within the environment, it is about social equity and justice for all. So, we have to see the broader picture when we are debating and discussing this matter of land management in our country. Madam President, I would like to suggest, and based on the research, again, there are some 18 institutions, according to the IDB that are involved in land management and land administration in Trinidad and Tobago, and if we are to deal with this question properly, you have to have, as I said, not a modular approach, but a more integrated approach to land management. And so, Madam President, as I said, if you go to the literature you will see, for instance, the state of play in Trinidad and Tobago. The Attorney General did indicate to us— Hon. Al Rawi: Madam President, I am sorry to interrupt my learned friend on a long day, 46(1), please.

UNREVISED 51 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Madam President: Sen. Mark, I am giving you a lot of leeway, you will continue. I may have to make an intervention at some time, because I really need you also to move into the general issues about the Bill itself. Okay? Sen. W. Mark: But, Madam President, I am sorry that the Attorney General, my contribution is above his head. Sen. Gopee-Scoon: No. No. No. Sen. W. Mark: Well above him, I am sorry. But I thought— Hon. Al Rawi: 46(4), because, Madam President— Sen. W. Mark: Well, I withdraw. I am sorry that the Attorney General is not fully appreciating the linkages that I am making towards this subject matter and the importance of development and growth in our nation. [Desk thumping] I thought that was simple logic. I was trying, Madam President to establish— Madam President: All right. Sen. Mark, the Attorney General invoked a Standing Order, I have allowed you to continue, so move on, please. Okay?—and do not engage the Attorney General on what he did before. Okay? Sen. W. Mark: So, Madam President, if the Attorney General, well through you, would want to suggest just stick to the Bill and not deal with the matter in a holistic way, I want to draw to your attention some of the realities that the IDB outlined in its report called A Methodical Framework for Comparative Land Governance Research in Latin America and the Caribbean. And on page 22, we are talking about land registration, and Madam President, if you are going to engage in a more efficient registration of land so that people can gain title and have proper ownership, it helps in economic development of any nation, it promotes competitivity. Madam President, according to the World Bank in 2014, it took 77 days and

UNREVISED 52 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) it cost 7 per cent of the value of the property to have a commercial land transaction registered in Trinidad and Tobago. Now, this is a nightmare, and we are trying to ease up the way that we do business in Trinidad and Tobago. As we speak today we are talking about land titles, the Attorney General said that only 15 per cent of the population of this country is in possession of genuine titles to land, meaning their Certificates of Title, before we change it after this amendment to Land Certificate, only 15 per cent, so there are about 85 per cent of the population. What the Attorney General did not tell us is that out of that 85 per cent, Madam President, only 35 per cent may be in possession of proper registration deeds, so there are almost 50 per cent of the population in this country, according to the IDB, that may not be in possession of title—either a registration deed or some document relevant to ownership of their property, and that is why this effort is being made. Madam President, we are told by the IDB that one-sixth of the population, which is about over 235,000 people or thereabouts, live in an informal way in this country—what you call “squatting” in this land, and we have to find ways and means of issuing these people with some degree of settlement in terms of comfort. We know that in 1998 there was an Act called an Act to regularize persons in Trinidad and Tobago who were squatting and there were processes involved in issuing those certificates to these people and to bring about some degree of comfort. Madam President, you will recall it was first a Letter of Comfort, then we went on to a Statutory Lease, then we went on to what is called a deed. So, you have close to about 230,000 people in Trinidad and Tobago who are not being given what I call proper title. Madam President, so when you talk about tenure of security, 50 per cent of

UNREVISED 53 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) private and family land is formally recorded, the next 50 per cent is not properly recorded. What I found to be quite interesting is that in terms of women, only 14 per cent, according to the IDB, were land owners in the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago. That was a very interesting statistic. Madam President: Sen. Mark, I am listening very attentively to what you are saying. I want to remind Members about Standing Order 65 which deals with the remit of this second reading which is what we are involved with now. Sen. Mark, I need you to try and deal a little more with the Bill at hand and not a general issue about land in question. Okay? Sen. W. Mark: Madam President, seeing that you would like me to deal with those matters let me comply. The Attorney General raised a matter of provisional title to land. And I wanted to ask the Attorney General when we talk about provisional title, I looked at the legislation, both the parent and the amendment, and there was the whole concept of what is called provisional title, but when it came to the definition of provisional title, it was in the definition section, and it sent me now to what is called the Land Adjudication Act. Hon. Al-Rawi: 49(1), Madam President. Sen. W. Mark: Madam President, I am referring to this Act that—provisional title, which is before us, means a title to land declared to be provisional under section 16 of the Land Adjudication Act; that is what I am dealing with there. [Interruption] No. No. I am saying that this is what is before us, and I am making reference to it. You, when I say you— Madam President: Senator. Sen. W. Mark:—the Attorney General made reference to Land Tribunal it was before us.

UNREVISED 54 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Madam President: Sen. Mark, you noticed that I have allowed you, you can have a seat, Sen. Mark. You can deal with how you are dealing with it, but Attorney General is merely pointing out, not to go too much into that amendment Bill. Sen. W. Mark: So, Madam President, we will come to the land adjudication matter as you said when we are dealing properly with it, but when we deal with provisional title, what I was trying to get is the meaning. And what I got from the definition that is before us is that, when you talk about provisional title, you are talking about somebody in possession of land, a possession. You could be in possession of the land, and once you get in possession of the land, you can, within a period of time with the appropriate steps being taken, become ultimate owner of the land. And there is where, Madam President, I thought that that is an area that we need to have some clarification on. And I am sorry that the hon. Minister is not here, the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries, because we saw recently in the newspaper where even within the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries where you had land fraud being perpetuated, and the Minister had to take action to deal with land fraud. And he wrote the Prime Minister to get action. Madam President: Sen. Mark, no, do not refer to, just—you dealt with a situation, just move on in your contribution, please. Sen. W. Mark: No, but I am saying if I am dealing with land and one of the questions with land administration, Madam President, you must always remember that we are dealing also with the parent Act, this is the basis of this amendment. So in the parent Act it talks about, for instance, fraud in the parent Act, and I am just drawing to your attention, in the parent Act when we talk about fraud, we have a situation where, I would have liked to have clarification on lands that are being

UNREVISED 55 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) occupied, some 15 acres of land being occupied at a place they called Monjaloo Farm for the last five years. I would like to have some clarification. Sen. Gopee-Scoon: Point of Order, 46(1). Madam President: Sen. Mark, please, I have to ask you to really deal with the Bill at hand. Okay? You are talking about some issue, the issue of fraud that can arise, but you have made your point and you can move on to another point, please. Sen. W. Mark: Madam President, let me remind this honourable House that in the parent Act—and I want to remind, Madam President, your good self—when I looked at this Bill that is before us, saw where the first thing that jumped out at me was this. Clause 2: In this Act, “the Act” means the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. So, Madam President, there is a line between this amendment and the Act of 2000. I cannot debate this matter without making reference to this Act. Madam President: Sen. Mark, you know, no one is preventing you from making reference to the parent Act. And no one is preventing you from speaking but, please, Sen. Mark, be relevant. Okay? Sen. Mark, I am going—yes. Sen. W. Mark: Okay. Okay. I do not want to argue with you, Ma’am. Madam President: Yes. Sen. W. Mark: You know we are friends. No, please. Madam, I am making the point that there are some issues, when we talk about land, this is about the registration to titles to land, and we know what the definition of land is, and if we are talking about land, and we saying there is, in fact, some illegal occupation of land in certain parts of this nation. I want to get clarification as to whether these people who are occupying these lands [Desk thumping] are being given the necessary permission. Because land, Madam President, not only includes private land, it includes state land as well, it is both state land and private land.

UNREVISED 56 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

And if there is, in fact, such a situation taking place, I would like some clarification, and call on the Attorney General to tell whether he is aware of scores of acres of land at Monjaloo being occupied by an individual by the name of Ricky Ramcharran. I would like the Attorney General to tell this House if that gentleman has been given permission by the Commissioner of State Lands to occupy this land that is at Monjaloo estate or whether this gentleman— Madam President: Sen. Mark, you have just embarked on a course that I have asked you not to do, and you have even taken it further. We are dealing with the Registration of Titles to Land (Amdt.) (No. 2), Bill. Later on in this debate, am I going to hear, because trees grow on land we could talk about the different types of trees? We need to be specific and relevant to the Bill that is before us. Sen. Mark, continue. Sen. W. Mark: Madam President, by the time I finish, I in trouble, I will have to sit down just now. [Laughter] The “amount ah time” I have been seated, Ma’am. Anyway, Madam President, may I continue, again? I thought this is a Bill that would have attracted our support and we are trying to strengthen it, but it seems like now we have to be in opposition to this Bill. [Crosstalk] Madam President, may I continue? Madam President, may I ask the Attorney General, through you, when we talk about, I am referring, with your guidance, to clauses 4, 5, 6, 7, 8 and 9 of the Bill, although I am not supposed to be dealing with unless I am in committee stage, but I will deal with it in any event. When we talk about a senior assistant registrar, we saw where when we talked about the registrar, there was a specific qualification for the registrar in the parent Act. The person had to have, I think, a minimum of, at least, seven years of experience, that is in the parent Act. But in this amendment we have removed, we

UNREVISED 57 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) have added the word, we have removed the word “assistant”—no, we have added the work “senior” to “assistant” registrar. What is missing is the qualifications for this particular job. Is the Attorney General saying, through you, Madam President, that somebody can graduate from Sir Hugh Wooding Law School tomorrow and “land a job” as a senior assistant registrar?—because there are no qualifications. 12.00 noon Hon. Al-Rawi: There is, in section 6. Come on, read the parent Act. Madam President: Attorney General. Sen. W. Mark: Madam President, I have asked the Attorney General, through you, to provide us with a specific qualification for this. I have not seen it in section 6, and he says it is there. We would deal with it at committee stage. I have not seen it, and I am indicating that an amendment would be put by this side to address that question, Madam President. Okay? Because I am not seeing it. Madam President, can the Attorney General indicate to us what is the link between this law and the Property Tax Act, and the valuation of land tax? I would like him, in his winding-up, to indicate what is the link? Because, Madam President, if you go to the legislation you will see where reference is made to section 34 of the Act, that is the parent Act. I think it 34(2). If you go clause 15, you will see where we are talking about under clause 15, section 35 of the Act is amended by deleting the words “a person” and substituting the word “subject to 34(2).” Madam President, of course I seek your leave to refer to the parent Act, to go to 34(2), so you can follow what I would like to advice and advance. Madam President, if you go to 34(2), you would see where the proprietor, which is the owner of the property, is subject to this particular provision 34(1), but

UNREVISED 58 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) with the following exceptions. You would not be able to get absolute title according to section 34(1) if, one, there is: “any unpaid money”—and that is (m)—“which, without reference to registration under this Act, is expressly declared by any law to be charged upon the land”; —and two, if you go to (o). “any public right of way and any unpaid paid taxes, charges, rates, assessments, and duties” So, in other words, the squatters that we are supposed to be taxing property taxes, what will happen to their entitlement if they are owed under this section unpaid taxes, charges, rates, assessments, and duties? Would these people be denied their right to occupy the land? This is an area that I would like the hon. Attorney General to clarify for us. Madam President, we take strong objection to what the Attorney General has proposed in section 73. And, Madam President, may I advise you to join me as I take you on a journey to section 73 of the legislation so you would understand why the Attorney General has not provided this House with a plausible explanation for the extinction of myself as a person who wants to go to the registry or to the Registrar General’s Office and conduct a search on property that I am suspicious of involving any member in this society? Why is the Government of Trinidad and Tobago trying to deny me the right to enter the Registrar General’s Office, pay my fees and get the requisite information? [Desk thumping] Hear what the Attorney General is telling us, Madam President. Hear what the Attorney General is telling us in the year of the lord 2018? Madam President: Sen. Mark, you have five more minutes, please.

UNREVISED 59 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Sen. W. Mark: Yeah. Madam President, in 2018, the Attorney General is telling us in 2018 that we must not have any entitlement to a certificated copy of any document that is available to the registrar general. You know what the Attorney General is telling us? We must become so computer literate. If you are not computer literate and you do not have access to a computer you cannot access documentation at the level of the Registrar General’s Office. Now, how can we live with that kind of explanation coming from the Attorney General? We reject that out of hand, and we serve notice on the Attorney General [Desk thumping] that like Barry Sinanan we ask the question, what does the politician have to hide? [Desk thumping] Barry Sinanan when this matter was debated in 2000, he asked the question, are we removing any person from the legislation who can now access any documentation at the Registrar General’s Office? The Attorney General, Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj got up and said no, we are keeping it, and he said I am happy, because I was wondering if we removed that what would be the impact that will have on politicians? Politicians will now be able to hide behind that kind of arrangement, and we are not going to be party to that, Madam President. So, we serve notice on the Attorney General that we intend to reinsert section 73 to give the ordinary man and woman, including Wade Mark, because I am an ordinary citizen. I must have the right to go to the registrar’s office and access information as I see fit, as I deem fit, and I pay my fees. Do not deny me that right, Madam President. I think it is an affront to my constitutional rights, and it is an insult to the people’s intelligence, the ordinary people intelligence. And, Madam President, do not come and tell me you are trying to avoid fraud. There is modern technology in existence today that can deal with that

UNREVISED 60 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) matter. It is the absence of proper systems in the Registrar General’s Office, lack of infrastructure, modern technology, interoperability between one area and another section of governmental arrangement that is responsible for what is taking place at the level of the Registrar General’s Office. So, we do not buy that argument, Madam President, whatsoever. We think the Government is hiding. We believe that they have something to hide, and therefore we are going to exactly shine the torchlight, bring the sunshine, bring the rays of the rising sun into their living room and their bedroom to ensure that we are able to see what is going on behind the curtains and behind darkness. That is what we are about. So, Madam President, I have, based on what you have advised, I do not want to detain you any longer. You told me I have a few more, I think it is about a minute and a quarter. Is it that, Madam President? And I do not want you to rise and I fall. So, I would want to fall with you the same time you rise. [Laughter] So, I would want, Madam President, at this time to thank you, and to serve notice on the Government that we intend to submit several amendments for its consideration, and we reject several proposal that the Attorney General has put forward, and we look forward and so on when we come to the Land Adjudication Bill to deal with the matter that I have raised in a more detailed way. But I have some more information to share with the Attorney General and the hon. Minister, who seems to be a fighter against impropriety if that particular area of his operation. I thank you very much, Madam President. [Desk thumping] Madam President: Sen. Creese. Sen. Stephen Creese: Thank you, Madam President. I want to begin by giving credit where credit is due with regard to the attempt that the Attorney General is

UNREVISED 61 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) making to bring some clarity and put an end to the problems that working people who are able to afford or to inherit land are experiencing in having their titles regularized. I myself have been frequently visiting the Registrar General’s Office in the attempt to have the same objective achieved. And as I speak of objectives, it is laudable to facilitate what is a century’s old problem, the whole question of title of ownership, and behind that, of course, is the broader question of agrarian reform, because we are part of a society that is transitioning from old feudal system, system of slave ownership and plantation economy, and as we move into the 21st Century, where the descendants of slaves and indentured people are coming into ownership, or are experiencing problems after coming into ownership in that the system of laws we have which are fairly complex, because you talk in terms of Trinidad and Tobago which, though a Spanish colony, was largely developed by French planters from other parts of the Caribbean, so you have this problem of Spanish laws, French interpretations, and then the arrival of the British, bringing another spin in it. And if we turn our attention to Tobago, it is even more complex with the several changes of European “mother” countries that have been responsible for the initial development of Tobago in the plantation era so that we have a complex system of laws that affect how land ownership was seen and conducted. So, it is commendable that an attempt is being made to bring some order. But my concern is that this piecemeal approach brings with it its own set of problems in terms of the time gaps that exist between the initiatives that are being undertaken in this particular registration of titles Bill and the other Bills that we know that have been listed, and that they all collectively are trying to bring some kind of order to the whole question of land ownership and the recording of

UNREVISED 62 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) landownership, or adjudication over landownership issues. And it is, you know, my greatest regret, that rather than coming here to face a collective piece of legislation which seeks to overhaul all that is currently on our books, that we are going to find ourselves in this piecemeal approach, and I am wondering what are the traps that this is forcing on us, in that we are all aware of the complex number of issues that are lurking in the background of any kind of legal land reform. We are talking here against having just dealt with the property tax, which has shifted the whole question of how one treats with the payment and the processes involved in the payment of property tax. I, myself, in pursuing the registration of a particular title with the Warden Office, found myself last week being told by the Warden Office in La Brea, you can no longer pursue that here, you have to go to the Valuation Office at Point Fortin. So, there am I with a big brown envelope full of documents. “Ah done” in La Brea already so I might as well go on to Point. And then there is a new process involved. Good? So, there are upsides and there are downsides, and I would admit that one of the upsides in this is that in all the years of owning different properties I have never been visited by the Warden Office. In other words, I do not know to what extent they knew where the property was, and what is my physical relationship to it. So that the good part of this is that I was told by the Valuation Office in Point Fortin, that they would be visiting within a month or so and they gave me a number that I can call if nothing appears to be happening. So that is good part. Because that was always one of my concerns, if I am paying taxes and nobody is visiting, whether the land is in the sea, or whether the land still exists. Good? And there is no requirement within the law for me to actually assert or be sure that the land has

UNREVISED 63 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) not been washed away by the sea. So I appreciate the benefits of that shift. However, the overriding concern as to all the nuances that are involved, and whether this piecemeal approach would get us there, I have serious doubts about that, and about whether the other listed Bills to come would not end up the way it did, as the Attorney General referred to previous attempts having lapsed as Parliament moved on to deal with other issues, or other Bills, other matters. So, that is the initial concern. But I appreciate, particularly in the case of Tobago, the attempts to put some order there, because the whole question of the sustainable development goals which the previous speaker alluded to, the underlying issue is what little property the underclasses of our society own or have access to, they should be allowed to— they should be facilitated in whatever mechanisms the wider society has for development. Development based, of course, on the ownership of property because the whole question of the ownership of property is critical in the development of societies such as ours. As I said we are largely a post-colonial, post slavery society, and therefore the movement from being landless to landowning has to be facilitated by the legal processes such as these amendments to laws such as these. Now, when one looks at all the critical pieces of legislation related to land ownership and registration of lands, we are talking about years 1884—no, to put it sequentially 1845; 1884 which was registration of deeds; 1892 with RPO; 1903. So that there has been, over the years, attempts to place order on the situation and therefore allow people who are transitioning from being landless, and Trinidad is largely a migrant society with people coming in from the other islands, so that in terms of having a stake in the society it is critical that legislation such as

UNREVISED 64 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) these move swiftly to facilitate the acquisition of properties, or the mortgaging of properties, because one of the issues I am aware that farmers experience is that— and farming is largely critical to this issue—you inherit property from your grandparents and so on, and in the case of our Indo-Trinidad communities, particularly in the southland, we are talking about the inheritances from Crown grants that come on down through the years, and the cost of the transferring of properties for one generation to the other. And what I am hoping for, apart from the facilitation in the processes outlined by the AG, what to me is missing is direct attempts to reduce the cost of the transferring of properties, because this to me is also another aspect of the overall problem that this legislation seeks to effect. Because, and I mean no disrespect to the attorneys present, but the cost of having properties transferred is really inhibiting, and there are generations, especially within the farming East Indian communities where these transfers really just do not take place until a crisis point is reached. And I am not satisfied that what we are doing in this and the other related pieces of legislation addresses that effectively. Yes, in the case of Tobago I can see how the land adjudicator aspect of it would bring relief, but for much of the agrarian, agricultural communities of the south of Trinidad, this is a very small step to be quite frank. I would also like to point out that the whole question of squatters and provisional title is in fact an improvement. Because, there is a culture in the south and in the east where most of the available agricultural type lands are for people to erect homes over two days and three days, and long weekend holiday periods, and therefore given the high cost of lands in the urban built-up areas, there really needs to be initiatives that facilitate people who are tempted to squat. Good? And I do

UNREVISED 65 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) not think I have to go through the history of the legislation that previously exists, particularly in some of the other northern Caribbean islands, but to a certain extent in Trinidad as well which sought to prevent migrants which sought to prevent the local populations who were landless from exiting the plantation sector. So, it is critical in terms of what are the common Caribbean social problems and common Caribbean economic problems, which in most cases are one and the same, they derive from the same root that we move to afford to squatters with some instruments of title that are bankable. Because in another place where I wear a different cap, in the credit union movement, that is a critical issue, a critical humbug in advancing family-based enterprises because of their inability to present to our founding, our financing institutions, certificates of title, deeds of transfer, and, you know, instruments of that nature so as to form the basis of the financing of family based activities, particularly agriculture. The thing is though, especially with regard to agricultural development, I am wondering if there is a sense in which we are almost too late. Because there is a shift in agriculture from horizontally based agricultural enterprises to vertically based enterprises, but yet I supposed that even if you are on two lots, which would allow you a lot of significant development, the time when having large acreages was critical, that time has largely passed. But, they say better late than never. Under a small island such as the one we have, land is, of course, a disappearing resource. I also wish to draw attention to the attempts to tighten up the folio system in larger pursuit of having the records available, fully computerized, fully digitalized. I appreciate Sen. Mark’s point about whether we want to inhibit access, searching of documents, and whether that would really form part of a valid attempt to contain

UNREVISED 66 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) attempts at fraudulent activities within the system. I think at the end of the day whatever we do we should ensure that searches of the title should be cheap, should be available, because we are in the digital age, we are in the IT age, and therefore that is the mechanism that we would all want to be available, especially to the children of parents who are freshly into a new literacy period. Many of us, our grandparents and great grandparents might have been illiterate. That is not unusual in our situation, and therefore this new access, this new-found access to being able to read and to go wherever reading allows you to is a critical part of the turn that our society is making, and therefore I would want to advocate caution as to how access to registration documents is in anyway curtailed. The other thing that I found interesting in all of this is that the facilitation of rectification of minor errors on deeds by mutual consent of the parties to be a very, very laudable move because it would reduce legal cost that would have involved you had to go through the full-blown procedure for one, and without really adding value to the property, simply adding cost. So, I want to commend, again, the AG’s office for that foresight. At the end of the day, Madam President, I think this is a good start [Desk thumping] and I wish to commend, you know, the Government for this initiative, and I hope that before this parliamentary recess sets in that we are able to go through the other pieces that are related to the whole question of—and in a broad sense is really agrarian reform. It is really about land, and people being able to own land, and making land ownership and land management a simpler process. So, I look forward to the AG’s introduction of the other pieces, and when we return, I am not too sure when we are taking the luncheon interval. Madam President: You have time.

UNREVISED 67 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d)

Sen. Creese: Okay. But the only thing, the AG is not in the House, but I wanted to know, to what extent the question of the Merikins in the Moruga district are being afforded by the legislation, you know, the pieces, in amendments and the other Bills that the AG has proposed. Because, to me, that is the other segment of our society that has been vastly denied enjoyment of property rights, properties granted by the crown. We have the East Indian community, the descendants of the indentured labourers who are afforded Crown grants, especially in the Rousillac and Fyzabad areas who would be able to benefit from what is being proposed. 12.30 p.m. But there is an earlier population segment who came here after the British/ American wars of 1812/1815, who were afforded Crown grants, but who were unable to have these titles regularized and who are now into, well, 1815 to now, five, six generations later, good?—and who do not possess the kind of title necessary for bankable activities. And we are talking about sizeable parcels of land stretching from Moruga to Rio Claro, just south-east of the Princes Town area. And I have serious doubts that what is being proposed, certainly in the Registration of Titles here and in the others would directly assist them in getting their situation rectified. So in that regard, I would appreciate it if any of the other speakers on the Government side and, of course, the AG himself could guide us on whether their situation has been considered by this particular set of amendments or in any of the others, because it is one of the more underdeveloped areas and to be quite frank, there is a link in that particular problem, with the problem of the cultivation of that questionable herb, and as the song says, coming from Moruga with a trunk full of, you know what, there is a reason for that. And the reason is that those people who

UNREVISED 68 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d)

“own” those lands are unable to go to the neighbourhood banks and or credit unions and prepare business plans for those lands. And therefore they resort to more lucrative— Madam President: Sen. Creese, I just want to caution you at this stage. I just want to ask you to look to the Bill at hand and deal with the issues that can arise from this Bill, okay? Sen. S. Creese: Thank you, Madam President. So that I will leave it to the Government side, if they are possessed of the information that would clarify that, to proceed with that. The other thing I wanted to draw attention to is that the particular provision and I wanted to quote the clause. I think it would be at 13, relating to the folio system and the simplification of the whole question of the root system. That too is a commendable initiative and that clause 13 combined with clause 14 does result in a better management of sorting out any nuances that may turn up, sometimes with regard to the whole question of surveys and the resurveying of the relevant lands. And, of course, in the development of these lands, sometimes the insertion of access to rare parcels requires some amount of modification of the details of the deed and I see those two clauses as providing an easy solution for that. So, that too is beneficial and the AG’s office should be commended for that and at the end of the day, and this is point at which I wish to close, because Sen. Mark had mentioned the question of Sustainable Development Goals. I find that generally this piece of legislation has a focus on achieving security of tenure and all the various things listed in the, 17 or so, Sustainable Development Goals. At the end of the day the question—are people being able to feed themselves and are getting away from hunger?—security of tenure and ability to develop whatever

UNREVISED 69 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Creese (cont’d) property you have are in fact being guaranteed in terms of the new approach to the registration of titles. So in that regard, I am prepared to support this Bill. I thank you. [Desk thumping] The Minister of Trade and Industry (Sen. The Hon. Paula Gopee-Scoon): Thank you very much, Madam President, and it is indeed a pleasure to join with my colleagues today in supporting the AG on these very, very, important pieces of legislation that are being brought before the Senate today. And what this again shows is this Government’s commitment to have a strong and effective system of land administration in place. And this is what we are doing today. [Crosstalk] I am hearing some noise coming from the other side about this is a UNC Bill. But, I think if they had only listened to the then Prime Minister, former Prime Minister, Basdeo Panday, I think they would have been in a better place than they are now. That is the problem. But anyway, the AG went into length, Madam President, to address the history of the registration of lands and there is no way that I am going to repeat any of that, but just to bring us up to date, this was passed already in the House on March 16, 2018, the entire compendium of land registration Bills that we are starting off with and it is expected that the Independents and the Opposition will give support to this important set of legislation. Again, this is just an amendment process into a Bill which was passed since the year 2000, but which was never proclaimed and therefore has not come into force. So, it has been a long time in the making, many years in the making and, of course, it has taken the dedication and commitment of this Government to really, to finally bring this work to fruition. And again, I congratulate, not only the Attorney General, but all of the public officials who have worked on these pieces of

UNREVISED 70 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) legislation. So, it is just one of what we are dealing with now, which is the Registration of Titles to Land (Amdt.) Bill. It is just one of a plethora of land reform legislation. Also today, we are going to go the full throttle on this. We are going to be dealing with the land today and finishing today, the Land Adjudication (Amdt.) Bill, the Land Tribunal (Amdt.) Bill, the State Suits Limitation Bill as well. And again, this all enjoins with the work that the AG has done previously and reinforces the legislation already passed recently including the Property Tax (Amdt.) Bill and the Valuation of Land (Amdt.) Bill. I mean, clearly, none of these pieces of legislation which we are attaching ourselves to today or even that recently with the property and the land valuation, exist in a vacuum. And this is why, perhaps, we should have dealt with all of them in one and save the Parliament time and save all of us time in discussing the legislation. It all will mesh so that at the end of day we will have a fulsome and proper land administration system. And the objective really is simplification, simplifying a very complex process which exists at this time and it is a continuation of the land reforms that our PNM administration had started in 2008, through an IDB loan whose purpose was to effect land registration on a compulsory basis. And this work, unfortunately, but not surprisingly, stopped in 2010. So, absolutely nothing was done between 2010 and 2015, very, very, important to note, that I do not know what the focus would have been, but it may have been more self-serving and self- enrichment, if I am allowed to say that. But, absolutely nothing was done on land reform by the last Government during 2010 and 2015. So, Madam President, I have learnt, I have listened. In particular, I want to

UNREVISED 71 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) go to the key elements of the Bill and then I can speak to the influence on the Ministry of Trade and Industry, the influence on the economy and so on. So, the key elements—and the AG highlighted the fact that we are fixing land administration in Tobago first and foremost. And I wish to emphasize that and bring that to the attention of public, especially to the Tobagonians as well, very important to them. Their system is chaotic and archaic and once and for all we are approaching this and dealing with the land administration fiasco that exists in Tobago. So speaking to the key elements, it is an amendment to the Bill which was passed in 2000. This legislation provides for the registration of interest and estates in land subject to the provisions contained therein in that register. When this legislation is properly implemented there will be an up-to-date official record of the legal ownership of registered land which will be overseen by the Registrar and the Land Registry and I will address—the AG did not have time to speak to the new Registrar and I will speak to that in particular. And again, this legislation is aimed at making the ownership and the transfer of land more reliable, more convenient, more stress-free, away from the complication of the existing system. The land title document, the land certificates that will be issued pursuant to the legislation will serve as evidence of ownership to the exclusion of the world. Persons would thus be afforded a level of protection from adverse possessors and persons claiming superior title. Further, a proprietor or a potential purchaser will now be assured that what is endorsed on the Land Certificate is indefeasible and the need to worry about hidden defects capable of defeating title will be significantly reduced or it may even be done away with totally. The AG would have dealt with the main provisions in the Bill and I would

UNREVISED 72 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) just speak to some of the provisions which he did not have the time to attend to. In particular, the creation of the position of the Senior Assistant Registrar and so on, and the creation of the condominium folio, he mentioned that as well; the replacement of the term Certificate of Title with the term Land Certificate; the widening of the powers of the Registrar and so on; giving the Registrar the powers to change the name and address of a proprietor on written application; prioritizing properly, executed instruments, et cetera. So, if you go to the definition clause, which is clause 3 of the Bill, there are several definitions now altered, are of importance and the new definition of “encumbrance” means: “a proprietary right held by one person over the land of another that limits the ways in which the owner may use or deal with land”. The definition of “condominium”, now introduced means: “housing consisting of a complex of dwelling units in which each unit is individually owned”. It speaks to the Land Certificate: the “land certificate issued under section 24 and includes a certificate of lease”. —speaks to the Director of Surveys, means: “the officer holding the office of Director of Surveys referred to in the Civil Service Act”. —and, of course, the Senior Assistant Registrar. Now, clauses 4, 5, 6, 7 and 8 of the Bill amend sections 5, 6, 7, 9 and 10 of the Act to include this post of the new Assistant Registrar who will have considerable responsibilities in ensuring the proper implementation of land

UNREVISED 73 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) administration reform as it relates to registration of and recognition of title to land. Clause 9 will amend section 13 of the Act providing for the maintenance of a Land Register by the Registrar and shall account for the folios of land that will be brought under the registered system of the Land Adjudication Act, and will include, lease folios, condominium folios, interest folios and now as well. Clause 14 will amend section 30 of the Act to give the Registrar powers of rectification concerning the register or instruments presented for registration. So, the remit of the Registrar has been expanded in several ways so that he now has powers of rectification given to him under clause 14. So, what it means is that: “(a) in formal matters and in the case of errors or omissions not materially affecting the interests of any proprietor”—he can deal with that. “(b) in any case at any time with the consent of all persons interested”—he can address those as well. “(c) where upon a resurvey, an area shown in the Register is found to be incorrect…in such case the Registrar shall first give notice to all persons appearing by the register to be interested or affected of his intention to rectify; and (d) upon receipt of any decision of any Court of the Land Tribunal”. So that he has other powers as well to record a change of name and address of a proprietor in the register upon proof of same when a written application is made. Sen. Ameen: “You reading the Bill, dey”? Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: No, but I am informing the public and I am— [Crosstalk] Sen. Ameen: No, I just ask, I just ask. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: I am informing the public—[Interruption]

UNREVISED 74 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

Sen. Mark: Madam President, on 46(1), could you guide us. The lady is repeating the—the hon. Member is just reading the Bill. [Crosstalk] Please, please, guide us from this matter, please. Sen. Rambharat: Finally. Sen. Mark: Yeah, oh God, man”. I am going to jump up now. [Laughter] You like to jump up, I will jump now. You will see jumping up today. Madam President: May I now, Sen. Mark? Thank you so very much. Minister and Members, when we are dealing—this is a debate, so we can make reference to the different clauses without having to read them out. Sen. Hosein: Yes. Madam President: And—excuse me, let me just—please, it is either everyone in this Chamber has decided today to do away with Standing Orders, or that you all have gotten very hungry from since 10 o’clock this morning. So please, so please, all Members, in debating you do not have to be reading each clause of the Bill as you make your contribution. Continue, Minister. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Thank you, Madam President. It is just that the Attorney General did not have the time to deal in particular with the scope of the work of the Registrar and this is the reason why I thought I would inform the public of it. But, I will go straight to clause 20. I am relating to the Bill as is required, and I will go to clause 20 where Sen. Mark had some concerns; he was concerned about—he spoke about the fact that politicians will now be intrusive and that the public would not be allowed to go to the registry to make their searches. That was a major concern with him, and I want to speak to the actual legislation, I am sorry, clause 20, which refers to section 73 of the Act, and clause 20(c)(3) that: “A member of the public may”—in fact—“search the electronic records in

UNREVISED 75 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

the Land Registry”—you can search electronically—“to inspect any”— port—“folio or any sheet of the parcel index map or any instrument or plan filed or conduct an electronic search in respect of any parcel of land”. So that the public has the capability of doing an electronic search. However, with regard to the physical documents, and therein lies the difference, that has to be done through an attorney and a search clerk, Sen. Mark. And the reason for that is because there is a mischief with regard to the physical records being tampered with. That is a fact. And that is the reason why—what I am saying is, you can still search electronically, but when it comes to the physical document, I repeat, can be done— Sen. Hosein: Will the Member give way? Will the Member— Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: I would like to finish. The physical search has to be done by the attorney-at-law or the search clerk. And again, to cure the mischief which exists today. [Crosstalk] So, all that you are saying about politicians having ulterior motives and so on, that has nothing to do with that. So in practice, I wanted to speak directly to that, but in practice, Madam President—and I am hearing a murmur. Madam President: Please, if a Member chooses not to give way, that is the Member’s prerogative, okay? Continue Minister. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Right. So in practice, under the legislation, information on land rights will be recorded in some form of a land registry and cadastral system. Effectively what we will establish, what we will establish in the construct of the law is a parcelized basis of registration; the use of a unique parcel reference number; the establishment of a priority for enforcement interest; the establishment of procedures to manage the land registration process; the

UNREVISED 76 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) maintenance of records; the establishment of procedures for compensating persons who suffer loss. The system therefore is going to be a lot more streamlined and more efficient in its operations and that inherently are the advantages to the approach we are doing now. So overall, it is an improvement in the land administration system in Trinidad and Tobago. So, it is about land rights, it is about land use, it is about land valuation and taxation, all of those benefits are encompassed here. And as I said before, it is critical. Why this is critical is because land is special. There are no two ways about it. Land is special to young people establishing a life together, first thing you want to do is purchase a piece of land. To the businessman, land is critical especially with regard to the collateralization of the land and his ability to be able to access loan facilities, to be able to expand his businesses and so on. And Sen. Wade Mark did, in fact—and he will never be Minister again, I do not think he ever was, but certainly he will never be. But Senator— Sen. Mark: You are God? Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Sen. Wade Mark— Sen. Mark: You are God? Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: But you have defined your future Sen. Mark and I move on and I speak to you. [Crosstalk] You have done it yourself. You have defined your future. I was saying to you about the value of land and so on. [Crosstalk] The fact that it is a legacy item. Sen. Mark: Madam President, I object and I seek your protection. I am not “you”. Could you correct that hon. Senator and let her refer to me by my proper title. Sen. Rambharat: Leader of Opposition Business in the Senate—

UNREVISED 77 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

Sen. Mark: No, I am Sen. Wade Mark. Madam President: Sen. Mark, may I just say to you that—anyway, I should not use local parlance here, but you see the crosstalk?—the crosstalk is what is inviting some of these issues. Minister, in reference to any Member, Senator. Continue, Minister. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: And I am sorry, Madam President. Sen. Mark: You are forgiven. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Thank you. So as I was saying, I want to bring us back— Madam President: You see what I mean, Members, if you continue, Minister with this talking to each other then I have to constantly be on my feet and I do not like it. Minister, continue. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Thank you. I want to bring us back to the place where I was saying the significance of land, in that it constitutes wealth, the significance of legacy, something that you leave for the next generation, the fact of the business persons and the whole question of the collateralization which is important for the growth of business. So, it is important to persons right across Trinidad and Tobago and one can well imagine how this has stymied the development of business in Tobago where the land administration system is in chaos. It really has stymied the individual businessman into making progress, into expanding his business, into going to the bank with a land deed to say, here is my land, it is valued $500,000, can I borrow half? And, so, he has just not had that benefit and it is too, across Trinidad and Tobago, where there are many areas in Trinidad and Tobago, particularly in the rural areas, where people do not have access and do not have that land deed in their

UNREVISED 78 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) hand and that is important to most persons. It is the reason why, land is important, it is the reason why old people, everybody lines up to pay their property tax and will continue to do that because it is special. Land is special. At the end of the day, overall, I can say all of this is part of our continuing effort to build the economy of Trinidad and Tobago and indeed Sen. Mark spoke about that. I can tell you about some of the challenges that we are having in the Ministry of Trade and Industry with regard to the question of land, the limitations of not having a proper land administration system. And when I look at where we are for instance on the—when I look at some of the global indices, the ease of doing business, the global competitiveness index, where we are, and indeed Sen. Mark brought these up and I want to respond to them, we are being very, very, serious about attaching ourselves to improving all of these indices. So that we have embarked to the Ministry of Trade and Industry on a system of reform of all of these relevant indices where we have not been ranking to our satisfaction. So that, I can tell you, with regard to the whole question of land reform, again, I want to be very clear, the particular index of registering property, where we are notably 151st. Not at all commendable; 151 on the list with regard to registering property. The last Government was not able to do anything about this. We are taking this head on, [Crosstalk] we are taking this head on and therefore on the matter of registering property there are several deliverables that we targeted to be achieved. Including, the development of a checklist for attorneys and the property owners and the amendment of the Registration of Deeds Act, Chap. 19:06; to increase the penalties for contravention of the Registration of Deeds Act, as well as the Real Property Act in cases of proven fraud; to review and approve the proposed amendments in consultation with the Chief Parliamentary Counsel; to

UNREVISED 79 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) expand the authority of the Registrar General in respect of the registration of common law titles by amending the Registration of Deeds Act and the Registrar General Act; the amendment to the Registration of Deeds Act as well as the Registrar General Act. All of these deliverables we have taken on board and many of them I can say to the population we have, in fact, achieved. So that we are well on our way and I can tell you, perhaps not by the next publication of the Ease of Doing Business, World Bank rankings, but I can certainly—which would be in 2019, but I can assure you that by 2020 we will be well ahead and our ranking would be way improved—[Crosstalk]—we would be way improved with regard to this whole registration of property. We are taking this thing very seriously, Madam President. And again, with regard to the automation of—one does not stand alone. So we are talking about registration of property, but again the construction permitting process. Pretty soon, by next week, we will announce our pilot project for the automation of the construction permitting process which would involve business process, reengineering, upgrading of hardware infrastructure, automation of the workflow process, digitization of all our maps, capacity building, public awareness and so on. And this all intertwines with the registration of property so that the consumer, the citizen out there who wishes to get his land in order and to proceed to building on it and he will, in fact, be able to do so through the land registration reform and also through the construction permitting reform as well. So, this Government is well on its way to making it easier for the citizens. And also, a significant reform is also taking place with the single electronic window, again, but I will not go into any details for fear that I will run afoul of the rules. But again, I want to speak of the difficulty with investments and overall, one

UNREVISED 80 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) of the main goals is that there is certainty and predictability with regard to land and land administration. And there are issues, I can tell you, if I can cite an example. With regard to the Mitsubishi plant which they are well aware of and yet they were involved in, under their administration, but which we had to come in and refine and redefine to ensure that it actually takes place because of some negligence on their part, but I will not go into any detail about it. But I can say to you, with regard to the construction of the highway, north to south, the Solomon Hochoy Highway, all of these, you will be surprised, these were not captured in the survey plans. So it took us more than a year to unravel and to be able to move forward, therein lies some of the difficulty. I can tell you with regard to HDC housing, many a time the question of the vesting of the land is delayed, years, because of land issues as well and, of course, that also delays the granting of the mortgages and the citizens’ right to own their property. So, therein lies some of the bases for which we must proceed with these land administration reforms, if I can call it that. I mean, in cases of compulsory acquisition—you seem to— Madam President: Hon. Senators, at this juncture we will take the break and we will return at 2.00 p.m. So this sitting is suspended until 2.00 p.m. 1.00 p.m.: Sitting suspended. 2.00 p.m.: Sitting resumed.

[MR. VICE-PRESIDENT in the Chair] Mr. Vice-President: The Minister of Trade and Industry. You have 16 more minutes. [Desk thumping] Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Thank you very much, Mr. Vice-President, but I do apologize. I had gone to the restroom.

UNREVISED 81 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

If I can just recap. I gave support to the hon. AG on the introduction of this package of land Bills and I would have addressed particular areas in the Bill, in particular, the question of the role of the Registrar. I had gone on to ease the concern of Sen. Mark when he made issue with the fact that persons would no longer be able to pay their money and do their searches. And I had cleared that up, that persons can, in fact, do their electronic searches. But it is where it involves the physical documents that the work of an attorney-at-law or a search clerk would be involved, in that they would have to, in fact, do the searches, and the reason being, to cure the mischief which is that, in many cases, the actual physical records are tampered with. I went on to speak about our overall concern with regard to where we are in terms of land registration. I spoke about the indices, the ease of doing business, the global competitive index and, in particular, what the Ministry of Trade and Industry is doing and, indeed, all the other Ministries are doing, with regard to our reforms. Specifically, I addressed the question of the reform of registering property and highlighted the deliverables, some of which have already been completed by the Office of the Attorney General. I then went on to speak to some of the difficulties we have had throughout the system on account of the very archaic and very cumbersome land registration system, justifying the need for the introduction of this proper, fulsome land administration system. And I had cited particular areas with regard to the HDC and in cases of compulsory acquisition where there would be difficulty in completing the transactions on account of the very bureaucratic systems. And I think I was at the point where I was about to cite an example of an investment which was hampered by the very bureaucratic system.

UNREVISED 82 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

And Sen. Mark did, in fact, raise the question of the facilitation of investments. And, yes, I would agree that the facilitation of investments is, in fact, stymied by the poor land administration system. And I can tell you that as Minister of Trade and Industry, I have had to get my hands wet, and what Cabinet has, in fact, approved is an investment facilitation framework where it allows me, as Minister of Trade and Industry, to sit with all of the professionals, the professional staff in the public service, and from the various areas—I am talking about the EMA; I am talking about the Commissioner of State Lands and also the Town and Country Planning—as a means of facilitating foreign direct investment. These are land issues and if we do not take that approach, until the reforms come into place, you would find that these investments would take years. Or we may reach the point where the investor would be turned away, and hence the reason why we have had to fast track. And it makes a difference. I am dealing with a particular investment at this time and in under 60 days I have been able, with the cooperation of the public servants, to facilitate the entire land process. But again, that is by dealing with it hands-on. That is not what we want. What we want is a proper system and framework, and this package of land legislation is a step and a part of fixing this whole system and facilitating investment flows. And there was a general conversation earlier about sustainable development and the attainment of this SDGs, a pet subject by Sen. Mark. I think that is a Motion that he had brought to the House and— Sen. Ameen: The first Motion. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: The first Motion and he was successful, and we supported that Motion, and I could not agree with him more. But at the base of the attainment of our Sustainable Development Goals is economic development.

UNREVISED 83 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

Without economic development there is no way that you are—and I am sure Sen. Mark will agree with me. There is no way you can attain your SDGs. But I can tell you a lot of it has to do with investments and therefore you come right back to a proper land administration system. So all that you are speaking of: financial investment; economic development; SDGs, a lot of it comes right back to fixing your whole question of land administration. And in the course of my preparation for today, I looked at an article, and allow me to go to it: “Financial Development; Property Rights and Growth”; authors being—I think they must be Dutch—Claessons and Luc Laeven. Anyway, it is in the journal of Finance, 2003, and I cite: “In countries with more secure property rights, firms might allocate resources better and consequentially grow faster as the returns on different types of assets are more protected against competitors’ actions. Using data on sectoral value added for a large number of countries, we find evidence inconsistent with better property rights leading to higher growth through improved asset allocation. Quantitatively, the growth effect is as large as that of improved access to financing due to greater financial development. Our results are robust using various samples and specifications, including controlling our growth opportunities.” I say this—I bring this to light—to show the correlation between property rights and a proper land administration system, to financial growth—economic growth— and therefore attainment of the SDGs. I mean to say that, therefore, we fix the system, the work of invesTT becomes a lot better. The work of e TecK who are, in effect, land administrators, they are the ones who hold the body of land for businesses, for commercial activity, and their work becomes simplified. And e

UNREVISED 84 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d)

Teck’s work is stymied because, again, of the cumbersome system. So, as I said, it makes the work of the Government much easier. Local investors, foreign investors, are more willing to engage and to invest because there is more certainty with regard to property and land registration, and so on. There is predictability for the businessman in doing business, in taking the initiative to do that plunge, for the foreign businessman in attracting him to our country. So this whole string of land tenure and ownership-related Bills are very, very important for economic development. I say all of this to say that this legislation has far-reaching effects and it is vital to our economy. We speak of diversification. It is vital to diversification and attaining all of our goals. In closing, I want to say that the legislation is of national benefit. So, Sen. Mark, when you spoke about social benefits and economic benefits, and so on, this little package is a start towards national benefit, using secured land tenure and property, and so on, having property rights. And the AG is the one who would have tied this also to the whole question of identification of the proceeds of crime, including money laundering, corruption, general criminality, and so on. He may have mentioned following the money, and therefore, this all ties in with the Government’s anti-corruption agenda. So in concluding, I want to say at the end of the day we are going to have a more modernized system, a more efficient system, a legitimate system of land administration. And I even went to— Mr. Vice-President: Minister, you have five minutes. Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon: Thank you. This is an exercise, at the end of the day, the entire population of Trinidad and Tobago will benefit from. We have introduced in the legislation, evidence-based, cost effective, common sense

UNREVISED 85 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. P. Gopee-Scoon (cont’d) policies, which, at the end of the day, we will all benefit from. I want to give my 100 per cent support to the Attorney General in what he has presented to us today. Thank you very much. [Desk thumping] Mr. Vice-President: Sen. Hosein. [Desk thumping] Sen. Saddam Hosein: Thank you very much, Mr. Vice-President, for recognizing me to join this debate to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. And, Mr. Vice-President, this piece of legislation that we are debating here, this Bill, consists of 23 clauses that amends the parent Act, the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. Mr. Vice-President, this is one of the most important pieces of legislation that this Parliament will ever pass in the history of Trinidad and Tobago. And I say this because land is a scarce commodity in this country. We are only a dot on the map. Trinidad and Tobago is approximately 5,128 square kilometres. So, therefore, whatever we pass in this Senate with regard to any Bill touching and concerning land, we must do it very carefully and we must study it and give it enough consideration in order for persons to properly regulate their titles in Trinidad and Tobago. And, Mr. Vice-President, I would like to thank the Minister, Sen. The Hon. Paula Gopee-Scoon for reading the Bill for us, first of all, and also she indicated that the UNC did nothing with regard to land reform in Trinidad and Tobago. But I want to rebut that statement by simply saying that while the People’s Partnership Government, under the leadership of Kamla Persad-Bissessar, we passed an Act called the Planning and Facilitation of Development Act, 2014. What that Act does is revolutionize the entire planning and urban development of Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk thumping] It was laying the foundation, it was laying the

UNREVISED 86 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d) framework, in order for a proper land-use policy in this country. And there was also the National Spatial Development Strategy for Trinidad and Tobago. So what we started to do was, we started to creep before we could walk, or before we could run, and that is a responsible government, [Desk thumping] because we are dealing with land, one of the scarcest commodities in this country. Mr. Vice-President, what this Bill does, it changes the system of land in Trinidad and Tobago. The Attorney General, during his piloting of this Bill, indicated that there are currently two systems of land in Trinidad and Tobago, the first being the common-law system, or we refer to it also as the unregistered system. And then we have the RPA system, which is the Real Property Act system. The Ordinance is now an Act. Mr. Vice-President, what this Bill does is something very similar to what currently exists in the Real Property Act system, which is to have land certificates, or certificates of title being endorsed at the back of them and having duplicate copies. The owner retains one and one is lodged in the registry. So it shows certainty of title. It brings indefeasibility of title, and these are the principles as outlined in the Torrens system, which has its genesis in Australia. And there are three principles coming out from the Torrens system, the first being the mirror principle, which I just explained, that there would be two duplicate land certificates or certificates of title, one retained by the owner, one kept in the land registry. Then there is something called the curtain principle. And the curtain principle is what we refer to as the indefeasibility of title which, when someone passes title through the Land Certificates, it would mean that their title is good title. It is good and marketable title. And then the third principle coming out of this is the assurance principle, because the State, in this case, guarantees good title.

UNREVISED 87 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

So, therefore, if bad title passes, the State would be the body to compensate the person who has suffered loss. And I say this because that provision is actually included in the parent Act. So as I go directly into the clauses of the Bill I would start at clause 15 which refers to the principle dealing with the indefeasibility of title of these lands that will now fall under the Registration of Titles to Land Act. And when we look at the prerequisites in order to register land under this Act, section 19(4) of the parent Act, if you would allow me to quote, with every Land Certificate that has to be registered into the registry, it must be accompanied by a map or a plan that is actually approved by the Director of Surveys. But, Mr. Vice-President, I do not know if you know, but in order to get currently any map or any survey approved of the Director of Surveys, it takes sometimes six to eight months. I have colleagues that, their plans are there for over one year. So this determines the length of time a person will have to take in order to register their land certificates. And this is dealing specifically with respect to subdivisions under the new system. And when you have to subdivide a larger portion of land—because the older generation, they would have bought large parcels of land and now they would want to subdivide the land so that they could pass it on to their children, their grandchildren, maybe their spouse. But in order for them to do this, first they need Town and Country approval. And I was made to understand—I had a conversation with a surveyor recently before we debated this Bill and he was indicating to me that Town and Country now requires that you actually construct a road in the land in order to get Town and Country approval. And, Mr. Vice-President, that is extremely expensive for that infrastructure and that development.

UNREVISED 88 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

Then you need local health approval. Then you need County Medical Officer of Health approval. You need T&TEC approval, WASA approval. I say all of this to show how difficult it would be now under this system for us to deal with land under the registration of title. These are the realities that we face as practitioners, as owners of land in this country. And in order for this Bill to actually be operationalized in Trinidad and Tobago, what we need to do is actually fix the system first. We should fix the Town and Country Planning Division, because we need more staff in order to process more applications that come towards them for approvals under the new Bill. We need more staff at the Director of Surveys. Because, Mr. Vice-President, when you look at what happens at the Director of Survey’s office, his office is actually located on Wrightson Road in the General Post Office, and I have received from certain colleagues also, information that that building was earmarked for destruction. So, Mr. Vice-President, we have a situation where we need to develop the infrastructure surrounding this Bill in order for it to actually be operationalized properly so that when we have the system come on board, that we do not have complaints of inordinate delays in order to get our Land Certificates registered at the Land Registry. [Desk thumping] I looked at the Draft Estimates of Development Programme Expenditure, 2018, Head 23, Sub-Item 18. And it is entitled: “Strengthened Information Management of the Registrar General’s Department”. In 2016, there was no expenditure. In 2017, the estimate was $15 million. The reversed estimate for 2017 was $2.5 million. The estimate for 2018 is $13 million. Mr. Vice-President, if we are serious about changing the land system in this country we need to do

UNREVISED 89 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d) more than that. This entails a comprehensive reform of the Land Registry system as it stands. And knowing that you are going to bring this Bill to this House, you cannot just only spend $2.5 million to fix that registry. More must be done, more infrastructure. So what I would like the Attorney General to address in the winding-up is, basically, when we pass this piece of legislation in this House, when will this become law? When will it be proclaimed? Because the 2000 Act is on the law books but it has not been proclaimed. It has been assented to. But 2018 and it has not been proclaimed. So is it that we are going to pass this Bill and allow it to lay in abeyance also? So these are certain issues that I would like to raise, because we need to operate with some sort of certainty. Because when I sit in my office and I advise my clients with respect to land transactions, I must have some certainty as to when this land system is going to change. How am I to advise them? How are they to conduct their business in the future? Because buying land is not buying “sweetie” in a parlour. Buying land is a life investment. It is an investment that will pass on to your generation as you go along. So we must operate with some sort of certainty. And I am sure, once we have this level of certainty in this country, it will actually encourage growth with respect to our economy that will—I know the Minister of Finance would have indicated that we have a turnaround. But we might want a bigger turnaround now once we get our land tenure system in place. Sen. Mark raised this point with regard to the establishment of the Senior Assistant Registrar. When I looked at section 6 of the parent Act, it gave the qualifications of the Senior Assistant Registrar, and when we read the Bill together with the parent Act, it would say that:

UNREVISED 90 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

No persons shall be appointed as Assistant Registrar or a Senior Assistant Registrar unless he is an Attorney-at-law. What this means, Mr. Vice-President, is that you do not need any experience whatsoever to become a Senior Assistant Registrar under this Bill. What you need is that you go to Hugh Wooding or you do the external programme through London, and you are called to the Bar and then you get a job as a Senior Assistant Registrar. So I am asking whether or not we should include a level of experience with regard to this position, because this person can perform a quasi-judicial function, because in the absence of the substantive registrar, section 35 of the parent Act gives a whole host of various functions this person can actually carry out: amending or rectifying Land Certificates—the folios. So these are very important functions that this person has to execute in their duties. Also with respect to the salary and the job description, I do not know if the Attorney General would address all of this in the winding-up, because I did not hear it in the piloting of the Bill. And when I looked at the Hansard in 2000 when this Bill was being debated in the House of Representatives, the current Prime Minister, Dr. Keith Rowley, Member for Diego Martin West, raised certain concerns with regard to this post, because he was saying why should it only be restricted to an attorney-at-law? Why not someone who has vast experience in land management system? Because he believed, at that time, that those persons might be better able to carry out the duties of a Registrar rather than an attorney-at-law because of their vast experience with regard—and their background with regard to land management systems. So I do not know if the Prime Minister had any input with regard to the Bill that was brought before us.

UNREVISED 91 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

Earlier on, I touched on the powers of the Registrar and those are found at clause 14 of the Bill and section 34 of the parent Act. And when I looked at the Bill, there was one concern with regard to the functions that the Registrar has, and that is—if you would allow me to read clause 14: “Where upon resurvey, an area shown in the register is found to be incorrect, but in such case the Registrar shall first give notice to all persons appearing by the register to be interested or affected of his intention to rectify;” Now, Mr. Vice-President, one of the most common claims that are filed in the High Court is one of issues of boundary, and I think the Attorney General can attest to that, that there are always boundary disputes. And in this case, when you have your neighbour saying that, “Listen, your building is encroaching in my land”, or “A fence is encroaching on my land”, what we normally do is that we will file a claim to the court and then the court will be the person to resolve this dispute through a trial or probably through some sort of settlement. So I am asking, why we are giving such vast powers to the Registrar, in this case in terms of actually rectifying boundary issues? So I hope those concerns are addressed. The other issue I want to join with Sen. Mark on, is that of the searches. And these searches that are conducted at the Registrar General’s office, and now those searches are restricted to an attorney-at-law or his clerk. Now “his clerk” is very vague. Is it that I am to understand that the clerk means the law clerk? The clerk means the search clerk? Because as attorneys-at-law we retain search clerks at the Registrar General’s office to conduct title searches on the unregistered system, so that we would determine whether or not there is a proper route of title, or whether or not the chain of title is broken in order to grant any purchaser good and marketable title.

UNREVISED 92 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

So I am saying that we should not restrict the public from going into the Land Registry and viewing deeds. [Desk thumping] Because deeds, lis pendens, judgments, bill of sales, power of attorney, deed polls, all of those documents are public documents, and if there is a fear that there might be some security issue— we have been functioning like this for the past how many years since we gained independence and it is about time that we digitize the system so that we always have a backup copy, or we make physical photocopies and keep it lodged in a vault, so that if somebody decides to tear a page, you know you have a backup copy, digitized and also physical. But we should not at all restrict members of the public from viewing public documents [Desk thumping] in any Government Ministry in this country. That is extremely dangerous. With regard to the issue that—I know the Attorney General will rebut that point in terms of, well, no, the public has an opportunity to view deeds through an online system. But during the lunch break I sat behind my computer and I tried to log on to the PIMS online and it was not working. So, Mr. Vice-President, imagine a situation like that. I need a search today and the online system is not working. That means that the public has no access whatsoever to deeds in this country because they are now dependent on an online platform. 2.30 p.m. And we cannot do that, Mr. Vice-President. We simply cannot do that because when we do this, there will be hundreds of persons in this country who would be without jobs—those search clerks—and not all of the records are digitized and uploaded online. So there is need when these search clerks reach a certain year, they actually have to go and inspect the physical documents, or the physical deeds that were not uploaded yet on the system in order to complete their

UNREVISED 93 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d) title search. One thing I want to ask the Attorney General, with respect to the operationalization of the online platform, is that, are we now giving the public an opportunity to search the memorials that would be entered into the memorial books, which is the folios? Those are the most important entries that we can think about with regard to the indefeasibility of title because we need to know who registered an interest with respect to that land as a folio, who has any rights or whatever, be it working rights, mines, minerals. We need to know that so that when we pass land we would know what reservations that they are subject to. Let me move on to clause 16 of the Bill which amends section 44 of the parent Act, and this deals with minors and minors holding land in Trinidad and Tobago. Now, our laws allow for a minor or a child to hold land in Trinidad and Tobago, but I see that the amendment removed from section 44 the word “restriction” and included the word “caveat”. For the benefit of the public I would just like to read the definition of what a “restriction” is, and a “restriction” according to the definition section means: “a restriction on the way land may be used or dealt with;” So, when we look at the section that deals with “caveat” now—because they replaced “restriction” with “caveat” and that is found at section 74 of the parent Act. A caveat is: “Any person who— (a) claims any unregistrable interest in land, lease or charge; (b) is entitled to a licence; (c) has presented a bankruptcy petition against the proprietor of any registered land, lease or charge;

UNREVISED 94 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

(d) is a judgment creditor; or (e) has obtained a lis pendens, may lodge a caveat with the Registrar forbidding the registration of disposition of the land, lease or charge concerned and the making of entries affecting the same”. So, now we are allowing the Registrar General, in this case according to section 44, to lodge a caveat where a minor is allowed to hold the land. Now section 74, that does not fall within the categories in which a caveat is to be lodged in the Registrar to stop a deed from being registered. So when we put this amendment with regard to a “caveat”, what we are doing is that we are actually stopping any person from transferring land as long as a minor’s name is on the land certificate. Hon. Al-Rawi: That is the law. Sen. S. Hosein: But respectfully, Attorney General, if a minor holds land in this country what we can do is apply to the court, get a guardianship order, and the court can direct how the land is dealt with. But in this case respectfully, with regard to the caveat, we have to engage the caveat procedure now which is the warning and all the other procedures in order to lift the caveat. Hon. Al-Rawi: Thank you so much for giving way. It is a very important point that you raised, but the independent law which relates to the landholding prescriptions against minors still operates. The caveat procedure is to harmonize simply the process of notification to parties. So respectfully, I do not know if there still is an incongruity in terms of logic or process. Sen. S. Hosein: My point with respect to this, Attorney General, is that if we leave the word “restriction” then the position would remain as you just stated with

UNREVISED 95 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d) regard to just going to the court and getting the guardianship order. So I do not understand why we had removed the word “restriction” and included “caveat”. So I think that is something that we can probably consider in more detail with respect at the stage of committee of the whole. Also, when I looked at the Bill there is no definition of minor. So I do not know if you want to change the word “minor”, include it as “child”, and use the regular definition that we used that a person under the age of 18 when we deal with lands under this Registration of Titles to Land Act. And, Mr. Vice-President, I go back to my point by saying that we are passing very important legislation in this country and this legislation found itself under a United National Congress government, and I would like to publicly commend former Attorney General Ramesh Lawrence Maharaj [Desk thumping] for the work that he has done with respect to the land packages to reform the land system in our country and today that work is continuing. I said this at my last debate that I am happy that this Government did not shelve away the land package, but that they brought it, and although it was a UNC initiative, that they saw that it was good law and that we can build on that good law because at the end of the day all of us here are temporary, all of us, but the laws here are permanent. We must make good laws for the governance of the people of Trinidad and Tobago, and we must be more patriotic in this country because we cannot say that because I am a UNC or you are a PNM I would not support the Bill. It is what is best for our country [Desk thumping] it is what is best for our citizens of Trinidad and Tobago because at the end of the day, after any general election they are no longer PNM or UNC, but they are citizens of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago.

UNREVISED 96 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. S. Hosein (cont’d)

So, Mr. Vice-President, with respect to this Bill there is work to be done. We have three more Bills to come. I do not want to breach the Standing Orders with regard to anticipation, but I anticipate the others three Bills that are yet to come and I will be making some further submissions with regard to the amendments to these Bills and I thank you very much. [Desk thumping] Sen. Melissa Ramkissoon: Thank you, Mr. Vice-President, for the opportunity to speak today on a Bill to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. It is not a lot of clauses we are here to debate today that we are amending, so I do not anticipate a lengthy debate today. For me, I will be quite short and very much tailored to just about three clauses of the Bill that I had some queries on. In relation to the piloting of the Bill we did learn a lot more and we learnt some statistics as well as the provisional title which opened up debate into squatters and where we are at with that, but from reading the various amendments put forward I personally would like to believe that it was championed on lessons learnt from practising such law and also from reading about where we are and how we kind of try to get the different Ministries to really operate in today’s society. So, I really believe in it as lessons learnt as opposed to just being mischief or dealing with corruption in our system. I really believe we have been evolving, especially land and land ownership. It is not something that we can talk easily about. Land is quite a touchy topic in our society. Ownership of land is doubly so, and there are different pieces of legislation that have been laid in the Parliament in this particular sitting that is supposed to be coming to us. I unfortunately thought that we were going to do all in one, so I had tailored my debate like that, but at nine o’clock last night they told me that we are going to take it one at a time. So now I am stuck here trying to

UNREVISED 97 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) figure out what I can say in this debate and what I cannot, and I would not say it is any fault of any Senator. If they see the reason in separating the Bills, then so be it. That is where we have the respect that the information would be brought forward. So I will respect the decision and understand that that is why they are keeping us here at longer times, right, Mr. Vice-President? But that is unfortunately how I had tailored mine. So I do intend to try to not touch on other areas while I go through my concerns with the—well, not really concerns, but more questions on the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000 amendments. One of the particular issues, well, concerns I had, was to deal with clause 14, which deals with section 30 of the parent Act, and that is to do with “The Registrar may rectify the Register or any instrument presented for the registration” and the cases are listed, and I noticed that we amended it, that the registrar may have the option to: “(a) in formal matters”—or—“in the case of errors or omissions not materially affecting the interests of any proprietor”; And then (b), we went on to the case where: “in any case at any time with the consent of all persons interested”; And later we even went on to how we will rectify the court or the Land Tribunal. But, what I found that—and I am not sure what is the reasoning behind it, is why did we take out that: “the Registrar may on application— (i) cancel the registration of the instrument or document and restore the folio to its former state”; So, we are not giving the Registrar the opportunity to cancel the registration

UNREVISED 98 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) of an instrument or a document, or cannot even cancel an entry that has ceased. This was existing in the parent Act where we had specific provisions before us today, where the Registrar had the opportunity to cancel or to modify registration that has ceased and this would be dealing with section 30 and it would give the effect—and it even gave you the opportunity as well to restore information that was prior there before. So, I am not certain why, because I thought that would have been very point- worthy to keep in, in terms of clause 30, that we keep that option for the Registrar to have that option to cancel the registration of the instrument or document and to allow the option if there is a matter that has ceased that they have that option to cancel it. So, I would like that consideration to be taken on board. In relation to clause 20, which speaks about addressing or changing section 73 of the parent Act, a lot has been said about this section 73 already and I am one of the particular Senators who applaud movement to doing things online, for doing searches online, for conducting online searches. I am always one who champions that and I thought that it was a good move, a good step for the Government to welcome this initiative for persons to go online and to search the database to find out about land titles and registration, or who owns it and how they go about it. Little did I understand that we were changing the rights and this is what I was a little unclear of because when I read section 73, it says that an attorney-at-law who holds, or is deemed to hold, would have the options that presently exist in the law, but then we added other amendments that say: “A person may, on making an application in the prescribed form and on paying the prescribed fee be entitled to a certified copy or any folio or part of the parcel index map or any plan…in the Registry.”

UNREVISED 99 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d)

And then it went on to say a member of the public may search the electronic copies of which I had just spoken about. So, to me it sounds like we are having both systems in place where we can allow persons to do searches, both going by way of an application form or a registered prescribed form that you fill out as you request certain information from the Ministry, or by means of an online electronic record where members of the public can do a search to find out what is the status of their property or something that is not. But listening to the debate so far this is not the fact and that is what I would probably need some clarification on because I too, like Sen. Hosein, went to the ttconnect website to look at what is required to conduct, or what is someone from the public required to do to conduct a registered land title search. There are specific steps because you cannot just go and search, or feel like you need to search something, you would just go. You need to go with an intent and you have to have specific information to conduct a search. But what I thought was more interesting is not only what you need to do to conduct a search, but now this information is available online. It is on the Government of the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago website. For non-residents and residents there are specific measures you can take, and it says “what do I need to conduct a registered land title search”?—there is an area where they have what fees you pay, if it is $5 or $10 for a general title—and “where do I go to conduct a title search”? Land title searches are conducted in the offices of the Land Registry which are listed and what hours are listed, and this is the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs. So, is it now that we will be repealing this measure to the public based on

UNREVISED 100 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) the amendments?—because this is not what I have gotten from reading the amendments. It makes it seem that we have both options that we can go into the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs and make an application through section 73(2), and as well you have the option of going through the ttconnect efforts through 73(3). So this is what I would like some clarification and I think the public really would like to know because land searches are very important especially now, Mr. Vice-President, since we heard that this is an area where we are trying to reduce corruption because I have heard of three persons paying down on the same piece of land and this is happening a lot with these Caroni lands that are being leased. It is very unfortunate. So, we do not want to take away from the public the opportunity to know their rights, and have the right of information before they go forward into making such a down payment on their land because normally it is 10 per cent of the property and property prices as we know are not cheap anymore—they start from $300,000, so 10 per cent of that—and we are trying to make sure we have provisions in the law that protect citizens of this country who are making an investment. So I do want us to ensure that we are getting it right especially before we get into committee stage when we are looking at section 73 of the Act before us. I would also like to speak about another clause which was mentioned in the piloting and is in the Bill before us, which is with the condominiums, and that is section 13 of the Act and clause 9, and we are inserting: “a condominium folio in respect of every condominium unit created in accordance with section 20”.

UNREVISED 101 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d)

Now, I am a bit confused by this because when we look at section 20—let me just find it so I make sure I read into the record correctly what we are being asked to amend today. So when we look at section 13 we are asking that we insert that phrase in which I just read off, and if you look at the existing parent Act (c) says— this is to deal with the land registrar specifically: “The Register shall be comprised of—ˮ and one of the areas is: “every interest folio created in accordance with sections 17, 19 and 20”. And 20 deals specifically with: “The Registrar shall create a separate folio in respect of each unit and the common property designated by a condominium scheme in accordance with the provisions of the Condominiums Act when it comes into operation or any Act which may repeal and replace it”. So we do have—and the marginal note is “Condominiums”. So, my concern or question here is, whyis it that we need to put in another addition? Because now in that same register, “The Register shall be comprised of”, it has a provision for the condominiums, so why now we are including an additional clause (d) to say, “a condominium folio in respect of every condominium unit created in accordance with section 20” which I just read? Why is it necessary? The thing is we have to remember that these provisions are already existing in the law. If they are not being operationalized or practised, that is a different story because we as parliamentarians, or especially Senators, we are not enforcers, we are legislators. We have it in the law before us already. There is no need to include it again, and if we are including it because persons are not enforcing it that is not our issue to deal with today.

UNREVISED 102 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d)

So I need it to be very clear when we are amending law, or we are trying to put things in place for enforcers to understand, it should not be so. With the provision already exists in the parent Act for condominium folios to be created as part of the register, then let it be. If it is not being done, that is another issue that Ministers need to take up in their different Ministries. My other point that I wanted to raise was the dealing with errors in the deeds which we spoke about again in section 13 of the Act, which is clause 9 of the amendment, and this is a very good provision because we do have issues unfortunately with errors that can be subject to a lot of disputes, and that is why a lot of times with land settlements they ask the parties to come to an agreement outside the court rooms to make the system or the process go smoother. So I do commend the Government for that amendment of the Registrar and the registry. I do want us to also remember that it is important when we are speaking about land and especially State land. The importance of this provisional title, the definition that we have put into this particular Bill of how we consider what is State land and what we are going to give you a provisional title for. I have spoken in another debate about persons building their property on state assets. Not State land, state assets. I do not ever hear politicians addressing these concerns, but as an engineer in the industry I always ask the question: what if? We have properties that are built over gas lines that are part of the state assets and they are part of the right of way of State lands, and these persons, Mr. Vice- President, unfortunately are not there recently. They are there over years and I know every Minister, especially in public utilities, rural development and local government, always have concerns when they have to go into these areas to provide services they have to go with armed reinforcement because it is not an

UNREVISED 103 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) easy access. So when we have amendments we are making to legislation, we have to understand how is this really going to be operationalized, how are we making these parliamentarians sit here for hours, how is it going to benefit the public at any point in time because you should not make a statement that you will be entitled to a provisional title on State lands and you are there at your own risk, who is going to pay if something happens. When you are driving through Forest Reserve compounds there are properties, or shacks as we like to say locally, being constructed at their own risk, and if you give these persons a provisional title or a document that gives them an opportunity to purchase or occupy this land and for their family it is a big risk for themselves, their health, their family and also to the company, because if anything goes wrong it is a reputation hazard that we have to deal with internationally. We have had reports in the public domain, Mr. Vice-President, where children were playing on these pipelines and they were covered with oil. Who had to pay the repercussions? The company. So we have to look at these things. We have not been maintaining a right of way. That is the company’s definite fault. Sen. Wade Mark brought up the issue of using technology such as drones to do their inspection, that can be an avenue to be looked at. Now, we do not ever have to look at the regulations, so we would expect these things to be guides, regulations championed by different Ministries to ensure that it happens. I have raised three clauses that I thought had big questions that were unclear on, how we would really operationalize it and really to ensure that we get it right because you do not want to change something that is going to impact negatively on the systems that you have presently and we know the challenges that

UNREVISED 104 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) exist with our present system. We do not want to make it worse, we want to make it better. So, Mr. Vice-President, with very few words today, I thank you for the opportunity to debate this. [Desk thumping] The Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries (Sen. The Hon. Clarence Rambharat): Thank you, Mr. Vice-President. I am very pleased to join the debate on this Bill, an Act to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. Mr. Vice-President, I have listened to those who have spoken before me, I have taken note, and I think that the general view—and let me say, Mr. Vice-President, straight off, as the Minister responsible for land in Trinidad and Tobago, I want to say that having interacted with my colleagues here and in the other place and with people around the country, I think there is a common understanding that the state of land administration in Trinidad and Tobago is highly undesirable. I counted in this House, for example, two formers MPs, well one MP today, Lower House MP, four candidates, people who sought election, and I suppose everybody who is here is capable of being a candidate seeking election, and whether you are a candidate, an MP, a former MP, at some stage you would have listened to at least one story of immense difficulty in dealing with land, particularly State land. So there is a common agreement amongst politicians for more than 30 years that the state of land administration leaves a lot to be desired, and, Mr. Vice- President, there is no better way to illustrate than to give you an actual example. From the moment this came to me on March 12, 2018, four days before the debate in the other place on the similar Bills, I felt that I must share this with my colleagues and the country, and this has a 20-year history and it must be clearly

UNREVISED 105 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) understood that what we do today on this Bill and the others, and what we do, thereafter, could have profound impact on the people of this country. On the 28th day of October, 1998, Leo Joseph from Diego Martin received a letter from the National Housing Authority Development Corporation and the opening paragraph reads as follows: “Please be advised that the National Housing Authority has assigned you a parcel of land at Lot #29, Cicada/Blue Basin Block, Rivers Estate, under the Squatter Regularisation Programme, for the purpose of constructing a dwelling house upon the following conditions:ˮ—and some conditions are listed there. —October 1998. Thereafter, Mr. Vice-President, on November 13, 2002, the Land Settlement Agency writes to T&TEC saying: “Please be advised that the Land Settlement Agency has no objection to the supply of electricity being given to Mr. Leo Joseph of…Blue Basin, Diego Martin. This area forms part of the Agency’s Squatter Regularisation Programme”. So, two state entities have recognized Mr. Joseph’s status.

[MADAM PRESIDENT in the Chair] Two years later, October 20, 2004, the Land Settlement Agency is writing to the Water and Sewerage Authority. “Dear Sir/Madam, Please be advised that The Land Settlement Agency has no objection to a water supply being given to Leo Joseph of Lot #29 Cicada Blue Basin Block River Estate Diego Martin”.

UNREVISED 106 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d)

3.00 p.m. Madam President, when we were debating the property tax and valuation Bills, on the property tax, in response to Sen. Richards, I made the point that squatters had always been subject to tax after we expanded the definition of “owner” to include “occupier” and I made the point that a lot of people would be surprised to know that squatters to do in fact pay property tax in this country. So I make reference—among the many documents I have a receipt 29th June, 2004, where the district revenue office is issuing a receipt to Leo Joseph for land and building taxes in respect of Lot No. 29 Blue Basin Block, Diego Martin. Land Settlement Agency has issued a receipt to Mr. Joseph to regularize his occupation. And then, Madam President, nothing happened until 2014, and Joseph receives a letter from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development saying that, and I quote: “The Ministry of Housing and Urban Development is pleased to inform you that your application for the Home Improvement Grant has been selected at a Random Draw conducted on 02-OCT-2014.” So he is now entitled to receive a Home Improvement Grant. We are dealing with yet another state agency, the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. On 18 November, 2014, Mr. Joseph writes to the Land Settlement Agency indicating that we have been advised by the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development that we have been selected for a grant, a Home Improvement Grant, and one of the things we must produce is a document showing that we are entitled to ownership of the parcel of land. And that in turn set in train, Madam President, a series of activities between Mr. Joseph, the Land Settlement Agency, HDC, the

UNREVISED 107 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d)

Ministry of Housing and Urban Development. And on each instance, Mr. Joseph is being sent to another state agency to get something which says that he is entitled to occupation of this parcel of land. Ultimately, on April 29, 2016, Mr. Joseph received this letter from the Ministry of Housing and Urban Development saying, and I quote: Reference is made to your application for the Home Improvement Grant and subsequent Assessment Interview… We regret to inform that your application has been denied for the under mentioned reason, and the reason(s):” And the reason is: “Insufficient documentation submitted” In particular, failure to establish a right to occupy the land. On March 06, 2018, the widow now, because after all this time, Mr. Joseph died, and his widow Marva Mendoza—this is her handwritten letter, Madam President, four pages, in which she traces the entire history from 1998 when she got this letter from National Housing Authority, with a deadline to construct and occupy, for which they have complied and in 2018 she is saying to me: “I have now dealt with NHA, Ministry of Housing and Urban Development, LSA, Commissioner of State Lands, T&TEC, WASA and I still cannot get something that tells me that I am the person entitled to occupy this parcel of lands.” Madam President, this is what I deal with every day as a Minister. Because all of us have spoken about the administrative and the bureaucracy and so on. But when people go to a government office and cannot find an employee and cannot find services and cannot get information, the final recourse is to the Minister. And Madam President, when as Minister, I in turn see somebody write to

UNREVISED 108 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) land management division of the Ministry, one letter, and in two months’ time that person has a tenancy agreement, Town and Country approval, an approved survey plan, and a confirmation that they should pay $200 a year for a parcel of land valued at $750,000, in a built-up urban area, when I put Leo Joseph and Marva Mendoza on one side and I put Auzonville—Nile Street, Auzonville—two months, survey plan approved, Town and Country approval, tenancy agreement, receipt for first year’s rent, then I must do my duty as a Minister, Madam President, my duty. [Desk thumping] My duties extend beyond this Parliament. Today, I am here as a Senator. But when I go out, I have a responsibility to represent every citizen of this county. And I have taken an oath to do so without fear or favour. And this Bill is not just words written on a paper, and an oath of office is not something that you swear on and forget. We stand in the defence, whether we are on this side or that side. We stand in the defence of the public interest. And if there is one interest, if today, in dealing with what is before us, we serve one interest, it is the interest of the deceased, Leo Joseph, and his widow, Marva Mendoza, two citizens of this county who have done no wrong and are entitled, if only by virtue of occupation, that right be done by them. [Desk thumping] Madam President, land has a peculiar history. And we are not here, and the state of poor administration is not necessarily by accident. Because in having any system of administration, you require planning and you require consistency. And as the Attorney General observed, in a sense we have gotten here through some inadvertence and all sorts of things including our failure to implement laws that we passed. And if I would just quickly highlight, in my view, some of the key areas.

UNREVISED 109 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d)

The first is, as the AG has pointed out, we started off with a very ancient system of land administration. And it is a system in which the king owned the land and the land was managed by virtue of the edicts of the king. But, subsequently, there were two very important developments in English law, particularly English legal administration, that to this day beset our administration of land in Trinidad and Tobago. And those two developments, Madam President, are first, Lord Cairns’ Act in 1858, and secondly, the passage of the Supreme Court of Judicature Act in 1873. And I will deal first with Lord Cairns’ Act. Arising out of that feudal system, in which the king held command and ruled by edict, the fact is that the court—the system of justice—recognized only the law, and in the case of land, legal title. And Lord Cairns’ Act in 1858 was the first step towards recognizing what will eventually grow to be the principles of equity. So pursuant to that 1858 Act, we were able to access reliefs like injunctions and specific performance. But in 1873, the English courts, the English system, went one step further. And instead of having separate courts, where you could go, on the one hand to one court for a legal claim and on the other hand to another court for an equitable claim, the 1863 legislation made all courts, courts of law and equity; 1873. The point with that, Madam President, is that what we have inherited, we are in a system of land administration, land law, and the registration of titles, where we do not only take cognizance of what is written in a deed, or what is written in a certificate of title, but good lawyers take cognizance of other interests which we call equitable interest. In fact, Madam President, as everybody knows here, I am a solicitor, and

UNREVISED 110 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) one of the things I have flagged, in terms of the evolution of land law in Trinidad and Tobago, is this issue of fusion in 1986, when barristers and solicitors were brought together as attorneys-at-law, and that in itself had a significant impact on land administration and the proper evolution of the administration of land. But Madam President, it is very important that we understand, that I was saying in my very first transaction I was asked to do as a solicitor, related to a parcel of land in central Trinidad. And on the Monday in Charlieville in fact, and the Monday when I wrote up on the weekend my opinion to my boss Ashmead Ali, on the Monday, when I presented him with the file and the beautifully written typed-up memo, he did not even look at the memo. He looked at me and said: “So what you thought about the land?” I said to him, I started to read from parts of the memo, and he said: “No. What you thought about the land?” And he was quite shocked that I did not go on the land. And he said to me something then, which I practise up to today, that you have to go on the land. Because what the title will tell you, the title will tell you who are the parties to the transaction and give you an outline of the survey plan, and so on. And those are the legal matters. You would not see the equitable interest, for example, somebody with a shack; a vendor has established a shack on the land and have been selling for the last 25 years. You would not see an easement across the land where the people—I think it is Sen. Creese who talked about access to the back lots. So the villagers have been using that to gain access to a roadway for 20/25 years and may have gotten rights, in addition to which, you will not see encroachments, and so on. And those are equitable interest. What you will not see on a title, and on a deed, and what you would not see on a Certificate of Title and what you would not see registered in the registry, you

UNREVISED 111 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) will see if you actually go and visit the parcel on which you are doing a transaction. And that is important. It is important that we understand that the manner in which our treatment of land has evolved, has meant that we are dealing with what is on paper and what is also visible on the land. And in a third category, dealings among family members, and so on, that you are unaware of. And I am happy Sen. Ramkissoon raised the issue of the Caroni lands, because that is an example, an example of the impossibility. Because you are dealing with a country where we have fraudsters; the impossibility of determining how many times somebody has gone around to people and offered a deed for sale. I remember a temporary Senator, Sen. Baig, raising the point of not wanting to disclose the deed number on the property tax assessment form. And I made the point to him that anybody could assess a deed, but it is not like he is going to take up the land and walk away with it. But the point is that people in this country do in fact shop the same parcel of land to different buyers and take down payments, and so on. And there is very little that you can do to stop that except through the Trinidad and Tobago Police Service. So that, it is important that we understand, in dealing with all the Bills or all matters relating to land, that it is not merely dealing with the physical title and the record and the registry, but in dealing with a series of interests, some of them which are incapable of registration and will only come to the knowledge of a prudent attorney-at-law or somebody handling a transaction by virtue of physical examination, enquiries and understanding the history of a parcel of land. And in the evolution also, very quickly, I will say that the Moyne Commission had an impact. The Moyne Commission came to investigate/enquire into the condition of workers in Trinidad and Tobago and they paid attention to the

UNREVISED 112 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) oil workers and the sugar workers in particular. It was the Moyne Commission who made the comment that the oil workers seem to be doing well. The sugar workers need help, in terms of the barracks, and so on, that they were living in. And that gave raise to something called the Sugar Industry Labour Welfare Committee, which is a separate housing arrangement for sugar workers, providing loans to sugar workers funded out of a percentage of the proceeds of the exports of sugar. And thereafter, we had the Slum Clearance Act which, in its effect in the clearance of slums, led to the displacement of people who were living there, and some of them were never settled in other places, which were supposed to be a part of the plan clearance. The Land Tenants (Security of Tenure) Act, 1981, memorable for all of us. It was extremely controversial, but also had a tremendous impact on land administration in this country because it created two sets of rights that administratively we were not prepared for. And those two sets of rights are: one, the opportunity to purchase the interest at half the market value, which was difficult to administer and never went well; and the statutory lease, which was part of the entitlement of the secured tenant, which again, created many difficulties and is the subject matter of a lot of decisions in the court. Madam President, in dealing with this Bill, I think we have already established the two systems of land registration in the country. We have already established the various forms of title: a leasehold, freehold, equitable, statutory, and so on. Madam President, I just want to make the point that there are many different ways in which you acquire title in Trinidad and Tobago, and for each method of

UNREVISED 113 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) acquisition of title there are complications involved, and in some cases these bureaucratic delays involved. Very quickly I would say, the one that is most familiar to us is, of course, the deeds of conveyance. Sen. Hosein spoke about in every land transaction solicitors will tell you it takes a lot of time because it is not just the drafting of the document but the number of other state agencies and bureaucracies that you must interact with. So, deed of conveyance is one of the most popular ways of acquiring title. Deed of gift, deed of assent. In fact, deed of assent is one of the most frustrating processes simply because the process of an estate administration and dealing with what is left by the deceased person could be a long and tedious exercise, especially when there are caveats, assignment of leasehold interest, of course. Partition is something under the partition legislation which ultimately leads to the title being conveyed onto somebody else. Adverse possession, which is something that is dealt with in another Bill in this House and we would deal with that when we come to that point. Compulsory acquisition; also a very frustrating method of dealing with land, and the most difficult part of compulsory acquisition is the fact that the State takes so long to pay. Through the operation of law, people acquire title; adverse possession, through matrimonial proceedings and through estate proceedings; through court orders; through matrimonial proceedings estate proceedings and other litigations; vesting order, particularly within the State, and my colleague Sen. Gopee-Scoon spoke about the vesting order, as we with deal with it in HDC lands; mortgagee sales, receiverships, auctions. All of those things are ways in it. Everyone is grounded in a piece of legislation and in carrying out what those various pieces of legislation provide for, we ultimately end up with a means or a method of moving,

UNREVISED 114 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) transferring conveying title and all are going to be caught by this particular piece of legislation. Madam President, in relation to the Bill itself, I would say there are 23 clauses in this Bill, as we have said before, and I would say that this Bill does three things. The first is that it makes some corrections. And I think those are the simplest parts of the Bill, where the Bill makes corrections. It might be typographical corrections and those I will identify as clauses 10, 11, 16, 17, 18, 19 and 20, which make typographical errors and seek to correct those things. There are some of those clauses, which I can call administrative changes, and those clauses are clauses 3, 4 and 5 to 8. Clause 3 introduces certain definitions. Clause 4, as Sen. Mark has said, refers to the senior assistant registrar. And then clauses 5 to 8 all deal with the insertion of the words “senior assistant registrar”. So I consider those to be administrative changes. Of course, both Sen. Mark and Sen. Hosein have raised a substantive issue in relation to the qualifications of that office holder, which the Attorney General will address. And clause 12, I also consider to be administrative, because that clause seeks to delete the words Certificate of Title”, which is how we currently refer to the title held under the Real Property Ordinance and replace it by the current terminology, which is Land Certificate. There are, Madam President, some clauses in this Bill which I consider to create some form or affect some form of legal right. And those are the ones that I want to pay particular attention to. The first one, both the AG and some other speakers have traversed. Sen. Ramkissoon spoke about it and that is the creation of the folio for the condominiums. As we know, even though the condominiums have emerged more than 20 years, the laws have not kept pace with the

UNREVISED 115 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) peculiarities of that particular type of real estate holding. And in the Property Tax Act and in the Valuation (Amdt.) Bill, we have addressed those. And in this Bill, the Attorney General proposes, through clause 9, to allow for a folio to be created specifically for matters relating to registration of title for condominiums. And I do not think anybody could seriously have an issue with that. It represents consistency with previous pieces of legislation that we have worked with. Clause 10, Madam President, I think does—it is seemingly innocuous but it does—something that is very important in the way in which it makes a slight but important change to the law. And what clause 10 says is that it makes it clear that the legal interest in a parcel of land is not created by the registration of an instrument, but by the notification of that interest by the Registrar with the registrar’s certificate. And that may affect, Madam President, it seems to be simple, things like priority, in terms of registration of mortgages, priority interest. It may impact things like the timing of the registration of a caveat and the way in which it affects—whether it is a registration or a restriction—priorities. And it is important that we know that it is not the instrument, in terms of dealing with ownership and registration of interest. It is the record that the Registrar makes that will determine the registration of the interest; the legal interest. And I think that is important. I also want to point to clause 13, which is similar in dealing with lands. Now clause 10 deals with the first registration of land. Clause 10 deals with the first registration, that that first registration, the most important part is the work of the registrar. Clause 13 deals with any further dealings in the land. The important part is when the Registrar creates the legal interest by making the notification in

UNREVISED 116 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) the folder. I think that several Senators have spoken on clause 14. And my note on that is it is vital. And as practitioners, as people who deal and interface with the State bureaucracy, the power of a bureaucrat to make small changes is a vital power. If they choose to exercise it, or if they exercise it to the public’s interest is a matter over which we in here have no control. But we do understand that even in every aspect, even in drafting legislation and publishing legislation there are going to be typographical errors. There are going to be unintended errors and you want to have a senior administrator with the power to make corrections. That I consider to be an important inclusion. I have heard several of my colleagues say they welcome it and I am happy to hear that. Madam President, the other clause which I considered to be extremely vital is in that clause dealing with the recognition of interest—let me see if I could get to it—dealing with the difference between interests that are obvious on the folio and the need to also, as I mentioned at the start, look at things which are not recorded on the folio. Madam President, I heard a lot of discussion on clause 20, which deals with this search, this power to do searches and all of that. I want to say, Madam President, I mean you just have to google “land fraud in Trinidad” and you will see. The Law Association has in fact put out information on land fraud. There are practitioners who have expressed concern about land fraud. I can tell you, Madam President, as a Minister, I have referred matters to the Fraud Squad and I have referred matters elsewhere and it deals with fraud. And it is not something that should be taken lightly. I can tell you from experience and any conveyancer or solicitor will tell you

UNREVISED 117 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) that the history of what we call the Red House is replete with cases where people go into the search room and take a razor blade and cut out deeds from the books. And that is simply because in the Torrens system or the RPO system, all you need to see is the certificate of title. As my friend Sen. Hosein said, it works on the mirror principle and whatever is in the registry is recorded or should be recorded on your duplicate certificate of title. That is a simple way of ensuring that you know all the transactions on your title. In the deed system, for example, if you are doing a transaction in Rio Claro, you will physically have to go the registry for the Rio Claro books or the county books. Because you know, as we have evolved we have kept some of the older terminology. You would have to go to the Nariva/Mayaro books. You may have to go to the county ward of Cocal books in the Red House. And what you are looking for, you have to go through book by book, deed by deed to see if there was any dealings in this land. The only way is if you come across a deed. So if, for example, somebody acquired the title by virtue of a deeds of conveyance from January 1970, and there is a transaction in 1975, where that parcel of land was sold, and that deed is cut out of the book and removed, then somebody searching year to year, book by book, will not see the 1975 transaction and that person will use the 1970 transaction, establish that that is the owner of the land and they will deal with the owner. Unlike the RPO system, where one of the things in the RPO system is that there is an insurance element to it. There is an insurance element, which allows for compensation if people who deal, based on what is recorded on the title, in fact suffer some loss. So that, in dealing with the physical records, I believe that is why the Attorney General is persuaded to allow the public access to the electronic

UNREVISED 118 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) records, to be able to do their searches, to allow the attorney or the clerk of the attorney to access the physical files, which may sometimes be required, because in doing a transaction you may not get all that you need from the electronic file or something in there may not be reliable enough to an attorney and they may require source documents in order to give a client some confidence in relation to the title. And I think that is the mischief it is aimed at and it is not meant to deny anybody access. 3:30 p.m. I mean, across the bureaucracy, across the state bureaucracy, we have an understanding that you do not have unrestricted access to files and information. In fact that is what led to the creation of the freedom of information legislation— Madam President: Minister, you have five more minutes. Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat: Thank you—that the Act says there may be hurdles or there may be pre-conditions to access. But I think on this one, lawyers who have practised conveyancing in this country will welcome anything that protects those historic records, once we have a system of conveyance of title in this country that relies on those historic records, and we do not convert fully to a system by which you can look at one document and establish a historic record. Madam President, it is not too hard to find an analogy. For example, in motor vehicle transactions you will get a certified copy which shows you the chain of ownership of the vehicle. But, registration in this country is not compulsory. Registration of ownership is not compulsory. You are not required to have an entry. You have people who do transactions without recording the transaction, and that is one case in which you would have a registered owner of a vehicle and an equitable owner, that is the person who have paid for the particular chattel. So it is

UNREVISED 119 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d) not unusual, and the reliability of the physical records is the mischief that section 20 aims to deal with. Madam President, I want to close just by pointing to two areas which I consider again to be important because of the way in which I believe it affects legal rights. Clause 23; I do not think anybody has pointed to that but it makes an important change in the deletion of the words “is guilty of” and the substitution of the word “commit” and that is something that for when we get to the other Bills we may see that also that is a very important change. And finally, this of course, is a necessary—clause 22 is a necessary amendment. But, I could see administratively that it could be complicated to administer, because what we are doing here is that we are not completely repealing the RPO. We are not completely repealing the ordinance. We are repealing, but recognizing that there would have been other places in which aspects of that legislation have been saved and we are not interfering with that. So this is not a complete repeal of the RPO, this is a repeal except where parts of the RPO have been saved elsewhere, and it is very important that that is preserved because under the laws as they currently exist, we have rights accruing that we do not want to interfere with a brand-new piece of legislation that affects people’s rights. Madam President, I am very hopeful today that we are headed in the right direction. I will close by saying what I always say. This falls in the hands of bureaucrats, technocrats, public servants. They are the ones to bring this to life, and to change the lives of those individuals like Marva Mendoza and the deceased Leo Joseph, in how they enjoy property rights and they are able to access certainty of title, and I look forward to having full support for this Bill brought by the

UNREVISED 120 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. C. Rambharat (cont’d)

Attorney General [Desk thumping]. Sen. Gerald Ramdeen: Good afternoon, and thank you for the opportunity to contribute to an Act to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. And I want to begin, Madam President, by indicating that I did not plan to speak at this particular venture. But I always like to come after the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries because he always a very unique perspective in his contribution about any matter that we are debating here. And today he began his contribution by giving us the humanitarian side of how this legislation will affect persons in many different ways, and he gave us the example of Leo Joseph and Marva Mendoza, who when you hear stores like that you understand how the kind of impact that what we do here as a Senate has on the people of Trinidad and Tobago. But I want to give another side of that story, and just as the hon. Senator read the letters that he had in his possession, I have a number of letters in my possession too that I want to read that are a bit on the—to demonstrate the way land is enjoyed in Trinidad and Tobago. My learned friend, the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries told us about how long Leo Joseph and Marva Mendoza had to suffer, for want of a better word, in order to get what they were rightfully entitled to, by virtue of the NHA first and the HDC and the institutions that came after. But, let me give you another example, Madam President, and let Trinidad and Tobago know about the other way in which land is enjoyed in this country. I want to read into the record of the Hansard a letter dated the 7th of August, 2017, and it is very important for us to, just like the hon. Minister pointed to the length of time, I also want to concentrate on the length of time.

UNREVISED 121 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

On the 7th of August, 2017, somebody by the name—a citizen of this country— by the name of Alana Haynes Patrolman, wrote to the Commissioner of State Lands, Roosevelt Place, No. 1-2 Jattan Lane, El Socorro Road, San Juan, Trinidad. It is a very short letter and I want to read it slowly so the population can hear it. Dear Madam, I am seeking your help with an ongoing emergency that I have encountered. On the 31st of July, 2017, where I reside at LP No. 56, Butler Alley, off Lady Young Road, Morvant. My door was broken down by my relative who is the owner of land which my house resides upon and all my personal possessions were removed and placed in the front yard of the building. I was not served with any eviction notice. He “have” since—that is the writing, so I am quoting—he have since been denying me access by locking his gate until I get a truck to collect my items. I am currently homeless and have nowhere to house my items. I am kindly begging for your assistance in getting a parcel of land to house myself, family and items. Respectfully yours. Alana Haynes. That is the 7th of August, 2017. We just heard a story about some people suffering over 40 years to get the entitlement there. On the 15th of September, that is one month and one week after, under a Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries—I do not want to use it as an instrument to demonstrate—under a Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries,

UNREVISED 122 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

Land Management Division, Commissioner of State Lands, one month and one week after, Ms. Alana Haynes, unlike Leo Joseph and Marva Mendoza, got a response to her request for land. This Division wishes to acknowledge receipt of your letter dated 7th August, 2017, in which a request was made for the use of a parcel of State land due to an emergency. I am not going to read through all of it because I have a limited amount of time. Please be advised that the Commissioner of State Lands—well it says “stater lands”, has given careful consideration to your request contained in your letter, referred to about and it prepared to grant you, to grant you, a licence to occupy State lands at Lot No. 115, Five Rivers, Arouca as a temporary relief for residential purposes. The Commissioner of State Lands, as a condition of your licence, you are hereby advised that no permanent materials are to be used in the construction of any structure to be built on the site. It must be used solely as a resident for you and your immediate family. And I am going to stop there. Madam President, I have a bundle of letters here—I am putting them away—that ought properly as the Attorney General has said we are here to give support for doing the right thing. To discharge our duty in the public interest. And therefore, whenever wrongdoing is discovered by whoever it is doing, it must be brought to the attention of the authorities and they must act on it, and it cannot be. We are here to debate the registration of titles. The Attorney General made it very clear in piloting this piece of legislation that one of the aims of the legislation is to fight corruption. Corruption comes in all kinds of different forms

UNREVISED 123 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) and if that, if a citizen of this country can write to a public servant, vested with the authority under the State Lands Act to administer all of the State lands that belong to the people and the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago and without many procurement, without any search, without any research, no Cabinet approval, no Ministerial approval. You can take State land and give it away, willy-nilly like that, I hope that when we all act in the public interest those who have committed these kinds of acts are brought to justice if only so that people like, referred to by Minister Rambharat, like Leo Joseph and Marva Mendoza, do not have to be put on the other side. That is one side of it. But this is a bundle of documents referring to one particular individual, one particular individual holding the highest office in this country for the administration of State lands and this is what is going on. Giving away the State land like if she has the fee simple in it, and Trinidad and Tobago’s fee simple belongs to that one person. So, I hope that that is one aspect of it that we will get into. Madam President, I think that no one can properly understand the remit of what we are involved in here, unless you refer to section 2 of the principal Act, which this is a unique piece of legislation that actually sets out what the aim of the legislation is in section 2 and I think for completeness and for Trinidad and Tobago, I think we should, I should be able to read into the record what the purpose of not only the amendments. Because the amendments join in achieving these purposes. And the purpose of this Act by virtue of section 2 of the 2000 Act, is to: (a) “provide certainty of ownership of interests in land and to simplify proof of ownership;

UNREVISED 124 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

(b) facilitate the economic and efficient execution of transactions with respect to interests in land; and (c) provide compensation for persons who sustain loss in circumstances prescribed.” And in order to establish these purposes which are very laudable there are a number of things that are referred to in subsection 3 which I will not go into in detail. But Madam President, the Attorney General took us back to 1066 which is the Norman Conquest. And, Minister Rambharat referred to two significant pieces of English legislation which is Lord Cairns Act of 1858 and the Supreme Court of Judicature Act of 1873 that we must all understand when we treat with pieces of legislation like this. We inherited as an English Crown Colony the land law that formed the law of the United Kingdom and it is that that has shaped the way in which we have administered the registration of land. And in that historical context, one must understand that as the Attorney General indicated we are an island state, and land is perhaps the most valuable resource to all of us. And in so doing, part of that historical context is that on the 15th of June, 1215 what we all celebrate today as Magna Carta was principally established because of the administration in which King John, 800 years ago— plus—was administering the land in the United Kingdom as it is today and the barons were not prepared to accept the way in which that land was being administered in the feudal regime 800 years ago and that led to the removal of King John shortly after. I think it was two months after the signing of Magna Carta. But, Madam President, this Act that we are debating today, the amendments

UNREVISED 125 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) that the Attorney General proposes, are aimed at making better the system that we have. And the Attorney General spent some time in explaining in piloting the legislation that we have registered land which is known as the Real Property Ordinance and we inherited that from the Australian system, as the Attorney General made reference to, which is commonly referred to as the Torrens system. And then we have unregistered land which those we are involved in transactions we call “old law land” where you physically have to go and do the searches. And what we are seeking to do by these amendments is to really tighten up, because the Attorney General has said that this system has been in place for over 100 years and there are certain weaknesses in the system that have exposed themselves over the period of time and we need to change them. And the Attorney General has set out what the aims of the legislation are. In piloting the Bill, we were told that there are over 250,000 squatters in this country who are going to be affected by the fact that we are going to implement a system whereby we hope to achieve a single registered system of land where all interests that people hold in land will be in one place and can be accessed at one time in one system. And the Attorney General was very specific in saying that it is a piecemeal process that we are going to engage in. We heard that the Government has been able to access US $100 million from the IDB, and I am happy to hear that, and $7 million to do the administration. But, one has to understand the background, Madam President, to pieces of legislation like this. And while the Attorney General has said again in this debate that we have had a long period of analysis paralysis and we must bring it to an end and we must move forward, we must also be careful that we move forward in the right direction and with the right approach so that we will get the right result. And

UNREVISED 126 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) why I say that is because while the Attorney General was specific in pointing out that with this loan—[Electronic device goes off]]—that has been given— Madam President: Members, this has been happening a little too frequent in the Chamber, whosever device just went off, I would ask you to leave the Chamber, leave the Chamber, stay outside for about 10 minutes, sort yourself out, talk to whoever you have to talk too, call whoever you have to talk to and you come back in. So, whoever that device belongs to, please leave the Chamber now for 10 minutes. Continue, Sen. Ramdeen. Sen. G. Ramdeen: Thank you. Madam President, I was on the point of the way in which we move forward, and I would like to suggest to the Attorney General that while the process is going to be engaged whereby the Government is going to engage a process—and the Attorney General made reference to Tobago and Trinidad. When one understands the way in which interest in land, proprietary interest in land is created over time, those 250,000 squatters that we have in this country, some of them are what I call “real squatters” and some of them are the beneficiaries of the Certificate of Title, a creation of another piece of legislation, the State Land Regularisation—sorry, Certificates of Comfort. I apologize. A creature that was created under the State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act, Chapter 57:05. We have to understand that occupation is something that happens over time. And included in these 250,000 people will be people who have been in possession for less than 16 years, more than 16 years and over 30 years. And the reason why I use those terms, they are very significant because 16 years is the period of time within which, in private land, you eclipse the title of the owner by virtue of possession. Thirty years is the period of time within which you eclipse the title of the State in relation to land that is deemed to be State land under

UNREVISED 127 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) the control of the Commissioner of State Land, vested in the President. And before 16 years you have periods of time within which people hold an interest and I say “interest”, Madam President, but they are unable to register that interest. And what is important about that is that when one comes to the definition section which is one of the sections that we seek to amend, this is section 3 of the Act, land is defined under that definition section as; “messuages, tenements…hereditaments, corporeal and incorporeal, of every kind and description, or any estate therein together with all parts, passages, ways, watercourses, liberties, privileges, easements, plantations, gardens, mines, minerals and quarries and all trees and timber thereon or thereunder lying or being.” And while the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries made the point that a lot of things that cannot be registered now will, this piece of legislation will be able to cure that defect. And it is a laudable one. What is missing from that definition is that someone who is in possession of land for less than 16 years is unable to register that interest, because it is not a title and it does not fall within the definition section. And I would suggest to the Attorney General, as I did informally to him, that in order to really give teeth to this legislation, and to capture the 250,000 or a large majority of the 250,000 persons, what the English legislature did in 1925 by the suite of legislation that they passed in 1925 which we did not follow, was that it allowed someone to have an interest in land, like a possessory title. We say possessory title, but being in possession dos not give you any title. What it does is that it eclipses the title of the registered owner. This piece of legislation unfortunately, as it presently stands, will not be able to give someone who is actually in possession of the land the right

UNREVISED 128 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) to register that interest, that so-called interest, I would say that they have. And I would ask the Attorney General to careful consider that, and to, if we wish to really achieve the aims this legislation to be able to put into the legislation a definition that will capture that group of people and give them the ability to register. And why that is important, Madam Registrar is because— Hon. Senator: Madam President. Sen. G. Ramdeen: Sorry. Madam President, I apologize; so caught up in this. Madam President, why this is important is because the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries and the Attorney General referred to the fact that a very important aspect of this legislation is the characteristic of the indefeasibility of title that comes out of the Torrens system and is incorporated into this system. And as the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries described in his contribution, even in RPO title, where you are going to register an interest by a memorial endorsed on the back of the Certificate of Title, that will not allow the person who is searching the title to know what is actually on the ground on that particular piece or parcel of land. Because there are many instances, where the indefeasibility of title by persons who think that they have an indefeasible title, when someone purchases, based on the back of the memorial of the RPO purchases, the land, they find that when they actually go on the ground there are persons there who have actually eclipsed the title, and they are allowed to eclipse the title because of the limitation periods that are put into different pieces of legislation. And therefore, you have circumstances where a legitimate bona fide purchase for value purchases a parcel of land based on the memorial on the back of the RPO and then finds that he has to seek some type of compensation from the

UNREVISED 129 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

Compensation Fund because what he purchased is actually not what he is entitled to, and it is no fault of the person who is the vendor. So, Madam President, that is a very important aspect of the registration of title that one has to consider. And, the fact that what we are concerning ourselves with this afternoon is this piece of legislation that is going to definitely modernize the system for the registration of land. And I just want to piggyback again on the example given by the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries. I can speak about it, because the matter has now come to a close and it is not sub judice anymore. But we recently had a situation in this country where persons who were not able to register their occupation because of the absence of certain clauses that are similar to what we are seeking to put in today have suffered great hardship, because while the Opposition supported this legislation in the other place, and subject to the changes that we will suggest we intend to in the public interest, to what is right to modernize the system it cannot be right, Madam President, that a year ago army officers, police officers drove up with their armed vans and vehicles and bulldozers and backhoe and went into a place called Pine Avenue in Sangre Grande and demolished over 50 homes of people who were on parcels of land. There is no mechanism for them to register their entitlement they were on State lands and their homes were demolished by the same administration who brings legislation that tells the country “this is the way to go” and while one understands that a critical part of this legislation is the provisions that deal with condominiums. Well that is at one end of the scale. Madam President, we also want to ensure that the legislation that deals with condominiums in Bay Shore and Westmoorings and Chaguanas and Maraval also

UNREVISED 130 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) deals with the people who live at Windsor Park who are squatting, and the people living at Pine Avenue and all of those thousands of people who also want to register their interest in land. It may well be in the Government’s interest to deal with the condominiums because one understands why. But we should not, by the passage of this piece of legislation at the opportunity that we have to improve the system, not take an all-embracing approach and be able to provide some type of relief for those people. Madam President, just to go on from that point and to develop that, in doing what we seek to do by modernizing the system of registration, land law in our country has changed over time. And one understands the position of the Attorney General, saying well we cannot have more analysis paralysis, and we have been doing this for some period of time. But there are two issues that arise out of that. The first is the way in which someone acquires adverse possession pursuant to a piece of legislation that we will debate after but materially affects what you can register under this piece of legislation that we are debating now has changed over time. And it started off with the old Latin saying of nec clam, nec vi, nec precario and that was then transformed into a system where the law as it stood was that someone who wished to acquire adverse possession had to dispossess the title owner. And then that changed and the law as expounded by Lord Browne-Wilkinson in Pye and Oxford v Graham, that was in 2002, was that you no longer needed to have the intention to dispossess. All you had to do was to have the intention to possess. And therefore, it is those changes over time that we as practitioners have to manoeuvre for our clients in relation to understanding how you can acquire an interest that you can register under this said piece of legislation. That brings me to

UNREVISED 131 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) the next point, which is this. If the Attorney General says we have 250,000 squatters in this country, how are these 250,000 squatters to understand what they must do and how they must treat with their possession in order to come to a position where, as the legislation proposes under, I think it is section 15, that they can register their title. What is important Attorney General is that yes we must stop the analysis paralysis, but we must also be able to educate all of those persons who are affected by the passage of a piece of legislation like this so that they themselves will be able to assist the Government. Because, like with the property tax legislation—and the Government has to go out there and get the property tax forms for over 400,000 or 800,000 persons—450,000 people who have properties. It is a similar exercise that has to be done in getting the registration of titles up to date. And unfortunately, I have been involved in litigation where you cannot chase title and you have go and get aerial photographs that are very, very limited in the Lands and Surveys Department. And unfortunately we had on person in this country, Mr. Paul Williams, who was a photo-geometric engineer that used to actually, out of his own pocket, pay an airplane to fly around Trinidad over periods of time and to capture in photo-geometric form the possession of every single parcel of land in Trinidad and Tobago. And that is what we use at the end of the day to establish whether people fraudulently are acquiring land or not. And one of the things that this legislation proposes, Madam President by the insertion of the amendment to section 23 and also by the amendments that are proposed by clause 29 is to tighten the way in which this registration takes place. But before we get to that, there are a number of persons—and the Attorney General, and perhaps the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries will know

UNREVISED 132 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) this as well— there are a number of persons, who have a profession in going to court with RPO applications for lands that they have not occupied for the requisite period of time to allow to give them that prescriptive title. They go, all they have to do is survey the parcel of land. You can get that done by just paying a surveyor to do it. You get three people to go on an affidavit and say you have been there for 30 years and you go before the court, you advertise, and if you do that you acquire title to that parcel of land which is protected by the indefeasibility provisions under sections 141 and 142 of the Real Property Ordinance. And while you want to concentrate on the fact that we are moving forward, there is a lot of work to be done in clearing up the fraud that exists in the system already. And the Attorney General, in the limited time that he had, sought to explain that under the old law system, Madam President, as it stands now, somebody could convey the Red House. They could convey the Waterfront, and it will be registered. And they could take that and people do not quite understand the consequences of it. But they can take that deed and then go and take bail for somebody, right, which is how the system is manipulated and what it is we are trying to cut out. 4.00 p.m. And the Attorney General says that this is all part of a package of legislation that is supposed to fight the scourge of corruption, and that was voiced as well by the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries. But, you know, the unfortunate thing about that, Madam President, is this. The last comment of the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries was that we must all understand that this falls within the hands of public servants to administer at the end of the day. And when one thinks about when reports of fraud to the Fraud Squad—when it takes 10 years

UNREVISED 133 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) to investigate and the people have died and the documents are lost, the system becomes so innately corrupt that it is very difficult to see the effects of the passage of a piece of legislation like this on the real corruption that goes on in the system. And to not go off course, Madam President, but if I can go straight to the provisions of the Act itself, I would like to suggest to the Attorney General that while Sen. Mark made the issue about the qualifications, when one goes to section 6—and we are amending that section by section 6(3), I would like to humbly suggest to the Attorney General that in addition to putting in the post of a Senior Assistant Registrar in subsection (3) to subsection (6), the qualifications that are set out there, which I think is the point that Sen. Mark was making, and a point that the Attorney General directed Sen. Mark to section 6 of the principled legislation, it says: “No person shall be appointed as Registrar unless he is an Attorney-at-law of at least seven years experience in Land Law.” Respectfully, while we in colloquial terms might understand what land law is, law dealing with land, I guess. It is not a term of legal art, and one would understand that if you say you are dealing with land law, it might be somebody teaching a tutorial in land law at the Hugh Wooding Law School. It might be somebody who now and then deals with land. But, I mean, we really need to tighten this, because these are people—like I made the suggestion at the very outset maybe—who are being given the power to interfere with people’s titles to land. It is, perhaps, apart from liberty, the most guarded possession by the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. I would humbly suggest to the Attorney General that we probably define “land law” as being, perhaps, in conveyancing, or in transactions that deal with the sale of land or the registration of land, instead of just leaving it as wide as it is.

UNREVISED 134 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

I think it will only do better to get the more qualified people to occupy that post. And in section 6(3), the one that we are amending, it says: “No person shall be appointed as”—a Senior Assistant Registrar or—“an Assistant Registrar unless he is an Attorney-at-law.” Attorney General, I think we should put a “lil bit” of qualifications there, because we understand. I think you and I—the people who are involved in the system— understand. An attorney-at-law who is qualified from the Hugh Wooding Law School, respectfully, to all attorneys-at-law who qualify, they have very little practical knowledge about how the system works, and despite the best training in conveyancing and land law at the Hugh Wooding Law School and at wherever institution they may get their LLB from, it really does not make them qualified to be able to adjudicate and to administer something as important as this piece of legislation. So I would humbly suggest that we just tighten that. The substantive pieces of law that we are asked to look at today, Madam President, I want to deal with clause 29, and that particular clause seeks—the amendments to section 29 seeks to do a number of different things, and I think it forms itself into the new clause 30(1)(a) to (d), and what this seeks to do is to give the Registrar the power to rectify the register or any instrument presented for registration in the following cases. Attorney General, may I direct your attention to (b) and (c) and (d) of your new clause 30, where it allows the Registrar by subclause 30(1)(b) to rectify the Registrar to: “in any case at any time with the consent of all persons interested” While one understands that you might have to rectify title and, therefore, this is really like a deed of rectification power that one is vesting in the Registrar to exercise, ex proprio motu, the difference, or what I may want to suggest, Attorney

UNREVISED 135 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

General, is that you might have a situation like this where you have two parties who are the parties to the memorial, again, affecting a parcel of land. But on the ground, there may be other persons who may then subsequently find out that while the legitimate de facto parties to the conveyance would be allowing the Registrar to have the power by just informing these persons. We may well do better in the legislation if we give an opportunity in this section that to give notice when this is done so that anyone who is affected, but whose name is not on the register, will have an opportunity, whether it be in 14 days or 28 days. Their interest may be affected and they can apply to the Registrar to either rectify or re-rectify, if you want to use those words or to at least treat with what interest they may have that may be affected by the consent of the two de facto parties to the transaction. So that is one way I think we can improve that. The other section I would like to suggest to the Attorney General that we can amend to tighten the legislation is in subsection (d) and the experience from a practitioner’s point of view, Madam President, is that on a very frequent basis, unfortunately, in the court, you have situations where the Registrar General is made a party to proceedings, especially where you have applications to set aside an RPO title and one needs the order of the court to interfere with the title that is already registered on the RPO register. And what you have is that you will have determinations of the court that will then give directions to the Registrar General to rectify the title or to cancel a certificate of title, but there is no actual requirement of a period of time within which it is to be done. So you have cases where the private parties can go for contempt or they can go to enforce the Order, but I think we would do well if we put in a provision that places a duty upon the Registrar General to be able to do this within a particular

UNREVISED 136 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) period of time. It will help those people—you see, Attorney General a very practical—sorry. Madam President, a very practical way of understanding why that is important is this. You have a situation where someone goes to court to set aside an RPO title. The court delivers a decision on the 1st of the month. What the court does by that decision is say the title is set aside and give a direction for the certificate of title to be cancelled. Before that is effected by virtue of compliance with the court order, the person with the registered title goes and sells to a bona fide purchaser for value, having the protection of the indefeasibility of title under 141 and 142 and, therefore, it allows—the system itself inherently allows you to commit a fraud on an innocent bona fide purchaser for value, because the decision of the court, which is what you are targeting here, has not been effected within that period of time. And, therefore, I think it is important—it will do well for the legislation for us to put that in there. I do not know if it is possible that by virtue of the Supreme Court of Adjudicature Act, we can place a duty—we might be able to do it in here—on the Registrar where there is any order of the court that affects— Madam President: Sen. Ramdeen, you have five more minutes. Sen. G. Ramdeen: Thank you, Madam President—to inform. It is usually done, for example, where a fraud is committed, that you would have a direction by the court to send the order of the court to the Director of Public Prosecutions and the Commissioner of Police. And there is no reason why we cannot put in a clause that places a duty upon the court or the Registrar of the Supreme Court to inform the Registrar General, in any case. Because as you know, Attorney General, when the matters are filed, the court knows exactly if it is a setting aside and RPO or

UNREVISED 137 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) whatever it is, and once there is a duty placed we can effect that protection to be able to make better that system. Madam President, there is one other section that I want to quickly treat with, which is the amendments to section 73, and there is a particular time provision that is dealt with in subsection (4) and subsection (5) that deals with the suspension period, which is really the period of time for which one can lodge a caveat, and you could have persons with an opposing interest lodge their interest during that time. I have tried to study this section carefully and the first thing that jumped out is the fact that, I think the period of time for the suspension is quite short, because how it operates, as presently drafted, Attorney General, is that the suspension is automatically lifted within 14 days without the intervention of anyone. And therefore, if you have a system as we currently have where in 14 days you do not get a deed registered and, perhaps, a caveat is not registered even in that period of time, you can run into the unfortunate circumstance of someone having an opposing title or an interest in land, opposed to how you described it here, as the principal instrument, and during the period for the suspension—which is the period of time within which people can come forward—it can defeat the purposes of the legislation because the time period is too short, the suspension is expired and one is able to register immediately thereafter. And, therefore, I would ask the Attorney General to carefully look at those subsections. I propose to treat with them in the committee stage. Principally, Madam President, this piece of legislation is a piece of legislation that I think we all agree is needed to modernize the system of land registration but one has to be, as I indicated, at the very outset, understand that in

UNREVISED 138 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) order for us to reach the point that we want to reach with the registration of titles of land, there are many persons that are affected with varying interests that can be registered under this piece of legislation. I want to emphasize that education is a very important element of the passage of any piece of legislation like this, and if it has not been done before it is not too late on the passage of the legislation—whether before it is assented or after the regulations are put in—for the Government, through the Office of the Attorney General or the Ministry of Legal Affairs, to undertake an education programme in the very rural communities—it is more important to do it in the rural communities—by qualified persons, so that persons who do not have access to the Internet, persons who do not understand what their interest is, people who are sitting on their rights for a number of years and also persons who can be affected by persons who are in possession of different parcels of land can also do that. We have large estates in this country with persons who have been occupying lands for a number of years, and they have no way in which they can gain relief to provide them with the security that they are entitled to, as the example given by the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries. And, therefore, I look forward to seeing that the implementation and the rolling-out of this piece of legislation will provide for those things so that the entire population of Trinidad and Tobago will benefit at the end of the day. I thank you, Madam President. [Desk thumping] The Minister of Energy and Energy Industries (Sen. The Hon. Franklin Khan): Thank you very much, Madam President. I rise to make a brief intervention in this debate on the suite of land Bills before us, starting with the Registration of Titles to Land (Amdt.) Bill, which will be followed by the other three, hopefully, during the course of this afternoon, this evening and into tonight.

UNREVISED 139 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. F. Khan (cont’d)

Let me start by congratulating the Attorney General for his foresight and his vision in bringing these pieces of legislation before this honourable House, especially during this period where we all know there is a serious crime situation in the country that we have to tackle, and we have been focusing on a suite of crime Bills. We have been focusing on a suite of financial Bills coming out of the Minister of Finance, Bills to improve the judicial process and all I think, compliments to the Attorney General and the Minister of Finance. But, in the general legal architecture of Trinidad and Tobago, a lot of emphasis is placed on the DPP’s Office and the Solicitor’s General Office, but the unsung hero in this whole architecture to me sometimes is the Registrar General, because there are a lot of issues that are handled by the Office of the Registrar General and, in particular, land management. So I want to congratulate the Attorney General. I will only make a brief intervention and deal with two specific aspects of this Bill which I want to contribute to. The background has been outlined in the Bill Essentials here, starting in 1978, where the Law Commission undertook a programme of reform aimed at modernizing the legislative framework. We went on to debate these various Bills in 2000 and just like the DNA, it took 17 years before it was proclaimed. Why the inertia in this country for so long? Here we have back-to-back examples of issues of inertia that have suffocated Trinidad under various administrations, and I think that as a country we have to wake up, smell the coffee and understand that we have to progress forward. So, in that context, I really want to congratulate the Attorney General in bringing these Bills before us. [Desk thumping] Well, let me make some general philosophical points. In a modern democracy, one of the most fundamental basic human rights is the right to own

UNREVISED 140 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. F. Khan (cont’d) property. Madam President, through you, I think Sen. Ramdeen said outside of the right of security, it is probably the most fundamental right available, because for some strange reason, the human species likes property, and if you study human anthropology—[Crosstalk] No. It is rooted in human anthropology, you know. It is called the territorial instinct where even the dogs have it. The dogs urinate across their boundaries, you know, and “dey say ah dog bad in its own yard when he comes out”. And he knows where his yard is. The right of property is engrained in the human psyche. We all know—you know how much chopping in this country took place over boundaries? In the country they do not say “meh boundary”, you know. They say “meh bound”. Doh cross meh bound” and plenty cutlass pass over the years based on one foot of land as to where the fence is or where the fence is not. I just want to relay an experience I had in Texas some years ago when I used to be a geologist, I think. We used to go to this annual conference of AAPG, American Association of Petroleum Geologists, and they would normally have a field trip after the conference and you will traverse riverbeds and looking at rocks and what have you. One day this field trip was headed by a Professor from the University of Texas in Austin, and then while we were on the ranch, a Dodge Ram pulled up and a rancher took out his shotgun and said: “Get out of my property.” [Laughter] Through you, Madam President, when a Texas rancher pulls a gun at you and he says: “Get out of my property”, you might as well very well listen to him and get out of his property. Because he will shoot and I am serious. He will shoot because property rights are so fundamental to the American, especially down south, in states like Texas and Arizona, that it tells you how fundamental this aspect of it is.

UNREVISED 141 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. F. Khan (cont’d)

I just want to share one more experience before I go on to the two clauses I want to speak about. Land has always been the subject of revolution, you know. Land tenure has been the basis of most of the Latin American revolutions. Am I right Sen. Creese? Madam President, through you, let me just share a lovely experience with this House. One of the high points I consider of my political career is when Nelson Mandela came to Trinidad. The Prime Minister, Mr. Manning at the time, asked me to accompany him when he had to speak at the Centre of Excellence. He was staying at the Hilton. So there I was with the great Nelson Mandela, two of us alone sitting down in the backseat of a car, driven by the army, and for half an hour we had a one-on-one conversation. Few people in the world had that privilege. I do not speak about it much—and I asked him—not many questions, because he was old—why did you not go the way of Robert Mugabe and seize the lands that were taken away from your people? And his answer to me was: “Son, you struggle your entire life to help your people, but at the end of the day when they get up in the morning, if they do not have a job to go to and their children do not have a school to attend, you have done nothing.” He said it will take three generations to regularize South Africa, but it is the way I had to go. I could not go the way of Mugabe. Lo and behold, to tell you how fundamental this land issue is, the Young Turks of the African National Congress now are revolting. Do you know why? Because of land tenure. And they want the land situation rectified in South Africa, because it is so fundamental to the human being and so fundamental to the concept of land that it is intrinsic in the human species that you do not play the fool—sorry. I do not know if that is parliamentary—but you do not mix matters when it comes

UNREVISED 142 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. F. Khan (cont’d) to issues of land. So with those introductory remarks, Madam President, and I said I would be brief, I just want to deal with two aspects of this Bill, and to talk about what I am reading out here from the Bill Essentials further: “Further, a proprietor or potential purchaser is assured that what is endorsed on the Land Certificate is indefeasible and the need to worry about hidden defects capable of defeating title is significantly reduced.” That, to me, is a lot of the racket that used to take place, because I know of instances where if you have the money to buy the land, cash, you go to an attorney—good attorney. They search the title. They say it is free of all encumbrances and they are willing to proceed with the transaction. Lo and behold, that same parcel of land, if you go to the bank—and the bank has a cadre of high-powered attorneys—they will find defects in the title, you know, and you will be surprised to know what minor defects they say, and sometimes it stops you from getting a mortgage from the bank. And the bank’s attorneys, I do not want to call them by name, but it is a particular group of attorneys. I say that without apology. So this indefeasibility will give the Registrar General that power to make its substantial move in the protection of the people’s interest. The other aspect is the issue of the Registrar General having the powers in formal matters as in the case of errors or omissions not materially affecting the interest of any of the proprietors. I have seen too many occasions where issues that are not material to the title have stopped the transfer of land, the probate of a will. I know of one particular example that I was involved in—I cannot call too much of names here—but in the probate of the will, the person’s name was Joanne,

UNREVISED 143 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. F. Khan (cont’d)

J-O-A-N-N-E, and the surname. In another document, it marked Joe-Ann and the lawyers took the position that they are not sure that this Joanne is the same as the other Joe-Ann. Obviously, the name, one document had it with a hyphen, the other document had it without in hyphen. In a case like that under these new pieces of legislation, the Registrar General could adjudicate. He or she will now have the power to say that is a minor defect, if it is a defect at all. So that is a very, very good part of this law. Most of the other speakers would have covered a lot of the legal aspects of this matter. The other final point I want to deal with, Madam President, is clause 10 amends section 14 of the Act to clarify that it is the entry of a memorial in the folio endorsed by the signature of the Registrar that gives legal effect to the first registration and not the signature on or registration of an instrument or document as the law now currently provides. The whole concept of first registration, I think it was dealt by the Attorney General as it relates to Tobago lands, and I think the people of Tobago are now seeing the light at the end of the tunnel to have their land issues corrected. [Desk thumping] But today, I speak as in my former portfolio of Member of Parliament for Ortoire/Mayaro which included Moruga. And this same concept will apply to the Merikins, the people who formed the companies of Trinidad—First Company, Second Company, Fifth Company, Sixth Company—because they were descendant of African slaves who fought for the British in the American War of Independence. When the British lost the American war they were given—they came by companies and they settled in the Moruga area. Most of them know it is their land. They have passed it done for generations, but none of them has a deed, none of them has a certificate of title.

UNREVISED 144 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. F. Khan (cont’d)

In fact, my favourite village in Moruga is a place called Dougla City, in Fifth Company and “Dougla City” means “Dougla City”. [Laughter] It was the result of a mixed marriage with—actually the mixed marriage produced 12 offsprings. I mean, I really love going there, because it just tells you what Trinidad could be. So 12 Douglas got 12 parcels of land from the master parcel. The 12 Douglas, half married to Africans and half married to Indians. So you have almost pure Indians and pure Africans who are first cousins and they all live in one community. It is about on a 20-acre parcel of land. Everybody has their lot and their plot. It was distributed to them over the generations. [Crosstalk] It is a PNM mess, if I should say so myself, but it personifies what life could be in Trinidad if we behave ourselves. So, through you, Madam President, this first registration concept will help the people of the Dougla City, help the people of Fifth Company, help the people of Sixth Company, help the people of Mason Hall, it will help the people of Plymouth and will help the people of Calder Hall. So, again, it is good legislation. It is to the benefit of the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. It gives you the right to own property—fee simple is the word they used—free of all encumbrances. It makes the system less cumbersome. It makes the system more user-friendly. It makes the system more affable to the national population, to the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. Again, why this legislation has taken so long to come before us? As the saying goes, “all’s well that ends well”, and I am sure this piece of legislation will end well here this afternoon as we unanimously pass this Bill and the other subsequent four Bills. With those few words, Madam President, I thank you. [Desk thumping]

UNREVISED 145 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes

4.30 p.m. Madam President: Sen. Haynes. [Desk thumping] Sen. Anita Haynes: Thank you, Madam President. Thank you for the opportunity to—well, thank you for recognizing me to contribute on this debate on an Act to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000. I do believe that all the speakers who have gone, thus far, on the Opposition Bench have already noted that the purpose of the Act and the amendments are indeed quite laudable and something that, in principle, we want to support, because the idea—and as everyone who has spoken noted, of certainty in ownership of land is something that is culturally critical to our citizens. And I mean, globally, but in Trinidad and Tobago, in particular, there is a penchant for ownership and looking at who owns the property, and I think that is what Sen. Khan was alluding to when he was talking about the boundaries. I would just like to take the opportunity before I go into the clauses of the Bill to just address one point that I have heard raised, in particular, by the Minister of Trade and Industry, which is that the Bills—when the Minister was speaking, the Minister spoke about the importance and the revolutionary aspect, and the groundbreaking nature of the Bill, and the land reform package in totality, which, again, we all agree with, but then the Minister questioned, well, why did we not take it altogether? So my question is, if it is so important and so critical then I think we should be afforded the time to go through each piece of legislation one by one. So I think we are agreeing, but there may be a difference in the approaches and it is not—I think it may be put forward as a delaying tactic but, more importantly, as a way to say, yes, we agree that this package is important and it is

UNREVISED 146 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d) essential, and it will touch and affect the lives of many people in this country. So, therefore, let us do it the right way and make sure we get it done properly, and that we show our commitment to the people of Trinidad and Tobago and putting forward the best work. Because we cannot on one hand lament the work ethic of persons outside and say, you know, we need to improve the work ethic, and then in here say, well, let us just try and get things done “all in one shot”. I also thought the contribution by Sen. Rambharat was rather informative, and the story of Leo Joseph and Maria Mendoza, I think, is one that I have heard time and time again and that I have seen myself. And, while I reflected on the legislation before us, all the pieces of legislation, I said to myself, what would be the impact of the legislation, once we get done with our business here, on the lives of the people of Trinidad and Tobago, and in theory it would be extremely impactful, and it would be revolutionary, as we have all said. However, unless we work on the implementing agencies—and I know the Attorney General said that in his wind-up he would give some of the details and add some flesh to the arguments, but unless we work on the implementing agencies, would we have effectively done anything here, rather than just pass the legislation and hope for the best? Sen. Rambharat, in reading the letter—sorry, Minister Rambharat, in reading the letter from Mr. Leo Joseph and Maria Mendoza, noted that they had to go to several different agencies, and had letters from several different people, and I had in my notes before, you know, why do we have so many land-related agencies and institutions scattered all over the country? So, while we are saying in the legislation, and it is listed right here in section 2 of the parent Act, that this Act is to facilitate an efficient execution of transactions.

UNREVISED 147 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d)

So, while we are trying to get this part right with the legislation, we are ignoring the fact that the Registrar General is under the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs. There is a Land Management Division and the Survey and Mapping Division in the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries. There is Town and Country Planning Division of the Ministry of Planning and Development. The Ministry of Trade and Industry deals with some issues for building, constructions and permits. There is the HDC, the Land Settlement Agency. Some of the 14 corporations deal with land issues. All of these people hold manual records and there is different information about the same parcel of land held in Ministries scattered throughout the Government. So, as you reflect on the story of Leo Joseph and Maria Mendoza, once we get through this exercise, will we really be helping them or is this same system going to obtain? Because, have we looked at the implementing agencies of the Commissioner of State Lands, the Registrar General, the Conveyancing Department, and they are all under immense pressure, and so we bring in the new system and we pass the law, are we in any way thinking about how the legislation will actually go forward and be implemented? And I thought Sen. Rambharat’s story—Minister Rambharat—sorry again— it just speaks to, we do one thing inside the Parliament—and I think Sen. Ramkissoon raised it as well—and outside of the Parliament, what we desired and what we hoped to see happen is not exactly—is not what obtains. And so, I would just like to take a minute and look at the role of the Registrar General’s Department just really quickly, and it is responsible for the registration of all civil land and company records, and it is the sole custodian of these records. The department has been at the Registration House in South Quay since 1999, and prior to that it was

UNREVISED 148 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d) located in the Red House. We have a situation where we are modernizing the land laws and we are all in agreement with this, but are we modernizing the institutions that have to implement these laws? And, you know, you have stories about strikes where workers are dissatisfied with their working arrangements, and, you know, I think the department was supposed to move to the Government Campus Plaza, and I am not sure, you know, if, in his wind-up, when the Attorney General starts to deal with, again, the flesh around the bones of the legislation, because while the foundation is important—and, yes, while it is important for us to get started and to start somewhere, it is also important for us to know, or for the public actually to know that this is not an exercise of us just saying, we have done something and we checked the box, and then we leave it. If it is meant to do something, well, let us do it correctly and let us give the citizens a fighting chance so that when you go to engage with these institutions that you have an opportunity to really reap the benefits of the legislation. So, I just wanted to look at some of the implementing agencies, but not to run afoul of the Standing Orders. I do have one—and I am not seeing the Attorney General in the Chamber, but I do have one proposed amendment. So, to just get to the gist of it, in the parent Act, section 11 talks about the Registrar, who: “…by authority in writing given to officers of the Land Registry— (a) require that such authority be exercised in accordance with”—the— “general or specific…” So that the Registrar may look at the Deputy Registrar, the Senior Assistant Registrar, et cetera, and delegate duties by authority in writing. And clause 14 of the amendment amends section 30 of the parent Act, and it says that:

UNREVISED 149 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d)

“The Registrar may rectify the Register or any instrument presented for registration in the following cases” And the Attorney General explained in his opening remarks about why this clause was rectifying a major defect in that it allowed for a flexibility so that you are not crowding out the system, or making the system unnecessarily cumbersome. But my concern is with section 30(1)(b), which reads—the amendment reads: “…in any case at any time with the consent of all persons interested”. So that the Registrar and, if, by virtue of section 11, anyone that he or she may designate in writing, would give the authority to in writing, “may rectify the Register or any instrument presented for registration in the following cases”. And what I was hoping is that because we have all noted how important landownership and how important this register is to us, and Sen. Khan, Sen. Ramdeen, Sen. Rambharat all noted how easy the instances of fraud can take place, especially in relation to land issues, and we live in a country where—I think as most people noted that not everyone is honest, and so that when you talk about— [Interruption]—well, yes. But when you are talking about given consent, I was hoping that the Attorney General will consider that we can put that the consent be in writing, because it is very easy, I think, where you have seen people come up with a story or concoct a situation where they have said that this has been granted or the land had been transferred. And you have had instances where elderly parents have been duped out of their property by even people as close as their children. So I am saying if—and the Attorney General noted earlier on that section 29 was an anti-fraud device, and I am saying this is a very simple consideration that we can just insert the word to give owners, or to give persons who have property

UNREVISED 150 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d) rights just that added comfort that you cannot just interfere with their ownership, and that changes cannot be made easily. Because, while we do want a system that is efficient, we also want a system that protects the citizens, and protects the rights of law-abiding citizens. As I was going through the legislation, I thought that we can look towards that as a possible added protection. And the reason being that I said that we do support the legislation, in principle, and the principles of the legislation. And so, as we move forward I think that was the one amendment to one of the clauses that I had, but I do have the more general concerns of whether or not we can properly implement it and whether or not we are going to put enough meat into the implementing agencies to ensure that the proper competency and training will be held. Because, when you are talking about—if you look at, under the idea of issues of training and competence, which arise in both the Registrar General’s Department and the Surveys and Mapping Unit, you know, we have to talk about whether or not, as we modernize the system. And as we look to move forward, we have a staffing complement that is capable of doing what the legislation is asking them to do. And so, you are looking at what we can anticipate as a request for demarcations and surveys because of recent developments, including things like the property tax, and people will want to get their affairs in order. So I am asking if the system, as it stands, would allow for this swift move for modernization. You know, Minister Rambharat went through the history of land registration in England and Wales, and I had also looked at this, and I looked at the timeline which is quite extensive. I think the Attorney General did note that this will take time, that as we move forward we do have to start somewhere and that it will take

UNREVISED 151 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d) time for us to get there, but while we understand that, we can learn from our mistakes in previous cases where we would have passed laws and not been able to implement them because we did not—I think the analogy that he used, that while the grass is growing on the long-term issues, there were short-term pastures. So that, while we are looking at the legislation as a long-term fix there are simple, low-hanging, short-term fixes that we can do if we really took a holistic approach to this, and a holistic and sensible approach where you start with the agencies that are meant to implement the legislation and move forward. [Cell phone rings] Madam President: I will ask the Senator with the offending device to leave the Chamber and return in 10 minutes, okay? Sen. Haynes, as I invite you to continue your contribution, I just have to remind you that you are now going over, okay? All right. Sen. A. Haynes: Thank you, Madam President. I would also—because my intervention here was also brief, because I really wanted to raise the point of written consent. But I do want to stress again that the need to prove ownership of land has always been of great importance, and that you look back, I think, even to as far as the Neolithic era, the need to prove ownership. They found evidence there, what we thought were burial grounds were actually demarcation lines. So this is a critical and essential area, and because of how important it is I think there is a very big need to get it right, and for us to do all that we can. So, I urge the Government to think about the amendments that the Opposition Bench will make, because it is meant to strengthen the legislation, and it is meant to help it work for the citizens. And if we can all agree that that is what we are here to do, then I believe that we can get through this in a manner that will show respect for the nation that we are meant to serve. As they look on at us

UNREVISED 152 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Haynes (cont’d) today, because a lot of people look on when we deal with land issues because it is so important that they will feel comforted that we have been doing their work. I thank you. [Desk thumping] Madam President: Sen. Obika, I would remind you to put your mike on, so that I can see. Sen. Obika. [Desk thumping] Sen. Taharqua Obika: Thank you, Madam President. I wish to assure Members that I would be as brief as is possible as I seek to simply add to this debate. Basically the Bill—the core tenets of the Bill have already been outlined and I do not wish to go over that, and so I would move on to some main issues that should arise. So, if you look to Part VII, sections 65, 66, 68, et cetera, regarding the Assurance Fund, and I see in the parent Act it makes prescription for the Assurance Fund, “such fees received by the Registrar as may be prescribed”, and reference is made to a negative resolution of Parliament. I want to ask the Hon. Attorney General if he did not see it fit to bring in the actual amount that would be required when you look at the valuation of a property that would be required to be contributed to the Assurance Fund. I hope that the Attorney General could give some guidance as to that, because, really and truly, this would be a fiscal matter, as it would impact on the Government’s ability to effect aspects of the legislation regarding the repayments of persons aggrieved. This is an important aspect of the Bill. Some amendment was made to Part VII however, no change was made to impact upon with the percentage of the assessed value that would require a transfer to the Assurance Fund. Madam President: Sen. Obika, I am so sorry, but I am not sure I am understanding the relevance of what you are saying. We have an amendment Bill that deals with specific sections in the parent Act, so just point me to where, what

UNREVISED 153 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) you are talking about as we move along, please. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you. Madam President, as I said earlier, Part VII. I guess it is my willingness to go so fast that probably caught persons off guard, and I apologize if that happened. But if you look at Part VII of the parent Act, the clause that deals with—that would be clause 18, basically, clause 18 is the only clause that dealt with amendments to Part VII. So, all I am asking the hon. Attorney General is to consider, or ask him if consideration was given on—if they are planning to introduce it in the committee stage of the Bill regarding the actual amount percentage of the assessed value, for example, or the formula that would be used to make contributions to the Assurance Fund. So that is the first point I wanted to make, given the importance of the Assurance Fund as it really looks to rectify those unjustly deprived of their rights over real property by reason of the operation of the laws. So, that is that initial point, Madam President. Regarding a main issue that persons would have stressed on, for example, the hon. Minister of Trade and Industry would have mentioned the importance of this legislation and the registration of titles for persons to access credit facilities, and, specifically, mortgage facilities, mortgage lending. A main aspect of acquiring a mortgage would require a process of evaluation and qualification, and if one needs to understand the mortgage facilitation procedure, a key aspect of that would be the deed of conveyance, and also ensuring that the property is identified for purchase, has a valid title regarding a deed, and is free of encumbrances, as the hon. Minister of Energy and Energy Industries mentioned prior. Now, once we accept that it would be important, Madam President, to inform the population as to why this is necessary and why this is important,

UNREVISED 154 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) because there are many studies, and the literature basically points to a correlation or a causal relationship between land registration and economic development. And one article I want to point to, which basically would form essentially the second and final point of my contribution to this debate today, but, albeit the second, I may need at least 10 minutes to wind it up, right? I want to point to an article titled, “The effects of land registration on financial development and economic growth: A theoretical and conceptual framework…”, by Frank Byamugisha. I would not attempt to repeat the surname. Now, basically, this is a document of the World Bank, right, and they basically looked at establishing that direct relationship, and I want to read just the abstract, part of the abstract for the record, Madam President. They are saying that this framework in terms of land registration is necessary to improve upon current and past investigation approaches which are focused on one sector. So they are saying that it is important to understand that land registration affects every sector of the economy, and land tenure— Sen. Gopee-Scoon: One second. I just wanted the quote, which report he is taking that from. Sen. T. Obika: Okay. Thank you. I will repeat it, “The effects of land registration on financial development and economic growth: A theoretical and conceptual framework of the World Bank”, by Frank Byamugisha. The second time it is a little better. Now, basically, there is a drawing, a diagrammatic that points to land registration and I just want to run through an oral visual for persons. So it starts at land registration— Hon. Al-Rawi: Oral visual.

UNREVISED 155 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d)

Sen. T. Obika: I am one who takes correction, you know, so you can repeat it for my— Hon. Al-Rawi: Oral visual. I just found it interesting. Hon. Senator: Interesting concept. Sen. T. Obika: One of my vocations is storytelling. One point I want to bring is this, in the World Bank’s Doing Business report in terms of registering property, the World Bank asserts that after registrations in some jurisdictions, price property values increase, okay? I just want to read a little bit of that: “Evidence shows that owners with property registered titles are more likely to invest in the local economy. Furthermore, increase in land value and land efficiency is often observed. In Nicaragua, having a formal title not only made owners more likely to invest but increased land values by 30%. Following a land titling project in Thailand, property increased in value by 75–197% after being registered”. Now, there can be social fallouts from this; therefore the Government would want, as a counterpart to this legislation, to look at supporting young professionals, as the hon. Minister of Trade and Industry pointed to the challenges of young persons to access mortgages, we would want to assist young professionals in mortgage support given most persons do not get contracts beyond five years which are not favourable to lending institutions with the exception of the TTMF, but the private lending institutions who would find the risk to be beyond bank risk. So that is that point, Madam President, the Government should take note of that aspect. Another point I wanted to raise in this same issue regarding development and its relationship with land registration is that the steps for property purchase and transfer of title are a key aspect of this elicitation as it affects the collateral which

UNREVISED 156 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) is used in business operations which supports new loans, and, of course, the property should be available for resale of the buyer. Now, Madam President, financial development is causally linked to land registration. Land registration enables the market to move more efficiently. It allows tenure and security. It improves the ability of persons to invest because it reduces information asymmetry, so therefore the lenders can place more trust in the system given that they cannot be blindsided by new information, or information that the other parties may have access to and they are not, given the inefficiencies in the system. So, obviously, us on this side, we applaud any decision to correct wrongs in our society. All we are doing is ensuring that the procedure that is embarked upon really brings some form of restitution to persons who may be aggrieved. A key aspect of financial development is the transformation of land into a liquid asset— Madam President: Sen. Obika, I have given you leeway here. Even though you have spoken on issues that other Members have spoken about already, but I think now you are stretching your contribution a little bit, and I need for you to focus on the matter at hand. 5.00 p.m. Sen. T. Obika: Madam President, thank you very much. As I close my contribution basically—you know, this opportunity I see it as a teaching opportunity. So I apologize, but that is my background, but I will curtail the lesson and I will reduce it to two points. Effectively, more land registered results in more borrowers, results in a wider access to credit. This legislation is essential to that. However, what the Government needs to ensure occurs is that they provide the relevant institutional

UNREVISED 157 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) supports, and I want to point to my initial point regarding the Assurance Fund, if they can give some indication as to a timeline for the calculation of what value of the assured value of properties would be remitted to the Assurance fund, what timeline they are going to come back to Parliament with this, given that it would be subject to a negative resolution. And I thank you very much, Madam President. Madam President: At this stage, hon. Senators, we will suspend and we will return here at 5.30. So we are suspended until 5.30. 5.01 p.m.: Sitting suspended. 5.30 p.m.: Sitting resumed. Madam President: Sen. Ameen. Sen. Khadija Ameen: [Desk thumping] Thank you, Madam President. My contribution to this debate, an Act to amend the Registration of Titles to Land Act, 2000 will be brief. As we deal with the letter of the amendments, it is important for us to also consider the spirit of the amendments and where this falls in the Government’s medium and long-term objectives. I know that in piloting this Bill the Attorney General in his 40 minutes may not have had time to tie in the objectives to the Government’s objectives, and he focused more on what each clause was anticipated to do. When Sen. Mark was on his legs I was very disappointed to hear an objection in terms of the relevance to his reference to the Sustainable Development Goals. It is my view that to discuss land governance policies without considering its link to policies on broader environmental and social stability issues, that need to accompany growth and sustainable development rooted in the United Nations’ SDG agenda, which Trinidad and Tobago is signatory to, is demonstrative of this Government’s lack of a vision, lack of appreciation for what it requires for

UNREVISED 158 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) developed nation status, what development status objectives each piece of legislation ties into. To me that is part of your responsibility when you decide on your legislative agenda, to tie those things into where you want this country to be several years from now. There is a National Spatial Development Plan. The Government has a Vision 2020, renamed Vision 2030, and those things must fit in. When the People’s Partnership was in government we had seven pillars of governance that tied into the SDG goals, and even as a Chairman of a regional corporation then every programme we wished to put forward, we had to ask ourselves which one of the pillars those things adhered to. So, I was happy to hear the Minister of Trade and Industry, Sen. The Hon. Paula Gopee-Scoon, do some of that in terms of tying in how this Bill, the amendments to the registration of title, how it ties into, for example, the ease of doing business. She spoke about some things with regard that would have an impact on economic growth. There are some other matters that she touched on with urban planning and so on. But I also feel disappointed that no Member of the Government made any mention of the impact of having the Registration of Titles to Land Act and the amendments that are before us, the impact it would have on the environment, on our ability to manage lands in a way that would improve our environment. Many people spoke about fraud, but not many people spoke about that, the positive aspect. But, Madam President, we are here to debate amendments to a Bill that was debated 18 years ago. Many would have mentioned before, it was assented to but not proclaimed. But the production of that Bill in the year 2000 came with a lot of work. It came with a lot of consultation, not only from the public—I think one of

UNREVISED 159 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) my colleagues before me, I think it was Sen. Mark—went through the process and the procedure that the then Attorney General engaged in to come up with what was that 2000 Act. So I would not repeat it. But in my view the amendments today are very, to say “cosmetic” might sound insulting and that is not my intention, but they are not really far-reaching. So my hope is that this Bill before us now does not see the same fate as the parent legislation. I was concerned about what would happen, seeing that the parent legislation has not been proclaimed, and here we are having amendments, and in terms of how we are going to treat with implementing. Of course, no real action can be taken until this is proclaimed, and it is my understanding, I am subject to correction, that when the parent Act is proclaimed that the amendments would be a part of what is to be proclaimed. So if I am wrong, please correct me. But, Madam President, therein lies a part of my concern. Because although that is a procedure, that is something procedural that would take place to have the amendments that we are debating here today proclaimed together with the parent legislation, my question is, we have seen 18 years since that last set of consultation that gave birth to the parent Act. I do not know that the present Government has done any consultation with stakeholders, with persons in the business, the practitioners, with regard to the amendments that are before us. I am just asking if any consultation took place. However, I know it would have been difficult, because if legislation that was debated 18 years ago was actually proclaimed and implemented, then you could look at the faults. But the Government and the legislators and the technocrats would not have that opportunity in this case, so it is not a case of looking at the practice and the results of the implementation and improving on it. It really is a

UNREVISED 160 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) theoretical improvement, and some of them are really just typographical errors being corrected and so on in terms of public response and response from, as I said, the practitioners. Madam President, the other issue that of course comes up has to do with the implementation. In 2008 there was an implementation strategy for this and other connecting issues. The Attorney General in his opening indicated that a part of that arrangement was the beginning of an arrangement for a loan from the Inter- American Development Bank. He did indicate US $100 million for Trinidad and US $7 million for Tobago. He indicated that the purpose of this would be—and guide me please—is to ensure that the infrastructure is done and that includes the mapping and everything that is required for that project. That was my interpretation of what he said. Madam President, though, it is unfortunate that the Attorney General—and it may have been that when he said that the purpose, the objective of this Bill is to deal with quieting of title. That may be one issue, but I think the Attorney General may have neglected to express his appreciation for the other things that a Bill of this nature would achieve. Certainly quieting of issues, dealing with disputes over title is not the only thing that a significant piece of legislation such as the Registration of Titles to Land would achieve. But even though he did not have time in his presentation to express the relationship to the ease of doing business, security to land management and so on, some others of his colleagues mentioned it, so they are forgiven. Madam President, the other main issue that this amendment deals with has to do with provisional title. I have one concern, one major concern under this issue of provisional title. Provisional title generally deals where you have persons who,

UNREVISED 161 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) through adverse possession, they apply. So before they can get their proper title they will have provisional title. At present there is another piece of legislation, the Squatter Regularization Act, that gives power to the Land Settlement Agency to regularize persons who are occupying State lands. I am aware of persons who occupy private lands, who have gone to court and applied for adverse possession, applied for the title of the original holder to be extinguished and then applied for adverse possession. But in the case of the squatters, the squatter regularization exercise is one that I think feeds into the provisions in this amendment. The provisional title, Madam President—this Government has stopped all regularization of squatters since they came into office. In fact, numerous times they appeared to me to be speaking against regularizing squatters, against providing people who occupy State lands illegally from being regularized and from those settlements being developed. If this Government wants to achieve, wants this provision for provisional title to achieve its optimal objective, you must resume regularization of squatters as soon as possible. The Attorney General spoke of 250,000 squatters, to his knowledge. Whatever—I do not know if he got those figures from the Land Settlement Agency, but whatever numbers are on paper, I am pretty sure that it is much more than that, because there are many sites as yet unexplored by the LSA that they have not intervened to collect data. So that is something that I plead with the Government—I take this opportunity to plead with the Government to give squatters the opportunity to one day reach the provisions provided for in the amendment here when it comes to provisional title. Madam President, another matter I want to deal with is there are many issues

UNREVISED 162 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) where when the Government has to do any project, whether it is a highway, a building or any sort of improvement, they can do a compulsory acquisition of your property. If a person, a landowner, does not have proper documents, they are at a disadvantage. I think it is important for us to properly record historically how we treat with those people. I know the Attorney General did not get to touch much on it, but is there any intention while implementing through this implementation strategy as you mentioned, does the IDB loan cover the setting-up of a Compulsory Acquisition Register, where all persons who were party to compulsory acquisition, the conditions, how much they were awarded and so on, whether those things would be part of the arrangement that you described, that you said the arrangements are completed in terms of the loan agreement for the implementation of this Act. Another thing that was mentioned, that I want to add two cents to, is I think a well-appreciated fact in Trinidad and Tobago, that there is a lot of room for corruption at the Land Registry Department. Several of my colleagues spoke about the fact that pages can be removed when people go in to do physical searches. My question to everyone on all sides of the House, do we really think that by preventing members of the public access, how much are we really reducing the fraud? The truth is that many times the members of staff, people who work at that department, are involved. Do we have a system to lessen that? The people who have access on a day-to-day basis to the documents, and who know the system inside out, better understand the fraud that could be committed, and to me that is a source that we have to target. The clerks and the lawyers. I was happy to hear the Attorney General mention that they would be given a PIN that would be unique to each person, to

UNREVISED 163 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) sort of track their activities. I do not know how much having a PIN could track whether a person actually tears out a page. I know, Madam President, that there were plans to have cameras and so on in the rooms to monitor those people who go in to check. So that you give access but you ensure that there is transparency. So, that was something I thought the Attorney General may have mentioned in terms of securing the files, securing the documents and allowing the scrutiny to take place. I do not see as I say, the people who are most knowledgeable about how to commit fraud are not the members of the public. They are members of staff. They are legally trained people, and I know this for a fact. So, Madam President, that is something I think we have to address. The under-resourcing of the department was mentioned. I want to endorse those points. The lack of sufficiently skilled staff members, that is something I think could be addressed in a short time in terms of providing the training. With all this electronic database, the platform and so on, there is going to be need for a follow-up, more training and in fact bringing in more persons. I am sure that is part of the implementation strategy so I will not go into that. The fact that the building that houses the Land Registry Department is in the state that it is in, even now, I thought the Government would have mentioned at least that they planned to put the workers there in a decent place while this transition takes place. I did not hear any mention of that. Madam President, when the hon. Minister of Trade and Industry spoke, she spent a lot of time. I want to commend her for trying to stick to her party’s—what appears to be her party’s tag line, “Blame the UNC”. She did mention that from 2010 to 2015 nothing was done. That seems to be a line that they use for everything. I do not know if she heard from other speakers that the work that was

UNREVISED 164 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) done was done up to the year 2000. In 1998, 1997, consultations took place. A lot of work went into this thing. After 2000, when there was the 18/18 situation, I cannot remember, I think she was part of that administration when Patrick Manning became— [Interruption]—you were not? All right. So there was a change in Government. Nothing was done from 2001 for all those years. Nothing was done until 2010. When in 2011 and 2013 I think something came to Parliament, and that was not under the PNM Government. But I liked the fact that the Minister of Energy and Energy Industries, the Leader of Government Business, he was fair in one comment he made, in that different governments have to shoulder the responsibility when certain things do not happen. He made reference to the DNA legislation where Regulations recently came, and he made reference to this, where 18 years ago legislation was passed. And the fact is that successive governments, different political parties, would have held office during that 18-year term. So I think the Minister could add more credibility. Ministers could, in general, add more credibility to their words when they desist from just selectively taking things that are of common knowledge. And this is one instance where it was mentioned that nothing was done from 2010 to 2011. We could go on and say, well nothing was done from 2001 when PNM came into Government, but the fact is that different governments would have done work on what is before us. These amendments were actually drafted when the UNC was in government under the last administration. The parent Act was work done by the UNC Government, and in between you would have had a number of technocrats who did work, a number of different government Ministers from different political parties who did work. We have to look at what this legislation brings to improve

UNREVISED 165 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d)

Trinidad and Tobago. So I thought the “blame UNC” rhetoric had no place in this debate. This is one of those debates, one of those rare occasions where both the Opposition and the Government could agree. We may not agree on how to debate the four pieces of legislation, whether we should do them all together or separately, but the fact is that because the UNC played such an integral role in producing the parent legislation, because the last administration played a role in putting forward these amendments, the amendments that are before us today, are very, very, very, similar, except for that part where you remove the ability for an ordinary person to go to do a search. In my view, Madam President, this is an opportunity that the Government should be happy to engage the Opposition in passing something with agreement. We should not be in a position where we feel that it does not make sense putting forward amendments, because they would not be taken into consideration, whether it is from the Opposition or the Government Bench, or the Independent Bench. And even—we have had amendments from the Government, from their own Benches. So whatever amendments are being suggested, I want to urge the Government to take them in good spirit, because the bulk of the work on this Registration of Titles to Land Bill, this Act, and the parent Bill, was done by the UNC. So we are not opposed, [Desk thumping] to having registration of titles to land in Trinidad and Tobago. Madam President, in conclusion I want to mention one thing. I feel it is important for me to mention. We are in the month of Ramadan and we do have colleagues in the Chamber, members of staff and Senators who are practising Muslims and partaking of the fast. One of the things I think we must be mindful

UNREVISED 166 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) when we carry on our debates is the consideration for the time for breaking fast, the prayer that they like to attend that would be around 8.00 p.m. And whenever we have debates in the House, particularly after 8.00 p.m.— Madam President: Senator, I am hearing you, but you know you have ventured way off. Sen. K. Ameen: Oh, no, no. It is just very briefly, Madam President. I want to plead with all sides of the House, whenever we have debates that go past 8.00 p.m. during the month of Ramadan it seriously infringes on the practice of our Muslim brothers and sisters during Ramadan, and I feel it is very important for me to take this opportunity to mention it, as we are in fact in the month of Ramadan. I want to thank you for the opportunity to contribute this evening, and I look forward to the other Bills on the land matters to be debated. Thank you. The Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs (Hon. Faris Al-Rawi): Madam President, the last speaker surprises me. I want to put on record that I genuinely believe that this Bill—genuinely believe that this Bill—should be debated with the other Bills. And I say so because the answers to many of the questions posed by hon. Senators are to be found in the other pieces of law. I agree with Sen. Ameen that we should be careful about time, and about the dignity that one should have in these reflections, but I cannot see that that squares up with an insistence by just the Opposition that we debate the Bills separately. The two just do not add up, because I respectfully hold the view that many of contributions today were very well researched and intended. On the Opposition Bench in particular, Sen. Ramdeen and Sen. Hosein distinguished themselves with the submissions made, and certainly there is good food for thought. But without being pejorative there was a sincere stretch for the

UNREVISED 167 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) rest of the haul by some of the Members of the Opposition. I say that with the greatest of respect, because really and truly this is a very narrow debate. I do not accept that this is a battle on paternity, whose Bill is what. I do not accept that this is a battle on lack of consultation. That is just not the case, and in those circumstances I think it is incumbent upon me to traverse the submissions made by my learned friends. I will remind Sen. Ameen that it is a near impossibility to pilot everything in 45 minutes, when you are obliged to go to the amendments and put it on the record. So I understand that the hon. Senator says that she is disappointed as to not being able to raise a number of things, but time just does not permit that, and a debate must be taken in the round. Madam President, my learned colleague, Sen. Mark, started off with one of his constant refrains. This Bill, he alleged, had no consultation. I will just put on the record that the Bill was issued out for public consultation. We received one comment, and that came in fact, and quite surprisingly and I am very grateful for it, came from the Law Association. They made certain comments. It was circulated on the website of the Law Association. It was issued to every single member of the Law Association, and the public lawyers also received the Bill. So this Bill has received a significant amount of circulation. But dare I say, the mere history and recounting the fact of how this Bill has passed between its genesis in 1998, on to 2018, tells us that we have had a lot of time to think about this. As to whether this is as simple as Sen. Ameen says, that there is no, and I am using my own words, “rocket science”, behind this, that there was great paternity to be given to the United National Congress, I ask, well what does that really mean if we do not take the steps to actually take it forward? The point is, one has to be sincere in bringing the approach forward as to implementing it as a priority item.

UNREVISED 168 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

6.00 p.m. It is well and good to say, “we had seven pillars and seven poles and seven slopes”, all of that, at the end of day, goes nowhere. The question is: What has been operationalized to improve the system? Sen. Ramdeen reflected upon the State’s action in the clearance—the Commissioner of State Lands, as she acted in the clearance of lands that she engaged in, in the Pine Avenue—where he said 50 homes were bulldozed. And I want to remind that it is true that the Commissioners of State Land do from time to time take action to preserve State land. That is no different from the Pineapple Gardens fiasco which then Minister of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Moonilal, Member for Oropouche East, presided over where there was bulldozing of many homes and crops at that point. And the reason that I say that is to say, State land is State land and it is true that it must be protected, particularly where it is environmentally sensitive land or it is State land to be developed for a larger benevolent purpose. The truth is, that for years we as a country have been toying with the idea of the regularization of squatters. Sen. Rambharat referred to it. In reflecting upon the slum clearance legislation which stood in the 1945 period after World War II where that legislation is, in fact, constructed, such that the State has the opportunity to go in, identify the area, clear the area, redevelop the area, and bring people back or relocate people, that slum clearance activity is something that has stood in our books as a state for quite some time. It is equally important to bear in mind that we have the State Land Regularisation of Tenure Act, Chap. 57:05. And in 1999, when that Act came about moving into the year 2000 when it became effective, we saw the birth of the

UNREVISED 169 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Land Settlement Agency and we saw the introduction of Certificates of Comfort. But, Madam President, most respectfully I think that governments have missed the mark, because this package of law whether it is standing at the year 2000 or in the year 2018, this package of law allows the people of Trinidad and Tobago, a once and for all solution away from “ad hocism”. Let me explain that this way. Let us look to the State Land Regularisation of Tenure Act, Chap. 57:05. That Act had a Schedule to it and had certain regulations to it. In the Schedule certain areas were described in that Act as being areas which after one year from the commencement of the Act, persons in the scheduled lands could apply to the State for Certificates of Comfort. But if you missed the mark at the year 2000, you were denied the ability to apply for Certificates of Comforts. Let me put that simply. You can only obtain a Certificate of Comfort and the leases which flow from that, if you were persons which met the conditionalities of section 4 of the State Land Regularisation of Tenure Act, Chap. 57:05, and you applied before the year 2000. If you “missed that boat”, you got no Certificate of Comfort. The “ad hocism”, and permit me for using that malapropism quite properly, that “ad hocism” is to be found in a Bill, a Bill introduced by the last Government—under the hand of then Minister of Housing and Urban Development, Dr. Moonilal—The State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) (Miscellaneous Amdts.) Bill, 2015. That Bill which was introduced and which lapsed was a very interesting Bill, but tells us of the problem in trying to just deal with lands by Certificates of Comfort. You see, the then Government announced quite publicly that persons should be aware that this land regularization was going to come, and what would happen

UNREVISED 170 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) as the Government proposed then, is that they would amend the Schedule and extend the date for the operation of the ability to get certificates of comfort, instead of the appointed day being the 01st of January, 1998, the appointed day would be the 13th of June, 2014. And in making that very public announcement which the Government did in grand fashion then, the Government then issued a Bill, and if you looked to the Bill from pages 4 straight through to page 23 of the Bill, there was a schedule of places which would now fall to be lands for squatting. And I am answering squarely the submissions put on the floor both by Senators Ameen, but not quite in the same fashion as put by Sen. Ramdeen who had a very strong point of law which I will come to in a moment. But, Madam President, in these umpteen pages, the lands which were described, listen to this, the land which is going to be a designated area, hear the land description: Boissiere, Maraval; Calvary Hill, Arima; Bangladesh, St. Joseph; Churchill Roosevelt Highway Old Road, Piarco; that is the property description. The whole of the Churchill Roosevelt Road, Piarco; the whole of Boissiere in Maraval; Bon Air North, Arouca. This presided, this formula and prescription came from a United National Congress Government sometimes referred to as the People’s Partnership, and the fact is that this Bill passing under the scrutiny and watchful eyes of then Speaker Mark, introduced into the Parliament then, Madam President, a formula for absolute disaster, but let me put it further. The formula was not only disastrous, it was one of the most fraudulent, and I say so intellectually, mechanisms in law to treat with people who were vulnerable and sitting in the situation as squatters, and let me explain why. Because, Madam President, when we pointed out to the Government that this was a fraudulent

UNREVISED 171 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) activity upon people who were in vulnerable circumstances, we did so on the back of pointing out that under the State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act itself, section 19 says, that if you are going to designate an area, in the 20-something pages of list of places so vaguely described, you had to make sure that you had an order pursuant to section 9 of the Town and Country Planning Act. So they did not do the homework, they did not go and get an order from the Town and Country Planning Act, they did not understand if the land was environmentally sensitive because there is a prescription against that kind of land falling into it. Instead, a Bill came about that said, “go forth and squat and we go fix it after”, and that came to a very significant point. Sen. Ramdeen has raised a very, very, very important point, and I commend him for the thought in trying to reach outside of the box. Sen. Ramdeen reflected upon the English amendments and asked for the manner in which the State can assist in having the first registration, the indication. So we know, Madam President, that this Bill proposes that you treat with lands in the various models where the prescriptive periods apply. You can register title on a provisional title basis if you are on State land for over 30 years, if you are on private land for over 16 years, if you have some form of documentary title to either State or private land, you can get a provisional title. And then this Bill proposes that the Registrar treats with the registration of provisional titles in another piece of law which we will come to and that is the land adjudication process and the land tribunal process, but regrettably we cannot discuss those Bills just yet lest we run afoul of the rule of anticipation. But what happens there is that it is only at that opportunity that we have the ability to note the person’s interest, and I think it wise to think about a form of

UNREVISED 172 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) registration [Interruption] yes, not if it is less than 16. I think it wise to think of a form of registration to treat with the circumstance where it is less than 16 or less than 30. Because Sen. Ramdeen raised an interesting point of, how does one evidence where the clock starts?—because that is the purpose of having that initial form of registration, and then waiting to see if someone who has a more significant title interest or a better proprietary interest comes along and displaces you. So it is a form of disclosure to say, “well look, I am on this private land or I am on this public land”, and that in the United Kingdom has worked as a formula. In Trinidad and Tobago I am not quite sure how that mechanism will work out, but we certainly do intend to look at it as we treat with this process, and when we come to the other Bill, I will explain how that can work in another context. So, we have had consultation, contrary to constant allegations from some of the Members opposite. We have a mechanism for treating with proprietary interest. I want to ask the hon. Senators Ameen and Mark to understand that, we have no scorn to reference to the Sustainable Development Goals. In fact, Madam President, as Sen. Mark was speaking, Sen. Rambharat and I had a good conversation over this, we thought that Sen. Mark’s contribution was very useful. It was a good debate, but unfortunately it was not relevant to the Bill at hand. I “doh” mean that badly. The points raised by the hon. Sen. Mark were very good points on Sustainable Development Goals, and where we as a society take ourselves, but the interruption was to get us back to the Bill because those are the rules of Parliament. So, I ask my learned colleague and my good friend Sen. Mark to not take any insult by the interruptions, they were not meant that way. Sen. Mark: He is my good friend? Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Sen. Mark, I am not your good friend today?

UNREVISED 173 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Sen. Mark: No. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: I am not your good friend today. Sen. Mark: I have severed relations with you. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Madam President, Sen. Mark who is a little bit upset about being irrelevant made reference to the IDB publication, and I wish to refer to the IDB publication that is a Methodological Framework for Comparative Land Governance Research in Latin America and the Caribbean, it is by Jolyne Sanjak and Michael G. Donovan and it was published in May 2016. At page 11 of that report, Sen. Mark reflected upon the ease of registration of land transaction and Sen. Gopee-Scoon did as well, the Minister of Trade and Industry, and it is true that it said there to be nine steps taking some 77 days. But what I found more useful was the estimated per cent of households with informal land and housing tenure, and that came about to be 24. 7 per cent, and that is a very strong figure to bear in mind. And it is not that 250,000 squatters exist in Trinidad and Tobago, there are 250,000 estimated squatting households in Trinidad and Tobago, so the number is fairly large. If you think that in a household there is more than one person, if you conservatively take it at two per household and it is not, it is usually more, that is 500,000 people, that is more than one-third of your population. If you take it to a higher number, you are getting close to half of our country being in less than ideal circumstances as it relates to the most basic of positions which is a roof over your head and some security of tenure. So, Madam President, I noted in the IDB report as it came further down towards Trinidad and Tobago in particular, that they really took note of the fact, in the contextual analysis of Trinidad and Tobago, that Trinidad and Tobago had been

UNREVISED 174 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) flirting with, but never perfecting the improvement of their land processes. And this IDB report in particular, notices the Land Tenants Act (Security of Tenure) (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2014. They noted that the Bill lapsed on June 17, 2015. They regretted the manner in which that was dealt with, and I have just referred to that. And the honourable authors of the Bill also noted that: “…a piecemeal approach in accordance with the political process for legal reform at that time” —is what happened in the periods of the ’70s, the ’80s and the ’90s. And that: “At one point, a comprehensive package of land policy reforms was drafted”. But it stops there. So this has been the subject of quite an amount of significant research and analysis, and it is true to say that they too, the IDB, reflected then in that report in May, 2016, that we had really just missed the mark. I would like to remind Sen. Ameen that I did not focus solely upon quieting of title, in fact, I read out six other objectives including: clarification and security of tenure of land; identification of State land; establishment of a modern land adjudication and registration system; whether all lands in Trinidad and Tobago have been registered under one system; the establishment of a Register; the establishment of a Land Tribunal. I read that into the record earlier and I repeat it, again, for the benefit of Sen. Ameen. Madam President, Sen. Mark asked a very square question: Does the Attorney General know one Ricky Ramcharan? No, I do not. I have no idea who Ricky Ramcharan is, and I have no knowledge of the matters that he is referring to. Madam President, the hon. Sen. Mark went through to ask about the linkages between the property tax regime and the valuation of land regime, and

UNREVISED 175 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) how squatters would be treated with. That has been traversed already in the valuation of land and property tax amendments, and I am prohibited from reviving that debate, so I will not go there, but just remind Sen. Mark to reflect upon the Hansard. Madam President, Sen. Mark also referred to section 73 of the Act in the manner in which this Bill proposes that it be amended. And quite a few of hon. colleagues opposite, on the Opposition Bench, referred to section 73, Sen. Hosein referred to it, Sen. Ameen referred to it, and this is where clause 20 treats with the amendments to inspection, searches and copies. I want to read the proposed amendment in the context of the Act as it will stand amended for the benefit of all persons listening to this debate. Madam President, it reads as follows: “…‘An Attorney-at-law who holds, or is deemed to hold, a valid practising certificate under section 23 or 26 of the Legal Profession Act or his clerk’…may, on making an application in the prescribed form and on paying the prescribed fee… 73(a) inspect any folio or any sheet of the parcel index map or any instrument or plan filed during such hours as may be prescribed;”— or— “(c) require an official search in respect of any parcel and the Registrar shall issue a certificate of official search setting forth particulars of the subsisting entries in the folio for the parcel. Subsection (2) a person…”—this is anyone else—“…may, on making an application in the prescribed form and on paying the prescribed fee be entitled to a certified copy of any folio or part of the parcel index map or any

UNREVISED 176 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

plan or instrument filed in the Registry”. So, they can get the certified copies, any aspect in the same fashion as section 73(1)(a). The only thing that is being prescribed to be with the attorney-at-law is the requiring of an official search in the circumstances set out below. “Subclause (3): A member of the public may search the electronic records in the Land Registry to inspect any folio or any sheet of the parcel index map or any instrument or plan filed or conduct an electronic search in respect of any parcel of land”. Subsection (4) goes into: “Where any person proposing to deal with registered land has, with the consent in writing of the proprietor, applied for an official search…”—then we go on to the suspension period. This law when read as a whole, section 73 as is proposed to be amended, allows for the full public access to the Register, what it does not permit is the searching and invocation of suspension procedures in the manner suggested by section 73(4). Let me make it abundantly clear. Sen. Ramkissoon was correct in her interpretation and reading of the law in my respectful view. The public is allowed access, there is nothing nefarious, there is no need to quote the hon. Barry Sinanan as he sat as the Member for San Fernando West in the year 2000, there is nothing that any politician needs to hide, and let me say why. Madam President, in asking about the infrastructure and institutional preparedness for this Bill, and Sen. Ameen reflecting upon what she described as mere trivialities, small things which the UNC had done. What was not done,

UNREVISED 177 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Madam President, was the operational side of this, and permit me to speak to that here now. The intention of the Government is to have a fully electronic and automated system. The intention of the Government is to introduce encrypted PIN identification and linked numbers by defined users so that transactions can be related on an instantaneous basis to who is asking. And that takes cares of the observations by Sen. Ramkissoon and Sen. Ramdeen and Sen. Rambharat. Madam President, at present right now I, John Brown, can go and change my name to James Frank, do a deed poll, have it registered, go to the Licensing Office get a driver’s licence that says James Frank, go to the Elections and Boundaries Commission, get an ID card that says James Frank, two forms of ID, go and open an account named James Frank, go and find James Frank’s land, scout out the area, ask neighbours, “who owns that land”? “Oh, well, we have not seen him for a while, the family migrated”, hence the name James. That then comes about. And then they end up in a lawyer’s office before a real estate agent selling land, produce ID matching the name of the owner of the land, produce bills matching the name of the owner of the land, pass through the FIU inspection process, pass through an inspection of the title by an attorney-at-law for the purchaser, and the mortgager if that is the case. And right now, unless you were diligent to know that this person is not the same person, you would have been the victim of fraud. That case example is an exact version of a case which I dealt with in private practice and several others like it. And if it was not for the fact that I was aware that there was fraud in the particular area in Mayaro where this land was going down, I would have potentially been a victim and my client may have been a victim of that transaction.

UNREVISED 178 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

But in the structure that the Government proposes, the birth certificate number for James will always be the birth certificate number for John Brown, so, we are linking it to the original information, and that is why it is so critical to understand that the IT comes to manage the fraud. And what I can say is that, in coming into office we at the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs, we met a land management system which was in chaos. Madam President, the core servers which run the PIMS system which is the online system which Sen. Hosein said he tried to access and could not get onto. Well, to access that system you have to have a log-on authorization for that system, I am not sure if that was the particular manner in which he accessed the system. But the Property Information Management System, PIMS as it is called, the core servers are 15 years old. The application was developed in Microsoft Visual Basic 6, mainstream support expired, Madam President, on July 13, 2010, and the extended support ended July 14, 2014. Madam President, when we came into office the provider of the software, so relieved was it that it did not have to maintain outdated software, we met a system where it was not properly managed. I am very pleased to say that the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs retained the services of the technology provider which is Massy, migrated all of the data across not from a daisy-chain linked series of computers, but onto an actual stack and system of proper servers. We are in the process of procuring further servers for the expansion of the system. But, Madam President, I want the hon. Members of this Senate, and through you, the listening public, to be aware, that all of this is for naught if the environment for searching does not work right. Sen. Ameen said at one point there were cameras to be installed. We are

UNREVISED 179 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) able to say to Sen. Ameen, all the cameras have been installed, but more particularly we came into office and we outfitted the tower for the Attorney General and Legal Affairs, we went into the vault and we retrofitted the vault from the very dangerous systems that were there, and we intend to move the registry from the South Quay premises, finish the move by at least September of this year. That means a new vault system, a new management system, the operation of the new IT technology, a better working environment, a managed environment. But, Madam President, I want to remind you, those towers were finished in the year 2009, ’10, ’11, ’12, ’13, ’14 they stood unoccupied and therefore, it was imperative to actually move the infrastructure and migrate it in stages if you could not do it in one fell swoop which is what we have done. The last end of the stage to be moved is the registry beginning this month and ending in September of this year. Madam President, we did something else. We entered into the digitization of land records. We noted that only the RPA or RPO records were being digitized, that is only 15 per cent of the land registry. We broadened the mandate, we got into an MOU and relationship with the University of the West Indies, we had the IDB-funded project for the strengthening of the information management systems. And, Madam President, I am very pleased to say that we started the digitization of the deeds for the period 1786—1969. Sorry, 1778—1969. Let me repeat that. We are in the middle of digitizing the land records for Trinidad and Tobago from 1778 to the year 1969 [Desk thumping] because we have already done 1970 to present. Madam President, at the end of the project we will have done approximately 5.8 million pages of scanning. And, Madam President, I want to point out this: We will be building the electronic environment for the system to work and this is

UNREVISED 180 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) where the gold mine existed. So, I want my learned colleagues to be assured that this pace is fast afoot. We have a dedicated scanning division, members of the public would have seen in the newspapers over several weeks by way of advertisements, the request for the IDB consultant to come in for the archiving of tattered and torn and dangerously close to disintegrated documents, because we have land titles starting in year 1778, and those books are deteriorating. So, we have brought in the archiving and the conservation of those materials so that we can be in a proper digitized environment. Madam President, we have also taken the step, and let me just give a figure. If I take the Real Property Act land alone for the year 2016, we digitized 10,200 instruments. Do you know what that value is? Remember, I told you that RPA is only 15 per cent of the land holding in Trinidad and Tobago. For one year of registering just 10,300 instruments, take a guess what the land value of that is?— $7.72 billion. Let me repeat that, 10,300 instruments digitized in the year 2016 translates to TT $7.72 billion. Madam President, that is why in signing the Memorandum of Understanding between the FIU and the Registrar General when you see suspicious transactions in one year aggregating to $22 billion, and when you see that $14 billion of those were stopped by this Government’s improvement of the FIU functionality, you understand how land management is tied into moving the horror of society that exists in money laundering and fraud and suspicious transactions; that is to give you an idea. If 10,000 instruments equals $7.72 billion, you begin to understand what we are treating with. Madam President, we have developed an electronic identification

UNREVISED 181 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) application. It is this application which we have already field-tested where we will have attorneys-at-law have encrypted end-to-end positions to allow for loading of customer information or client information on an advanced basis, so when you get to the registry, the inspection and verification is a quick transaction. It is that which is linked to birth certificate, marriage certificate, death certificate, et cetera, and Board of Inland Revenue number. We have restructured the Registrar General’s Department. We launched as well, an application called the RPA online application which was developed in-house in the IT division of the Ministry of the Attorney General and Legal Affairs, and let me tell you what that does. It allows us to have access to 80,000 records online which treat with the journals and delivery books. That way we are allowed to check RPA land registry journals; RPA delivery books; status of RPA instruments and documents lodged; query rejection notices; returns of ownership; applications for status of returns of ownership; and applications for withdrawals of certificates of title. Madam President, we have done all of that in-house. So when you hear hon. Senators on the Opposition Bench say, “what can $2.5 million do for you”? Under the management of this Government and this Attorney General, $2.5 million [Desk thumping] goes a very long way. Because like the Minister of Works and Transport, a lot of our work is happening in-house with in-house capacity. In any event we are maximizing the implementation of the IDB-funded projects, and we are very pleased to see that evolving in the fashion that it is. Madam President, we saw Sen. Creese reflect upon what he referred to as what the impact of piecemeal approach to legislation is. We have explained that we are going for a long run which is this Registration of Titles to Land (Amdt.)

UNREVISED 182 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

(No. 2), Bill and Act and we have short-term gaps to take care of where we use the existing system. The last clause of the Bill, clause 22, treats with the transitional manner in which we will slowly come down from the registration of deeds system and the RPA system. 6.30 p.m. We do intend, in this position—because he raised a very interesting issue— to treat with the original people’s, or, if you take it even further, the Merikins’ issue in Moruga. In treating with that indigenous claim, or near indigenous claim, we have the ability in the other Bill which we will come to, that is the Land Adjudication Bill to treat with that. Madam President, we saw the recommendation for qualifications of the senior assistant registrar, and it is true to say that the senior assistant registrar needs to be just an attorney-at-law. And I want to point out why it was crafted that way. It was pointed out that way because that is the existing structure, the Registrar General’s Department. Madam President, we have had advertisements out for the retention of clerks—search clerks—and for lawyers, but, Madam President, it is not every lawyer that is attracted to this area of law. The area of law that we are talking about, land management, is something which you have to have almost a vocation for. It is like the criminal bar. Sen. Chote, I am sure, will hear me out on that. There are only a few lawyers of a senior rank and capability that control the criminal bar. It is the same thing in the conveyancing practice, in the mortgage practice. There are very few lawyers that have the ability to get there. Sen. Ramdeen is one of the few cross- trained lawyers that can understand the various aspects of this field together with other fields.

UNREVISED 183 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Madam President, there was a point as to minors and whether we should treat with the reference to the caveat as opposed to restriction. Respectfully, minors in this country are governed by legislation, legislation which causes land held by minors to be settled land in law. They can only deal with that land by way of court authorization. There is legislation to govern that package, and the linkages on to the miscellaneous provisions of the Act where we treat with the introduction of caveats is intended to provide a notice to the whole world of the existence as opposed to a mere restriction which would be hard to find. Let me put that simply. The caveat is a place where everybody is bound to look to see if there is a restriction on the land, because there is a registry for the caveats per se. Madam President, we have dealt with the observations of several other Senators wrapped up into those arguments that I have traversed so far, albeit that those came from individual Senators. We have treated with, no we have not yet treated with the rectification provision. Sen. Ramdeen raised the point in relation to the new section 30(1)(a) to (d), and he asked about the 14-day prescription period, and I just want to point out that that period is for the suspension aspects. It is not for any other purpose than holding a time frame for suspension still, so that the title can be certified by the Registrar. In this instance remember the Registrar is certifying the title. That is what section 73 is to permit. Not to block out the public, but to have the Registrar certify the title in circumstances where people agree that their title can be certified. And that is why it was necessary to put a suspension period in that particular order. Madam President, Sen. Obika asked for a timeline of a short value for the funds. Currently, the parent Act, even though we do not amend anything that Sen. Obika spoke to, I will address the point nonetheless. All that we treated with in

UNREVISED 184 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) that assurance point, was changing a typographical reference to section 66 to section 67. It was nothing else but that. But in any event the assurance fund is something that will stand firstly as that which is to be established, but in the fault of its establishment, it is backed by the Consolidated Fund. So, it is funded by the taxpayers— Madam President: Minister, you have five more minutes. Hon. F. al-Rawi: Thank you, Madam President—of Trinidad and Tobago. Sen. Ameen, I have addressed her submissions already. And, Madam President, in the round therefore I come to the following proposition. We are clearly treating with not just legislative amendment to the manner in which we register titles such as to cause a delinking from the registration of deeds and conveyancing in law and property system on the one side, and the real Property Act on the other side, where those two streams stand at 85 per cent and 15 per cent of land titling in Trinidad and Tobago. We are bringing that into one system which is intended to promote and as close to an indefeasible title as is possible. We are allowing for due process. We are allowing for implementation on the back of technology, on the back of systems, on the back of increased manpower, on the back of improved technology. Not just technology, but improved technology. We intend ultimately to be able to say that Trinidad and Tobago has moved to an electronic system entirely. Sen. Rambharat referred me to a book called The End of Lawyering or The Death of Lawyering, which I have got the title wrong, but there was a publication in Canada which signalled what the end of lawyering would be, where you got to a pure titling system, where you got to a system which could be done electronically, where you got to a system where the title was guaranteed. And I want to say, there

UNREVISED 185 Registration of Titles to Land 2018.06.05 (Amdt.) (No. 2) Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) is a massive impact to the people of Trinidad and Tobago, not only in respect of avoidance of fraud, money laundering, inconvenience, but very importantly to their pockets, because the banking sector in charging interest rates on mortgages makes the clients pay for mortgage indemnity, and that mortgage indemnity is 10 per cent of the mortgage. So you have to ensure the top 10 per cent, and that is a direct cost to citizens. And then they ask the attorneys-at-law to have insurance backing their professional indemnity insurance arrangements, so the attorneys at law pass on part of that cost to their clients. As we simplify the system we get to the pet peeve of Sen. Small and Sen. Mahabir, which is what are we doing about the banking sector? This Bill allows us to reduce the cost associated with mortgaging, associated with conveyancing, it gives a better title guarantee. Madam President, we have been 18 years of cryogenics. This is not an analysis paralysis. This was in cryogenics stasis for 18 years. This was not on the horizon at all in terms of implementation. So, Madam President, I urge hon. Senators to support this particular Bill. I am very eager to debate the other Bills on the Order Paper, and I beg to move. [Desk thumping] Question put and agreed to. Bill accordingly read a second time. Bill committed to a committee of the whole Senate. Senate in committee. Mr. Al-Rawi: Madam Chair— Madam Chairman: Hon. Senators—just one second Attorney General—there are 23 clauses in this Bill, may I just point out that there is one set of amendments circulated by Sen. Mark. Is everyone in receipt of those amendments?

UNREVISED 186 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Mr. Al-Rawi: No, Madam Chair, that is what I was about to signal to you. I have not seen them. I understand that it has been circulated. All Members got them? [Assent indicated] So, I am the last man to get them? Clauses 1 and 2 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 3. Question proposed: That clause 3 stand part of the Bill. Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark, you have circulated an amendment? Sen. Mark: Yes, but to fully appreciate this amendment it would be necessary to go to clause 16, because arising out of that particular clause that amends section 44, that we remove the word “minor” and replace it with the word “child”, and consequently we suggested that the definition of “child” be outlined in that section of the legislation. Madam Chairman: Attorney General. Mr. Al-Rawi: Madam Chair, I welcome Sen. Mark’s move to have a harmonization of the term “minor” into “child”, but I need to caution, conveyancing and land law is a highly complex area, which is made all the much more complex and the issue exacerbated by the fact that it is very piecemeal. We are treating with the Conveyancing and Law and Property Act, 1845; we are treating with the RPO, which is 1892; we are treating with 1874; and we are treating with the Infant Act, the Family Law (Guardianship of Minors, Domicile and Maintenance) Act; we are treating with a number of pieces of law. The criminal law and other areas of law have taken the view now, and we had a chance to harmonize, in particular as we dealt with the Family and Children Division, for the definition of child. A child is someone under the age of 18. But the case law, and the piecemeal aspects of other laws, once we touch the issue of minor here, which is the term which is currently used, we are going to end up into

UNREVISED 187 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 interpretation problems, in particular, the Infancy Act comes into problem. Whilst I welcome the point, and I certainly undertake, because I did warn that there was a second round of amendments that we were coming with next. In that second round, Madam Chair, I propose that we take note of this particular issue. But at this point, I think that we may be pulling upon a thread on a tapestry that might unravel the entire tapestry, and in those circumstances I wish to most respectfully ask Sen. Mark to hold his hand on this particular recommendation. Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: Yeah, well, having regard to what the Attorney General has said, with all the accompanying laws that may carry this term or word of “minor”, and the possible confusion, maybe as he said in the second round of our continued review ofthe legislation we will look at it. So, I will withdraw. Madam Chairman: All right. So, Sen. Mark has withdrawn his amendment. Question put and agreed to. Clause 3 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 4 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 5. Question proposed: That clause 5 stand part of the Bill. Sen. Mark: Yes, Madam, when I made my contribution, and I made reference to qualification, the hon. Attorney General did indicate to me that I can find the qualifications in, I think, section 6 of the parent legislation. And when I did refer to section 6, it was consistent with what I was seeking to address. And what you found in section 6, Madam Chair, was you had this assistant registrar, which is now senior assistant registrar, and simply an attorney-at-law. Whereas, in all the previous sections of the parent Act, both the Registrar, as well as the deputy registrar, had a minimum, in the case of the Registrar, of seven years, and in the

UNREVISED 188 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 case of the deputy, I think five years. So, we are suggesting, for the consideration of the Attorney General, that because of the importance of this matter that we are dealing with, dealing with people’s land, and you want to be very careful in how this is executed, you want people with experience. And since this person is a senior assistant registrar, we are suggesting that at least the person should have a minimum of three years of experience, Madam Chair. So, this is the proposal that we are suggesting for the consideration of the Attorney General. Madam Chairman: And, Sen. Mark, if I could just point out, I think there is a typographical error. It is senior assistant registrar or an assistant registrar, not “and”. Sen. Mark: Okay. Madam Chairman: I think the “and” has to come off actually. Sen. Mark: Okay. Or, thank you. Madam Chairman: Attorney General. Mr. Al-Rawi: Thank you, Madam Chair. I welcome Sen. Mark’s recommendation. I think it is prudent. Sen. Mark is correct that section 6 of the Act, 6(1), 6(2) and 6(3) treat with qualifications. And just for the record, the Registrar must be an attorney-at-law, at least seven years’ experience. No person shall be appointed as a deputy registrar, which is the position just under attorney- at-law, at least five years’ experience. The next functionary in line is the senior assistant registrar or an assistant registrar, and there is a good recommendation for three years. The recommendation came from the Registrar General that there be no particular time frame unto it, and it came for two reasons. One, because of the difficulty in recruiting people because there was such a difficulty in actually getting people interested in this area that many shied away from the area of law. What we have

UNREVISED 189 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 noticed is that when people join in as assistant registrars or even get to senior assistant registrar, they can be fresh out of law school, but they tend to stay in the system. The public service regulations also impact this point, and I do not have the answer as to what they prescribe, because I do not have it before me nor does the CPC’s teams. Madam Chair, I would genuinely like an opportunity to reflect upon this and to speak to the PMCD unit of the Public Admin. Check the public service regulations to see if there is a difficulty with the years associated. From a principled point of view, I can see no real objection to it, but I fear that if I agree to it now I may unwittingly do myself out of a hard-fought position that the Registrar General and Public Service Commission may have done. I do not know if it would suffice that I give an undertaking that when we come, and we intend to come this month with another Bill which has an omnibus bit of amendments included into this Act if we can look at it then. But, I do not have the square answer to that at this point in time. Sen. Mark: Madam Chair, with the greatest respect, I understand what the Attorney General has said in terms of conversation with the officials at the Registrar General’s Office. But, we are into law making here, and we are dealing with people’s property rights, and I do not think that we should really be taking chances with appointing someone who can hold down the office of deputy Registrar, or even Registrar General, given the emergency situations, and that person does not have any appropriate experience at the material time that we are dealing with. And I think as lawmakers we have to be very careful that we do not short change the population. We were told by Minister Rambharat earlier on in the proceedings, some of the challenges that he himself is experiencing at his Ministry where you have senior people in charge and they are doing their own thing.

UNREVISED 190 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

So, I am not happy with agreeing, Madam Chair, that we put no qualifications for the assistant, the senior assistant registrar. I think that, you know, we should put a minimum period. And the AG is sufficiently persuasive enough to tell the individuals who he had discussions with, that the Parliament, the lawmakers of this country, determine otherwise. And that is why I am suggesting that we really incorporate some minimum level of experience here, Madam Chair. Madam Chairman: Yeah. Sen. Ramdeen. Sen. Ramdeen: Madam Chair, thank you very much. In my contribution I just pointed the Attorney General to this said section 5 and the definition of the qualifications in subsections (1) and (2). During the time since then, Attorney General, I have had the opportunity to look at the next, well let me not say the next, but the Land Adjudication Act as drafted presently, and if you look at section 4(1)(b) of that piece of legislation you would see that the qualification there, though for a different position, is described differently, and I think that we could borrow the words there in terms of inserting the word “conveyancing” instead of “land law”. If you look at how you defined the qualification for that person, in that particular piece of legislation, we could just be consistent and make the necessary amendment to section 6 subsection (1) and (2). Madam Chairman: All right. But, Sen. Ramdeen, we were treating with the amendment as circulated by Sen. Mark. Sen. Ramdeen: Oh, I am sorry, Madam Chair. I just thought the Attorney General could deal with them together. Madam Chairman: Attorney General. Mr. Al-Rawi: Sure. Madam Chair, when I was in Opposition I loathe the expression that used to often greet me almost on a sitting-by-sitting basis of saying that that is the Government’s policy, which my predecessor in office did. And I

UNREVISED 191 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 have resisted that for the entire time that I sat in the particular office that I do. Sen. Mark’s recommendation is persuasive, but I am also bound to observe the fact that we wish to implement this law as quickly as possible, beginning in Tobago. There is nothing to prevent us from starting now. And this law is going to fall upon the existing Registrar General’s structure where there are in fact people in post with less than three years position, and we were lucky to get them, because we had a hard time filling the position. I do not want to unwittingly shoot myself in the foot, in a figurative sense. I had the square recommendation from the Registrar General that this post because as it was a supervised post, anything that the Assistant Registrar or senior assistant registrar does is supervised and must pass through the hands of the most senior attorneys, and in those circumstances I am respectfully just not in a position to agree to that right now. But I am certainly prepared to give an undertaking that in the Bill that we have coming in the next couple of weeks, that if I have gotten the green light I can include it there. So, may I respectfully ask Sen. Mark, again I hear him, I think there is merit in what he is saying, but I do not want to throw the baby out with the bath water. With respect to Sen. Ramdeen’s position that we modify the qualifications in section 6 of the Act, even though it is not the subject of the Bill, from experience in land law to experience in conveyancing, again I think that both terms are fairly undefined. Does land law operate in a larger context? Does it hit mortgaging? Does it hit securities? Does it hit other aspects of it? I mean, when we are at law school, as the lawyers here would know, the course is called land law, and we do not really get into conveyancing and mortgaging until we hit the Sir Hugh Wooding Law School level. So, I think that land law is something that can be widely interpreted, as

UNREVISED 192 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 much as conveyancing can. One can argue that conveyancing is a subset of land law. Sen. Ramdeen is very correct that another piece of law which we are going to debate today has the reference, but, I would prefer, because when we get to Cabinet appointments, even though it is a public service position, sometimes the technocrats view these things in a very narrow way, and I fear that we may be putting ourselves out. So, may I respectfully decline to accept the recommendation, although I accept that there is merit in Sen. Ramdeen’s approach, that it was intended to assist. Madam Chairman: So, hon. Senators, I shall now— Sen. Mark: Before you put that question, may I as the Attorney General— Madam Chairman: Yes. Sen. Mark: Attorney General, you said that you are coming within one month? Mr. Al-Rawi: We hope to lay in—certainly before we go on recess we hope to lay the next Bill. Sen. Mark: That would address? Mr. Al-Rawi: That is going to treat with amendments to the Registration of Deeds Act, Conveyancing in Law and Property Act, Real Property Act, in a number of areas. Sen. Mark: And are you saying that the matter that we are addressing here— Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes, because we will also be including amendments to this Act as it relates to the management of trusts, et cetera. So, we took that as a stand-alone, because it was associated with another piece of law. There is a rule that you should deal with amendments in the way that they make sense, and we are coming with an omnibus piece of law to treat with a number of things, so we have the opportunity in that Bill to look at this. I have the drafter of the Bill right next to me here, and we have taken note.

UNREVISED 193 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Madam Chairman: Yeah. So you would withdraw? Sen. Mark: Yeah. Madam Chairman: All right. So, Sen. Mark has withdrawn. Question put and agreed to. Clause 5 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 6 to 13 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 14. Question proposed: That clause 14 stand part of the Bill. Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: Just leave— Mr. Al-Rawi: Madam Chairman, we agree, just propose a modification of language. Madam Chairman: So, hon. Senators, the question is that clause 14 be amended as circulated. Question put and agreed to. Clause 14, as amended, now stand part of the Bill. Clause 15 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 16. Question proposed: That clause 16 stand part of the Bill. Sen. Mark: Madam Chair? Madam Chairman: Yes. Sen. Mark: Even though we have agreed to maintain “minor”, the whole question about fraud and corruption that the Attorney General alluded to, and we all are conscious of what takes place, we just felt that there is need to tighten this provision, and we should insist that if you are talking about a minor you would want to get some evidence to justify this submission that is being made. Now, we

UNREVISED 194 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 believe that some documentary evidence should be submitted to the Registrar General or Registrar in order to justify this particular claim. And, we are asking the Attorney General if in the interest of ensuring that we tighten the system, we demand or suggest that the provision of a certified copy of a minor’s birth certificate be submitted. It is a matter of trying to tighten up the whole exercise. 7.00 p.m. Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark, am I right in believing that you are going to be withdrawing this amendment? Sen. Mark: No, just only, remember we had withdrawn the question about the minor— Madam Chairman: So you are proposing to deal with (b)? Sen. Mark: Yeah, I am dealing with (b). I am withdrawing (a). But in terms of (b), remember in principle we have already agreed that we will withdraw “child”. So that it is in principle, agreed upon. But I am just saying, for the consideration of the Attorney General, even though we are putting minor or we are maintaining minor, we just wanted to tighten the whole process and one of the ways we were considering, if we are dealing with a minor, obviously I would imagine a minor is a person who will be within a certain age range, right, AG? Mr. Al-Rawi: Madam Chair, if I may. Madam Chairman: Yes, Attorney General. Mr. Al-Rawi: I welcome the proposed amendment just with a small modification so that clause 16 which amends section 44 of the Act, instead of inserting a new paragraph (c) because it would—paragraph (c) proposes an amendment to subsection (3), right? The one that flows just after that technically is paragraph five. So we really got to put in a new subparagraph (b) and then (b) falls down to (c). So we are inserting a new subparagraph (b) and instead of putting the words

UNREVISED 195 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

“including a certified copy” we propose that it be, “provide a certified copy”. So that we could do that there. So, Madam Chair, the amendment to clause 16 would be inserting a new paragraph (b) in subsection (3) after the word “minor” where it occurs last, the words “provide a certified copy of the birth certificate”.—and provides. So let us read that again. So, Madam Chair, the amendment to clause 16 will read as follows, if the text of it is put now: Inserting a new paragraph (b) in subsection (3) after the word “minor” where it last occurs, the words “and provide a certified copy of the birth certificate”. Let us just double-check this. Madam Chair, could I indulge you one last time, because the CPC has had a chance to smoothen that language for me. So in keeping with the language of the Bill, the amendment will be as follows. So it will read—so that your text reads: Inserting a new paragraph (b) as follows— Now, “by inserting after the word “minor”—sorry, Madam Chair, I am being drip fed the amendment, Madam Chair. So it will be: Inserting a new paragraph (b) in subsection (3) as follows. No? All right, Madam Chair, the CPC’s department is giving me a small bit of adjustment. So, Madam Chair, if you look to clause 16 of your Bill you will catch me. You see (a) and (b), the language rubric is in subsection (5) by deleting; in subsection (2) by deleting. So the new (b) that we are inserting will say: In subsection (3) by inserting after the word “minor” where it occurs last— and we are continuing now, the words “and providing a certified copy of the birth certificate of the minor”.

UNREVISED 196 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

And I apologize for stretching your indulgence. Sen. Mark: Madam Chair, may I ask the Attorney General, Attorney General just for clarification, what would you describe as a minor in terms of age? Mr. Al-Rawi: A minor— Sen. Mark: In terms of age. Like we say a child in under 18. Mr. Al-Rawi: For the law which we saved with respect to children, for instance, under the Infancy Act, a married minor can transact; a married child can transact business. The law is that a child can possess but cannot transact land. So it depends upon a number of circumstances. Is the child married? Is the child divorced as a child therefore emancipated and still with the rights of the child or the rights of the adult? Is the child a minor in the context of the criminal law as it stood in the old days or is it in the context of the amended Children’s Act which is under 18? And it was for that reason that without doing the research that I did not want to yet trouble including the word “child”, because there other pieces of law that we would have to factor at the same time. So, in the round, it is that it could mean a number of things. Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark, are you therefore going to withdraw your amendment so that I can then read the amendment as proposed by the Attorney General? Sen. Mark: Yes, the initial amendment I had, yeah, I will have to withdraw it. Amendment [Sen. W. Mark] withdrawn. Madam Chairman: Right. So Sen. Mark has withdrawn his amendment. Sen. S. Hosein. Sen. S. Hosein: Thank you very much, Madam Chair. AG, with respect to the various permutations you gave with regard to the age of a minor, which one will be applicable to this Act?

UNREVISED 197 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Mr. Al-Rawi: I am going to research it so that in the next round that I am sure whether it is infancy, guardianship of minors. I have to do a little bit more research in it because it not quite clear yet. Sen. S. Hosein: So you do not want to just standardize it to any person under the age of 18? Mr. Al-Rawi: I very much want to but I need to know what other consequential amendments to other laws I need to do at the same time and not just rely upon the implied amendment principle. Sen. S. Hosein: So that will come on the omnibus also? Mr. Al-Rawi: Yeah. Madam Chairman: All right, Attorney General, Members, please let me just go through this proposed amendment before I put it before the committee. It is proposed in clause 16 at sub (b) for it to read as follows: In subsection (3) by inserting after the word “minor” where it occurs last the words “and providing a certified copy of the birth certificate of the minor”. Mr. Al-Rawi: Madam Chair, just instead of “providing”, we will use the word “provide”. It would read better and grammatically correct. Madam Chairman: So, hon. Senators, the question is that clause 16 be amended as follows. At paragraph (b), to read as follows: In subsection (3) by inserting after the word “minor” where it occurs last the words “and provide a copy of the birth certificate of the minor”. Question put and agreed to. Clause 16, as amended, ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clauses 17 to 19 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Clause 20. Question proposed: That clause 20 stand part of the Bill.

UNREVISED 198 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: I will ask Sen. Ramdeen to deal with that. Madam Chairman: Sen. Ramdeen. Sen. Ramdeen: Thank you, Madam Chair. Madam Chair, the Attorney General in the wrapping-up of the debate, indicated that the suspension period that is referred to in the amendment that is proposed by Sen. Mark— Madam Chairman: Sen. Ramdeen, can you speak up a little bit? Sen. Ramdeen: Sorry, I apologize. Madam Chair, the proposed amendment that is suggested by Sen. Mark seeks to change the suspension period from a period of 14 days to a period of 28 days. The Attorney General indicated that the 14-day period is simply a period within which no instrument can be registered and that then activates subsection (5) and subsection (6). The point that I was making to the Attorney General was that, the period of 14 days is one which by virtue of subsection (4), (5) and (6), collectively, and conjointly, requires that that suspension period which has to be a period of time within which anybody who has a contrary interest to the instrument that is being registered will have an objection period to be able to treat with it. I am respectfully of the view, joining Sen. Mark, that the 14-day period might be too limited a period having regard to all the exigencies that occurred during that period of time, and that is why I suggested 28 days. More so, because it is a period of time that by virtue of the legislation expires automatically. And when one looks in, just presenting the amendment that Sen. Mark has put forward, Attorney General when you look at subsection (5) and subsection (6), the 14-day period as you would know, the caveat is really the first step in which one with a contrary interest, or an interest adverse to the instrument, it is the first step to preserve the status quo. And a 14-day period in the practical realities of

UNREVISED 199 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 civil litigation would then mean, that if that 14-day period expires, the person would then have to go and get a court order to stop the registration of the instrument or to preserve their interest, whatever that interest may be. And therefore with a 28-day period it will allow the Registrar General or the Assistant Senior Registrar to treat with whatever issues that may arise before having any of the parties to have to, on the expiration of 14 days unknowingly, that the 14-day period is going to expire, to go to court to get some kind of quia timet relief at that time. And therefore I think that the administration of the Act, by virtue of this section, will be better served by giving a little—nobody is asking for months—but a little longer period for the Registrar General herself to treat with these matters. One has to understand that the rolling-out of the administration of this piece of legislation is one that may require the Registrar General to treat with many different applications on a daily basis that would engage this particular section that gives her the power to do these things. And therefore, in the practical realities where you have a Registrar General, certain Senior Assistant Registrar General, but you have thousands of transactions or hundreds of transactions going through, out of that you have a percentage that may be contested. I think in those circumstances we would do well to expand that period of 14 days to 28 days. I do not think that we would lose anything by doing that, neither do we reach a point where it becomes onerous upon anyone who wants to register a title. Madam Chairman: Attorney General. Mr. Al-Rawi: Madam Chair, I thank Sen. Ramdeen for painting the picture as clearly as he has. Unfortunately this is a bit of a double-edged sword. If we look to the language of this particular clause, which is clause 20, which amends section

UNREVISED 200 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

73, we are saying that: “A person…on making”—this is subclause (2): “A person…on making an application…in the…form…paying the…fee…” Let us get to (3): “A member of the public may search electronic records…” Let us get to (4): “Where”—a—“person proposing to deal with registered land has, with the consent in writing of the proprietor, applied for an official search…” This person is applying for an official search and has stated in his application the particulars of the proposed dealing. The registration is then suspended and suspended for 14 days. It automatically expires. Subclause (5) preserves the ranking of priorities in time for any other instruments which may have hit in that suspension period. What the suspension period facilitates is the Registrar General issuing an official search report. The complication and introduction of caveat in subsection (5), and subsection (5) reads as follows: “The instrument referred to in subsection (4) shall have priority over other instrument which may be presented for registration during…suspension period, and shall be registered upon…expiration…” This language is intended to facilitate the perfection of the thing which you cause the search for. So let me explain it clearly. A and B are entering into a transaction for B to buy A’s property. A and B consent in writing that an official search for the property should be produced by the Registrar General. At that moment in time the search starts. All transactions cannot be logged against that particular property because everything is suspended. And the thing which they are seeking to do,

UNREVISED 201 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 which they have disclosed prior to the suspension in the application for search, let us say it is a conveyance, what subsection (5) says, is that conveyance shall pop in first in the queue and everything else comes after. So this is the manner in which you procure an absolute guarantee, well, as close to indefeasible guarantee of the title as at a particular point in time and you preserve the insertion in a ranking of priorities of the thing which you applied for at that moment in time. Any other caveat can easily be factored under the Miscellaneous Provisions in Part VIII of the Act which is the lodging of caveats where under section 74 of the parent Act you are allowed to lodge caveats, et cetera. The danger in expanding the 28-day period is that you allow more items to fill the buffer zone. In a 14-day period let us say you get 10 transactions waiting in the queue, in a 28-day period it stands to reason that you may get more. Let us say you get 20 items. So in extending it to 28 days you are running the risk of exaggerating the potential mischief by expanding the time. This particular formula has come about on the back of the Real Property Act, its structure, its purpose and also the practice of the Registry. So we did not want to amplify the time frame, we wanted to keep it smaller because otherwise we run the risk of filling the buffer zone into a larger area. Sen. S. Hosein: Madam Chair, sorry, if I am to get you clear, the same example used with A and B, application is in for research and a judgment is entered against A. The judgment will come after the conveyance? Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes. And because in this system you are not hiding behind the veil of a registration, meaning, your search is not just behind a veil. Right now when you search land you are searching land at any point in time and nothing else will happen. And whatever happens between your search— Sen. S. Hosein: And the conveyance—

UNREVISED 202 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Mr. Al-Rawi: —and the conveyance usually ends up with you running the risk of having to rely on your search clerk. Did you check judgments? Did you check lis pendens? Did you check registration? The clerk then comes back to you with a piece of paper saying judgments and lis pendens as at 3.05 p.m. on so and so date, equals to that. And then there is still a gap. So you have your search clerk waiting at the end to make sure it is just before 4.00 p.m. and you are the first in line and you lodge it then. There is a lot of litigation on that basis. To remove the allegation of a charge kicking in that you may not have been where, post your search clerk certifying something, you informing the bank, you perfecting a mortgage, this says, okay, two parties agreed to the search or a bank and a person agreed to a mortgage, they know that the title is certified not just by the search clerk but by the Registrar General as at that date and nothing can stop that transaction going. In other words then, subsequent risky aspects are excluded from the titling. Sen. S. Hosein: But is it that the conveyance is executed and then the judgment is entered. So that means that the person will be taking the land with the judgment. Mr. Al-Rawi: No, the judgment does not kick in. So the priority as at the 14 days prior is reserved. So what it means is, your searching must be done—there are going to be two types of searches effectively. For people to know that they want to deal with land you would not request an official search. You will get any search clerk, which is why the Bill provides for any person may ask for folios, et cetera, you investigate the title, you know, okay, I want to buy your land. I have done an unofficial search. Your agreement for sale is built on that. At the point of titling and perfecting it is when you go to the registry and say, right, Madam Registrar we want to have an official search done, stop the clock. Madam Registrar stops the clock, gives you an official search, and certifies the title and now you close in that

UNREVISED 203 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

14-day window because the title has been certified. And that is where there is no gap between your search clerk leaving the registry and somebody arriving two minutes after and locking in a position. Worse yet, if it is done on an equitable basis as opposed to legal basis, even worse yet if it is done for a situation where it is a bona fide purchase of a value without notice. Sen. S. Hosein: I take your point. Mr. Al-Rawi: Okay. Sen. Ramdeen: But AG, on that basis, if you work that out, on that basis somebody who is expecting a judgment to be against them could have a provisional period of time where they could transfer the property— Mr. Al-Rawi: That is where section 74 kicks in. Section 74 of the Miscellaneous part says: “Any person who— (a) claims any unregistrable interest in land, lease or charge; (b) is entitled to a licence; (c) has presented a bankruptcy petition against the proprietor of any registered land, lease or charge; (d) is a judgment creditor; or (e) has obtained a lis pendens, may lodge a caveat.” So I accept your point that a judgment creditor does not crystallize until the order is made. However, you may filed a lis pendens with the filing of the action. So you can take care of protecting or not avoiding your charge coming in by fraudulent transaction to sell and cause an official search by invoking section 74. Sen. Ramdeen: But if I lodge an instrument, I am just thinking out all the practical reality. If I lodge an instrument during—the suspension period kicks in

UNREVISED 204 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 on the lodging of the instrument, that is, when the 14-day period starts. What is my ability, I can always pull out. Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes. So it is no different from the—it is two mischiefs we are treating with. One, abusing the system or two, having a title which is unguaranteed. Where one draws the line is of course not an easy thing. Madam Chairman: Sen. Mark, first. Well, Sen. Ramdeen has spoken already, so I will allow you make your comment. Sen. Mark: Well, no, I was going to part (a) of this amendment. Remember there are two parts. Madam Chairman: Yes. Sen. Mark: So can I proceed? Madam Chairman: Yes. Sen. Mark: Madam Chair, I know that the Attorney General sought to convince us in his presentation but we are not moved by his submission on this reason why he has— the reason that he has given for wanting to delete this particular provision that has been in existence since independence. So we do not understand why the AG will want to deny a citizen that right. I agree with him that the person could have access electronically to search, but we also believe that person should have the right to go physically and access information. So we respectfully disagree with the Attorney General on this one. Madam Chairman: Attorney General. Mr. Al-Rawi: Thank you, Madam Chair. To use much-quoted words, “I do not associate myself with the sentiments” expressed by Sen. Mark but I will say why. We are not prohibiting searches per se. We are just limiting official searches to attorneys-at-law, acting in a particular way. You have not only the electronic register, but if you look to subclause (3) which is at clause 20(c (3):

UNREVISED 205 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

“A member of the public may search the electronic records in the”—and it goes on. But (4): “Where any person proposing to deal with…land…” We morph out of the attorney-at-law. But searching the electronic register does not stop you—in subclause (2), from: “…making an application…and…paying…prescribed fee entitled to a certified copy of”—the—“folio”. You see you can do a full search, obtain certified copies of it, but what we are not allowing is the ability for the suspension period to be invoked. So you still have the searching by the public, we are just making sure that when you are triggering the suspension period, the parties consent, it is an attorney-at-law acting, you freeze the time, you make sure that the no other judgments, et cetera, can kick in afterwards and the priority is preserved. So, I think it is perhaps because the area of law, I mean, let me put this on the record, mortgages survive in this country and in the English law based upon a doctrine of law called scintilla temporis. Let me explain that to see how technical this actually is. You cannot mortgage something which you do not own. So when you go to a bank and you say A and B are transacting. A is going to buy a property from B, but for A to buy the property he has to go to a bank and get the money. The bank says, okay, I will lend you the money but you have to give me the property as security. So you cannot give the property until you buy the property. So B has to get the money first from the bank. So what we do is we execute the instruments at the same time. The conveyance from A to B is done, the mortgage from B to the bank is done. They are done simultaneously. But to effect the legal

UNREVISED 206 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 fiction that you actually own the property, because you cannot own it till you pay for it and you cannot pay for it till the bank gives you the money and the bank cannot give you the money till you own the property and give it to the bank. So to make that work in law we lodge and register the conveyance first and two seconds after we lodge and register the mortgage under the doctrine of scintilla temporis. This preservation of time frame and the legal fiction and reality that works out in conveyancing is rather unique. It is the way that we make the system work. Sen. Ramdeen: I just wanted to ask you in relation to your new 73(1). How do you— Madam Chairman: Just one second Sen. Ramdeen, because you know we are dealing with— Sen. Ramdeen: Okay, I will wait till it is finished. Madam Chairman: Clause 20, the amendment as circulated by Sen. Mark which you explained the position earlier. Sen. Ramdeen: Sorry, Madam Chair, if the AG would entertain all of—I was just trying to do it efficiently so that he can deal with them at the same time. But we can do it separately, I have no difficulty in doing that. It is a very simple point if he wants to treat with it now, subject to you of course. 7.30 p.m. Madam Chairman: Yes. Well, before you ask it—Sen. Ameen, you wanted to say something on clause 20 on the amendment as circulated by Sen, Mark? Sen. Ameen: Yes, Madam Chairman. With regard to the public access, I know the Attorney General explained again that the public would have access by the digital search. The reality is that the system is there but it is not functional many times. And I want to ask the Attorney General, because if the system is not functioning because of some technical problem, it means that the public would be

UNREVISED 207 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 denied the right that they have in law to search, and they have no other way of searching unless they pay an attorney. So, to prevent this—and the fact is that even before, for quite some time the system is supposed to be working, but it is not working. How do we treat with this? And this is where, Madam Chairman, I again want to reiterate that whatever is available electronically and whatever is available through technology, should enhance what we have now. And for the very fact that the system is not working and has not been working, and if we accept this— Madam Chairman: Sen. Ameen, I think the gist of your point—I think we understand what you are saying. So, Attorney General, I will ask you to respond. Mr. Al-Rawi: Thank you, Madam Chair. But first of all, let me put on the record the system has always been working. The online aspects, external to the office, is what was prejudiced. [Interruption] No, no. You had your say. Let me make this clear. The system has always been working at the registry. The inconvenience of having the online system crash because of the failure to keep the licensing, et cetera, happened and has been recovered. Until we actually make the physical move from the registry at South Quay and relocate it—we are not going to spend hardware twice. So we are limping with the system at South Quay, and when we move this month in June to September, we are migrating with better technology. But let me make it abundantly clear. The system is working. Secondly, in the event that we take that the system actually crashes—because Sen. Ameen has a point, what happens if the system crashes electronically—I refer you to subsection 2: “A person may”—that is anybody—“on making an application in the prescribed form and on paying the prescribed fee be entitled to a certified copy of any folio or any part of the parcel index…”

UNREVISED 208 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

So you have that. And then the doctrine of necessity kicks in, in any event. So that you will always be permitted the right to search because it is de facto and de jure a public registry. The only aspect of the attorney-at-law in 73(1)(a) and (b), is firstly, (a) the attorney may inspect any sheet or parcel index; (b), require an official search. So we are preserving all of the opportunities to do it and the online system that we are now implementing actually has redundancy features. We are having system A backed up with system B, backed up with system C, because we cannot afford for the entire registry to be lost. So we have redundancy measures in place as well. Madam Chairman: Sen. Hosein. Sen. S. Hosein: AG, with respect to the clerk, is that that we are going to prescribe a form for attorneys-at-law to complete in order to identify the clerk? Mr. Al-Rawi: Absolutely correct, yes. Sen. S. Hosein: And second is that, are you minded—we can come back to this point in the omnibus Bill—that we create a separate category for the search clerks who are regularly at the Registrar General’s office? Because too often, attorneys, we have our—there is a search clerk there that we are accustomed doing business with. Is it that we can ask the Registrar General to authorize this person— Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes. Sen. S. Hosein:—so that we can include a separate category, not just the attorney or clerk, but also those title search clerks, those freelancers? Mr. Al-Rawi: Sure. The term “clerk” is going to be interpreted to mean anybody who functions as the clerk, not just your litigation clerk, but your search clerk. Secondly, the forms at the registry are going to include that John Brown, the attorney, identifies Jane Brown or Jane whomever, as the clerk and then the letter

UNREVISED 209 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 of authorization, the identification cards, the documents are done. The attorneys then receive an encrypted PIN number, end-to-end encryption, and that is managed from an online payment system where deductions are made so it is a cashless environment. All of that has been developed already. So we just went with the term “clerk” because the Regulations can take care of the rest. Sen. S. Hosein: If I may recommend also that in the form we include a specific section on the specific land to be searched. Because I do not want a situation where I give an authorization to a clerk and they go and do work for other attorneys, and it be in such a way that it is an agency agreement rather than an employer/employee. Mr. Al-Rawi: I understand, and we propose to treat with that, Madam Chair, by way of how we regulate the relationship between the Registrar General’s department and the attorney-at-law, so each transaction is done individually. Sen. S. Hosein: Sure, thank you. Madam Chairman: I am allowing just one more intervention on this matter before I take it to the vote of the Committee. Sen. Mark. Sen. Mark: Through you, Madam Chair. AG, If I were taking myself,—if I were to go to the Registrar General’s office tomorrow and I pay my fees and I want to search for some piece of property, company, what have you, I can do that physically tomorrow morning with no let or hindrance. Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes. Sen. Mark: If this law is passed in its current form, what you are proposing, can I go subsequent to the passage and the assent of that law—go to the Registrar General’s office, pay my prescribed fee and tell them I want to conduct a search? Not electronically, eh, I am talking about I am asking them physically to bring this for me.

UNREVISED 210 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes, let me explain. Sen. Mark: Explain it to me. Mr. Al-Rawi: Let me explain. Madam Chair, I would invite hon. Members to focus upon the word “folio”. We are not in this system treating with the registration of deeds system, which is where you have to find deed after deed, after deed, after deed, and daisy-chain it. This is a cleaned-up version of the Real Property Act. In the Real Property Act, the certificate of title, which is the folio here, has all of the transactions on the back of it—all. All of the memorials as existed under the RPO will be on this folio. We have four types of folios. We have them for interests; we have them for leases; we have them for—in the manner that we have set out here. So we have created four types of folios— condominiums. Right? So when we see here, a person, on making an application in the prescribed form, that is any person—this is subsection (2)—is entitled to a certified copy of a folio, that is the whole hog. That is the advantage of the Real Property Ordinance- style structure and this structure. So you are getting the ability to do this. We are just not allowing, because of the standstill provision, this freezing, suspension period, any and everybody to do it. The conditionality for that, it is your attorney-at-law who does it, and you have the written consent of the parties who own or are interested in the transaction. It is because there is a definite effect of allowing the certification of title. So this inspection and certification of folio is very different from the registration of deeds process. It works alongside with the journals and delivery books as well, which give you all of the other particulars which we have not limited. Madam Chairman: So, hon. Senators, I will now put the amendment to the vote

UNREVISED 211 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05 of the Committee. Question put and negatived. Clause 20 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Madam Chairman: Hon. Senators, I would like to just suspend the workings of the committee for the procedural Motion. So the Senate will now resume. Senate resumed. PROCEDURAL MOTION The Minister of Energy and Energy Industries (Sen. The Hon. Franklin Khan): Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, in accordance with Standing Order 14(5), I beg to move that the Senate continue to sit until 11.00 p.m. Question put and agreed to. Committee resumed. Clauses 21 to 23 ordered to stand part of the Bill. Madam Chairman: Attorney General, we just want to be very clear on clause 16 which was amended. If you could just look at it, because initially we talked about inserting a new paragraph B. But in the end what was proposed was that in paragraph B, amend. That is the correct position? Mr. Al-Rawi: So we do need to insert a new paragraph B and then there will be a consequential amendment. Paragraph B becomes C. Clause 16 recommitted. Mr. Al-Rawi: Yes, Madam Chair. We propose, consequent upon the recommendations and discussions led by Sen. Mark, that we amend clause 16 of the Bill by inserting after paragraph A, a new paragraph B, as follows—and this new paragraph B will be, and I will read it because I am sure you have it. In subsection (3), by inserting after the word “minor” where it occurs last, the words “and provide a certified copy of the birth certificate of the minor.”

UNREVISED 212 Senate in Committee (cont’d) 2018.06.05

And then “Renumber paragraph B as paragraph C.” Question put and agreed to. Clause 16, as amended, again ordered to stand part of the Bill. Question put and agreed to: That the Bill, as amended, be reported to the Senate. Senate resumed. Bill reported, with amendment, read the third time and passed. LAND ADJUDICATION (AMDT.) (NO. 2) BILL, 2017 Order for second reading read. The Attorney General (Hon. Faris Al-Rawi): Thank you for allowing me such a generous amount of time to collect my papers, Madam President, and to figure out where we are. Madam President, I beg to move that a Bill to amend the Land Adjudication Act, 2000, be read a second time. Madam President: Proceed, Attorney General. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Madam President, I am very pleased to pilot the second Bill in the package of Bills referred to as the land package. I deeply and sincerely regret that we are not debating the Land Tribunal Act and the legislation to amend the Crown Suits Ordinance at this time. I wonder if it is too late to ask the Opposition now whether they are prepared to debate those two Bills together. And so I ask Sen. Mark. [Continuous desk thumping] Sen. Mark: I would like to propose to this honourable House, through the esteemed President, that we adjourn the debate and we return on Tuesday of next week. [Continuous desk thumping] Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Madam President, it is often not such a good thing to start on a negative note by offering a condemnation for what I consider to be a totally

UNREVISED 213 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) irrelevant and unnecessary indulgence of this Senate’s time. So I intend, and I give notice, that I will be invoking the Standing Orders with extreme vigour on every occasion where hon. Members step out of their creases. [Desk thumping and crosstalk] Madam President, this second Bill that we are debating today, falling into the land package, comes out of the need for land reform in Trinidad and Tobago. I am obliged, because it is a second debate, to repeat some of the material which has caused us to come here. Suffice it to say, Trinidad and Tobago operates upon 19th Century English law so inherited from our English predecessors as far back as the conquest by Norman the Conqueror in the year 1066. Coming out of that conquest, all land in the British Empire, which Trinidad and Tobago became a part of, fell to be gifted by the British Crown. The British Crown had the facility to offer various types of interest in land. They would offer to those from the gentry something referred to as the Lord’s interest or Knights interest or different estates which were vested in the hierarchy of the gentry of the United Kingdom. And secondly, they also had the ability to offer estates to persons who were referred to as commoners or estates in common. Madam President, that is different from what is referred to as allodial land. An allodial land or interest is land which is owned by indigenous people in such a fashion that the State has no right. Now, the whole purpose of the State having these various types of interest is really so that the State can exercise dominion over its subjects, and that dominion which was exercised included the levying of taxation. In the allodial land system, taxation is not a feature because the State is not permitted the right to manage taxation for land which is vested in original people.

UNREVISED 214 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

That goes further in today’s very interesting environment to all things which exist under the surface of the land, and I am referring in particular to mines and material. In a society such as ours, where there are exploitation rights which go to the benefit of the people of Trinidad and Tobago, in particular in our oil and gas sector, mines and minerals or sub-surface wealth is a very important concern. Madam President, the two systems of land management that we have in the system are squared simply in the Conveyancing and Law and Property Act, 1845, as it is joined by the Registration of Deeds Act, No. 18 of 1884. Those two stand on the one side. And then on the second side there is the Real Property Act which was referred to as Ordinance. Real Property Act is now Chap. 56:02, and that was introduced into our laws in 1892. The Real Property Act now stands 126 years old. The Conveyancing and Law and Property Act stands as 173 years and the Registration of Deeds Act now stands as 174 years old. The Real Property Act is, in its origin, taken from the Australian model, called the Torrens system, in 1892 when it was introduced into Trinidad and Tobago. It found rooting in Jamaica as well. Madam President, there has been a series of consultations and reflections and proposed developments to the law beginning in 1977, passing through a package of laws which came under the hand of Prof. Wiley in 1981, which saw the introduction of the Land Registration Act, the Landlord and Conveyancing Act, the Landlord and Tenant Act, the Condominium Act, the Limitation Act, the Trustee Act and the Succession Act. That package of laws was regrettably not proclaimed despite the fact that it was brought into the lex corpus of Trinidad and Tobago. It functioned basically on the Guyanese model of system of land registration. But because there was a push- back from the users of the system that the system would have been so alien, it was

UNREVISED 215 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) not something which was brought into effect largely because it was feared that it could not have been operationalized. With that in mind, in the period 1996—2005, under the agricultural sector reform programme, there were a series of consultations and amendments which saw, in the year 1998, the now late Mr. Justice Gayapersad as chairman of the Law Reform Commission, piloting and coming up with a series of laws based upon the experience which occurred in the Turks and Caicos Islands in 1970, in Anguilla in 1972, in the Cayman Islands in 1973, in Montserrat in 1976, in Antigua and Barbuda in 1977. In 1999, we had the introduction of three pieces of law: the Registration of Titles to Land Act, which this Senate has just considered a moment ago and passed, with amendment; the Land Adjudication Act which is what we are proposed to treat with now, and the Land Tribunal Act. Those pieces of law were, in fact, brought into the body of laws in Trinidad and Tobago but have not been proclaimed because the proclamation largely depended upon the articulation of regulations. I am very pleased to say that as a result of work undertaken, beginning in the year 2004 and 2005, and with implementation plans in the year 2008, that the Government has drafted the regulations to work with the package of laws, and in particular, this Land Adjudication Bill which we now propose to treat with. Madam President, the Act before us, which is now proposed to be considered by this Bill, is a very important piece of law. The Land Adjudication Act came into the House of Representatives on the 15th of November, 1999. It was introduced there. It came to the Senate on the 4th of April in the year 2000, and then it came back to the House of Representatives to consider the Senate

UNREVISED 216 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) amendments on the 4th of May, 2000. It was assented to on June 15, 2000. We now stand 10 days short, precisely, of 18 years of the Land Adjudication Act, standing in the books of Trinidad and Tobago—just short of 18 years by 10 days, as we are now on the 5th of June, 2018. The Bill before us proposes, in its 20 clauses, amendments to aspects of the Land Adjudication Act. Now, the Land Adjudication Act itself is comprised of 28 sections in six parts, and we propose today in the 20 clauses which amend this particular Act—we propose improvements which redound to the benefit of Trinidad and Tobago. Madam President, it is the Government’s square intention to have the commencement of the land adjudication exercise begin in the island of Tobago. And in relation to that, I am very pleased to say that the IDB, the Inter-American Development Bank, settled upon a loan which was perfected by the Government, in two tranches for two specific purposes. On the first limb of that settled loan, we have US $8 for the implementation of the land adjudication system, which causes registration on the Registration of Titles to Land Act via a land tribunal. That loan is for US $8 million. And on the second aspect of it, it is proposed that US $100 million be spent in Trinidad as a part of Trinidad and Tobago for the implementation of the same system.

[MR. VICE PRESIDENT in the Chair] The Land Adjudication Act, it is necessary to perhaps traverse some of the— as I welcome you, Mr. Vice-President, to the Chair—it is perhaps necessary to traverse some of the logic behind this Act. Section 3 of the Act is where the Minister, by order, declares any area to be an adjudication area. The Land Adjudication Act is premised in its operation to say that Trinidad and Tobago will

UNREVISED 217 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) be carved up into small pieces called adjudication areas. 8.00 p.m. Those pieces, pursuant to section 3, would be known to the population by an Order done by the Minister with responsibility for this Act. Those pieces will involve surveyors or who are called surveying officers, demarcation officers and adjudicators arriving into the system; boundaries are defined, points are defined, and then in small pieces Trinidad and Tobago goes under a declaration area and they go to work in identifying the land as it is put there. Section 5 of the Act is where the adjudication officer in consultation with the Director of Surveys divides the area into adjudication sections or can declare an entire area an adjudication area, and it is given a distinct number. The adjudication officer is required to examine all RPO registers. Why? The system under the RPA—the Real Property Act—is such that that form of title, albeit on a voluntary basis which has resulted in just 15 per cent of Trinidad and Tobago’s land mass coming under that particular law, that tightening system is viewed to be an actual guarantee or near guarantee of what the title looks like. It is not the same with the Conveyancing and Law of Property Act and registration of deeds system, where those systems, that latter end of the system, only records the transaction between individuals and does not speak to the title aspects of it. So because the RPA is very useful the adjudication officer, when the demarcation is done, enters into the area and goes first off for all the RPA land, and that RPA land falls into the point and does not need to be tested because it has already been tested by the system of administration coming forward from the year 1892 to date. Section 6 of the Act, in terms of logical flow in how we consider this Bill, is

UNREVISED 218 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) where the adjudication officer prepares a notice in respect of each section specifying the personalities, persons are invited where they have an interest to make a claim in writing or in person by an agent to turn up and to participate in the marking of boundaries, et cetera. Section 6 further goes on to provide for the manner in which notices are given to the public, where the public is made aware, where information is given out, where there is knowledge of what the process is going on in that section. In section 7 of the parent Act, we make sure that at no time, during that demarcation exercise, that adjudication exercise are transactions affecting any piece of land in that section dealt with. So there is a standstill or freezing aspect so that if something is to be treated with, the Registrar must inform the notification of deeds, et cetera. So no action in respect to an interest or right to land in an adjudication section can be entertained, in fact, in a civil court, unless the Registrar or the adjudication exercise is made informed. So that is to make sure that you do not have two streams where a court can, for instance, go off and do something which the adjudication exercise might be doing otherwise. We make sure that all parties are informed. Similarly— Sen. Ramdeen: Would you give way? Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Yes, please. Sen. Ramdeen: Sorry. I know you made the distinction between the Real Property Act and what the persons who are registered under the Real Property Act are required to do, but is it not, or am I incorrect, if I put it in that way, that when the adjudication officer is carrying out his duties under this Act for a particular

UNREVISED 219 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) adjudication area he is treating both with old law and with RPO so that he comes up with one set of titles? Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Yes, you are correct. So I started off, hon. Senator, by talking to the bit which the adjudication officer would accept without question. That is the RPO. The Act also allows for the old law which is the registered deeds to filter in, but there is a certain amount of care which is done and inspection. So there is a certain caveat to that, but it does entertain both systems and the hon. Senator is correct, Mr. Vice-President. Section 8, persons make a claim in a particular form. In that process, persons are required to attend in person or by agent when the requested officer, be it the adjudication officer, demarcation officer, or recording officer request that. In section 9, we treat with the adjudication officer being satisfied that a person is entitled to a claim, and that includes the position where it is Real Property Act or registration of deeds, conveyancing and law of property systems, both of them can be accepted. Minors are treated with very carefully. Persons under disabilities are treated with very carefully. Persons who do not turn up but who the adjudication officer believes has a claim, they are also factored into this matrix. A demarcation officer under section 10 of the parent Act gives notice that land in the adjudication area is being demarcated and there are time frames prescribed. We then see in section 12 of the parent Act the demarcation officer can adjust boundaries with consent, something which has been very problematic for people over the years and which, in fact, in a previous debate we heard mentioned that there is umpteen amounts of litigation where people fight over boundaries. In fact, I can say that in my own private practice I have seen people fight over two inches of land. So it is not uncommon for them to spend hundreds of thousands of

UNREVISED 220 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) dollars over two inches of land. Mr. Vice-President, we are looking at section 13 where the demarcation map is prepared. We move into section 14 where a recording officer steps in, records the claims that are being dealt with. In section 15 of the parent Act, if there is a dispute as to boundaries we set out how that is to be adjudicated upon and the process, et cetera. We provide for there to be a system which is as informal as possible. You take the rules of the High Court in civil jurisdiction, but there is an informality of process much like the Industrial Court that comes to lend assistance. In section 16 of the parent Act is where the State land is treated with and how we treat with the prescriptive periods: 16 years for private lands, 30 years for State lands. In section 19, we see where the adjudication officer signs and dates the adjudication record. Section 20 where the public is allowed to object. Section 22, where corrections to the adjudication record, et cetera, are done. Section 23, where there is the 90-day period on notice of completion and how you can object. Section 24, where persons aggrieved by decisions can go to the tribunal. Now, I have taken care to describe the process to indicate that this land adjudication exercise in the parent Act is a very logical process which facilitates due process, which facilitates ventilation of issues, but it allows for flexibility of process. Because in the land adjudication exercise we are taking the obligation upon the State to put the machinery in, put the mechanisms in for adjudication, do the demarcation and survey, record it via the recording officer, pass it to the adjudication officer, involve the public in the process and, therefore, this takes away the reason for the failure of the Real Property Act, which was a voluntary basis, where the cost had to be borne by the individual approaching the State for the grant under the provisions of the Real Property Act, and that was usually done

UNREVISED 221 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) by the application to bring lands under the Real Property Act which is an application done by way of court process. Mr. Vice-President, what is the time that I must end my presentation? Mr. Vice-President: 8.35 p.m. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Thank you, Sir. I intend to hopefully be shorter than that. Mr. Vice-President, when we look to clause 3 of the Bill, we are amending section 2 of the Act. I ask hon. Members to pay attention to the amendment to the adjudication officer where it now means the chief adjudication officer, deputy adjudication officer. Similarly, we are treating with the precise definitions of the “chief” as an individual basis, and we are treating with the deputy adjudication officer on an individual basis. We have separated out the definitions. We saw it fit to also add the definition of the Director of Surveys because that was not a feature of the parent Act, and that is, the Director of Surveys has supervisory control over the demarcation officers and surveying officers. It was necessary to introduce that creature in law to the interpretation section, which is section 2 of the Act by way of a proposed clause 3 of the Bill. Mr. Vice President, I ask hon. Members to take note of clause 4 of the Bill, which proposes an amendment to section 4 of the Act. In this, we are providing for very important amendments which skirted on unconstitutionality in the parent Act. Mr. Vice-President, we are in this position creating a chief adjudication officer who should have 10 years as an attorney-at-law—minimum experience— who is appointed by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission, in that comes the constitutional proportionality R v Hinds, or Thomas v AG kind of argument, where we are treating with the backing of a Judicial and Legal Service Commission to avoid the Executive interference.

UNREVISED 222 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

We are then providing that there should be such number of deputy adjudication officers who may be recruited as necessary for respective adjudication areas and, in inserting a provision with respect to deputy adjudication officers we are saying that they too shall be attorneys-at-law for at least 10 years’ experience in conveyancing and shall also be appointed by the JSLC, again giving constitutional backing. We then apply the formula of the Cabinet—and I say that pursuant to the operation of section 74 of the Constitution and section 80 of the Constitution, the Cabinet effectively now referred to in legislation as the President because it is the President who is instructed by Cabinet—to facilitate the appointment of demarcation officers, recording officers and survey officers. We say that the terms and conditions of service for these non-JSLC members are to be such as prescribed by the President and, Mr. Vice-President, we say that these particular officers now stand in two separate parts. I wish to draw in aid for support of this mixed system of JLSC operatives, that is chief and other adjudication officers versus Cabinet/President appointed officer, there is ample precedent for that in our laws. It has been traversed in cases like Paul Lai which my learned colleague Sen. Ramdeen was involved in, in the Sam Maharaj dicta, in the Suratt dicta. It is not uncommon to have structures such as this in our laws in Trinidad and Tobago. Very importantly, we seek to introduce a new subsection (8) where we treat with again, another unconstitutionality which the parent law had. You see in the original subsection (8) of section 4 of the Act, a demarcation officer or survey officer could have entered without consent unto lands, and that we saw as respectfully something which ought to have been prescribed by a mandatory

UNREVISED 223 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) provision that you get consent, and only if you get consent can you enter. But if you do not get consent or you cannot find the owner of the land, then in fact we prescribe that you shall go to court and have a High Court Judge on an ex parte basis allow you permission to enter the land. This must be subjected to due process, to judicial scrutiny because we cannot allow a situation where any and everybody could infringe upon the right to private life which our Constitution so carefully enshrines. Mr. Vice-President, clause 5 seeks an amendment to section 5, clause 6 seeks an amendment to section 6. They are really minor because of the use of the chief adjudication officer as disaggregated from the other adjudication officers as we have introduced that. We are making sure that the provision of notices is managed in this section 5 by the amendments which clause 6 propose, where the chief adjudication officer shall cause notices to be published in two daily newspapers in circulation in Trinidad and Tobago at least once per week for four consecutive weeks, and that way the population is brought into the knowledge of the process. After all, in today’s world where crime and criminality and unlawful entry onto properties can be an issue, people masquerading, we want to make sure that there is adequate notice and attention by the public, to and by the public in this area. Mr. Vice-President, we proposed in clause 7 to amend section 8 of the Act, and we are treating with the improvement in language in subclause (3) in section 8 of the Act. So where a: “…person fails to attend in person or by an agent after written notice has been given, the demarcation, recording or other proceeding may continue in

UNREVISED 224 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

his absence”. In clause 7, we propose an amendment to section 9 of the parent Act. We are really treating with the issue of adjudication officers providing safeguards for minors and persons with disability, and albeit that the amendment is a minor amendment I am just flagging the issue of the safeguard which section 9 of the Act allows. Mr. Vice-President, we are treating in clause 8 with an amendment to section 10 of the Act. We are proposing, again, that the notification by a circulation to the public of the demarcation exercise is adequately done. And so clause 8 amends section 10 in the fashion that appears in the Bill. Clause 9 treats with an amendment to section 12 of the Act, and we are ensuring here that we have the demarcation officer acting in the fashion of special powers being specifically set out. The demarcation officer can, with consent of owners adjust the boundaries, and that is a very important and cost savings mechanism for the taxpayers of this country and for people who are in constant dispute with their neighbours, or who genuinely wish to have their boundaries adjusted because of the way their properties may have been built over time. Very often these fall to be pebbles in a shoe, or a fly in an ointment for mortgages and for conveyances where there are incursions of boundaries by neighbours upon each other. We have also said that we should amend the mandatory language that a demarcation officer can award compensation and we have said, “No”. The demarcation officer should be able to recommend compensation because that after all, is not the function of the demarcation officer. That is instead the function of the adjudication officer who has the quasi-judicial functionality in making the recommendation.

UNREVISED 225 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Mr. Vice-President, clause 10 proposes an amendment to section 13 of the Act. In this, we are really providing for the duties of the surveying officer. We are saying that subject to any general or special direction issued by an adjudication officer or a demarcation officer, the duties of a surveying officer should include carrying of the surveying work and preparation of the demarcation map, very importantly using survey data, aerial photographs, et cetera, and that allows for the incorporation of technology into the whole exercise and it takes avail of the cadastral information management systems and the geographic information management systems that the Ministry of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries is sitting on in terms of a gold mine. It takes care of land titles which the Surveys Department has as well. Sen. S. Hosein: AG, just on a point of clarification with regard to the Survey Officer, will that person be under the instructions of the Commissioner of Surveys; or is it a separate office and they would now fall under the Registrar General’s Department? Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Very interesting point. I think it is both. So surveying officers—technically, to be a land surveyor you fall to be licensed and so there is a particular regime there. The land surveyor as defined inside of this is a creature which has potential, but in the exercise of this adjudication process the surveying officer falls under the direction of the chief adjudication officer. So whilst there may be—how should I say—a collateral instruction which one could have, it is certainly the case that in the exercise of the application of this adjudication process there is only one boss in terms of the special and general directions as section 13 of the parent Act describes where they fall subject to the chief adjudication officer’s ultimate discretion.

UNREVISED 226 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

Sen. S. Hosein: Thank you. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Mr. Vice-President, when we look to clause 11 where we amend section 16 of the Act, we are really providing for a very important cornerstone of this law, and permit me to address it this way. In preparing the adjudication record where an adjudication officer is satisfied, and listen to the subcategories: “(a) a person has a valid title…under the Real Property Ordinance...” Well, there is no need to check that as I have explained before. “(b) a person…without a documentary title is in open and peaceable possession of a parcel of land other than…State land and has been in…possession…for a period”— The old Act says 30 years, it should have been 16 years because private lands the period of limitation is in fact 16 years and not 30 years. It is for State land that the prescriptive period is 30 years. So we are clarifying this to allow for the adverse possession rule and the extinguishing of rights to apply after 16 years for private lands. In the subclause (c) which we now introduce, we are treating with State land separately and, of course, we stick to the lawful formula of 30 years. In subclause (d) we deal with, where: “a person has a good documentary title to a parcel of land and that no other person has acquired or is in the process of acquiring…title”— thereto— “under any law relating to prescription or limitation”—he— “shall declare that person as the owner of the parcel with an absolute title and record it as such;” And that takes care of the process of the old law land, the registration of deeds, et

UNREVISED 227 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) cetera. The new subclause (da) is where provisional title comes in: “a person is in possession of, or has a right to a parcel of land but an adjudication officer is not satisfied that such person is entitled to be recorded under”—the previous paragraphs—“as the owner…with absolute title”— he—“may nevertheless declare that person the owner of the parcel with a provisional title and record it as such;” And that, Mr. Vice-President, forms a cornerstone feature for treating with informal settlers properly called squatters in this country, or persons who wish to regularize themselves without having to go through the loop, and fire, and rings of difficulty that one experiences in the State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act, Chap 57:05, where one gets certificates of the comfort provided that you had taken avail of applying for one prior to the year 2000. Mr. Vice-President, also in this particular section we make sure that where that person has achieved the status of being an adverse possessor, meaning you have provisional title, you are not absolute title, you are not recorded as such, that we do two things. We tell the person, “Look, you have a right to go to the Land Tribunal”. Oh, how I wish we were debating that Bill now because it would make sense. And oh, how I wish we were debating the limitation period because adverse possessor is all about that, but unfortunately, I am sure Sen. Mark will explain the logic to that in a short while. But what we do in new subclause (2) here, this new subclause, is we tell the adverse possessor, you may approach the Land Tribunal and deal with the rest of your title. But we also tell the Commissioner of State Lands about the person being on land, and that takes care of a very important point which Sen. Ramdeen raised earlier in the day about the English system where one can trigger the process

UNREVISED 228 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) of being notified that you are actually on the land, and that may very well take care of that very interesting submission by Sen. Ramdeen. The adverse possessor of State lands may apply to the Land Tribunal and seek a vesting Order. Understand the magnitude of what this is. This is, let me put it this way, the cheap version of bringing lands under the RPO Act where you would have to pay $30,000, $60,000 to a lawyer, go to court, spend umpteen hours in court. To bring lands under the provision of the Real Property Act, in this system here, we now say, you can have the state mechanism under the Land Tribunal in the adjudication process, deal with your claim, and this provides a relatively cheap solution to people who have been dispossessed of land for far too long in our country. Mr. Vice-President, in the new subclause (4) we are treating with the provisional title under subsection (1)(da) specifically and we are putting in again important elements where you record the data possession as it commenced. That takes care of an earlier submission. I cannot revive a debate, but Sen. Ramdeen made an interesting point in another debate in the Senate, at another time, which spoke to when you first record your interest, and this particular subsection (4) perhaps achieves that purpose. Particulars of the deed, instruments, any reservations those two are also recorded, and the holder of provisional title may apply to the Land Tribunal in the circumstances set out. The adjudication officer in the new subclause (6) must look at the application and refer it to the Land Tribunal for hearing and determination, and notwithstanding the new subsection (1) that we have: “an adjudication officer shall not make…in respect of State land… which—

UNREVISED 229 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

(a) is declared to be a protected area or Forest Reserve under the Forest Act; (b) is declared to be an environmentally sensitive area under the Environmental Management Act; or (c) has been identified by the State for public purposes”. This, Mr. Vice-President, is the critical feature of this clause where we for the first time make sure that environmentally sensitive land, land for public purpose, our aquifers, et cetera, are managed to the interest of all of the citizens of our country. After all we live on an island, we do not live on very much square footage of land, either in Tobago or in Trinidad. Sen. Ramdeen: Would the AG give way? Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Sure. Sen. Ramdeen: Thank you. I am looking at that section very carefully and why I ask is because if we take the same example as the Sangre Grande incident, that actually has taken place in lands that are occupied that are designated to be a forest reserve. You have the same thing in Caroni Swamp—I do not want to take up much time—what happens to the people who have occupied this parcel of land in expiration of the prescribed period under the particular pieces of limitation legislation now for the purposes of protecting those areas as it stands now? Hon. F. Al-Rawi: That is where—and that is nail on the head, Sen. Ramdeen. There are many areas in Trinidad and Tobago which are in fact on aquifers where we have squatting communities, and this is where the State is going to have to provide for its citizens, either by way of causing an exception to the application of the law when we get to that area or, secondly, by causing a redevelopment in certain areas. Because one of the benefits of this exercise is that we will be

UNREVISED 230 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) identifying for the first time State land, where it is, how is it managed and policed, but what we do have—and let me make it abundantly clear, this Government will not be putting people off of lands in any arbitrary fashion, much like I am sure the last Government was equally minded to do. Environmentally sensitive lands, et cetera, have to be managed, but the rights of citizens, the fairness, the legitimate expectation, the wills, the wants of families who have been there for very long periods of time must be factored in this mix, and there will obviously be consultation in the land adjudication process. That is the first start for consultation and, secondly, in the work-out of it because Cabinet and Parliament have the ability to cause exceptions, but Sen. Ramdeen has hit the nail on the head. We are treating in clause 12 with an amendment to section 17. Section 17 is the principles to be followed in land adjudication and that really is set out in the subsections (1) through (4), and we are looking at possession of rent receipts. We are treating with the fact where people may be in adverse possession, but it is their parents or their predecessors in title who had the benefit of the receipts or the possession, we are saying that those things count to the person last on land. So, if you are on property which has been there over 30 years but it was owned by five successive people, the five successive people add up to the mix so that we do not dispossess someone from a structure or a continuous occupation because the principle is that is it adverse to the interest of the State and not just you are adverse to the interest of the State. It is the continuum of possession or occupation. Mr. Vice-President, the adjudication record is managed in the principles in the new subclause (6) to treat with an interesting situation in section 17, where people had original documents and did not want to give it over. We acknowledged that and in the new section 18(6), which clause 12 treats with, the recording officer

UNREVISED 231 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) shall retain a copy of a document referred to in (5) and return the original to the claimant endorsing the interest, et cetera. So that we managed the willingness of old aunties and old uncles not to lose their piece of paper, their deed which they cherish and pride so correctly. Mr. Vice-President, clause 13 treats with an amendment to section 18. We are just treating with removal of “unique parcel” and instead putting “parcel number”; we are treating with recording and demarcation officers. It is really some minor tidying-up there. In clause 14 we amend section 19. Again, we are looking to the circulation of notice in daily newspapers and otherwise. In clause 15 we are amending section 20 of the Act and we are tidying up by the introduction of chief adjudication officer. As we have now disaggregated adjudication officers properly, we needed to tidy that up. Clause 16 amends sections 21 and 22 of the Act, again by including the reference to chief adjudication officer as we have tidied that up in disaggregating the functionalities there. Clause 22—sorry, clause 16 amends section 22. Again, it is for the insertion of the chief adjudication officer. And very importantly we then come to clause 17 which amends section 23, and here is where we now say in a better formulation of language that: “Upon the expiry of ninety days from the date of publication of the notice of completion of the adjudication record or on determination of all objections presented in accordance with section 20, whichever shall be the later, the adjudication record shall, subject to the provisions of the Registration of Titles to Land Act, become final and an adjudication officer shall sign a certificate to that effect and deliver the adjudication record and relevant demarcation map to the Registrar together with the certificate and all

UNREVISED 232 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d)

documents received or copied in the process of adjudication”. That is specifically to replace the language of section 23 as it is in the parent Act because we needed to make the role, functionality and process a clear one in express terms. 8.30 p.m. Mr. Vice-President, clause 18 amends section 24. Mr. Vice-President: Attorney General, you have five minutes. Hon. F. Al-Rawi: Thank you, Sir. I had hoped that I would have been sooner, but I am compelled to go through the prescription of the Act. Here is where we are treating with the final certificate and the appellate functions. And again, we are tidying the action and we are removing some of the confusing language in clause 24, which existed there. Clause 19 amends section 25, and here is where we say how offences are managed. We needed it to be more specific in the locking-in of offences to say that, having been served with a notice or an order issued by an adjudication officer, wilfully neglects to attend in pursuance of such notice or order, that is when you commit an offence. The language was dangerously loose and we have sought to be very specific by improving upon the mens rea description of the offence, which is the wilful refusal, and we have also put in the prescription that you have to have been served, so that we marry up with the offences, as we have in law, in other pieces of legislation. Mr. Vice-President, this in the round takes us to a land adjudication process. That land adjudication process, ultimately, when we pass through the Land Tribunal and we deal with another piece of law which we are bound to deal with separately, that is the limitation of actions, it is then descended into the registration

UNREVISED 233 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Hon. F. Al-Rawi (cont’d) of title to lands. This is a logically-connected Bill to amendments, which this Senate has considered already, on the Registration of Titles to Land Act. It is something which is deserving of support. We have been 18 years nearly. We are just short of 10 days to make the 18th anniversary for the consideration of this law from date of assent. It is high time that we treat with this. The mechanism of law is in place. The systems are ready to go. The money backing the system is ready to go by IDB funding and central government funding. The process has been thought out. We have improved the constitutional parameters of the Act, in the manner in which this Bill suggests, and I beg to move. [Desk thumping] Question proposed. Sen. Wade Mark: Mr. Vice-President, I am very happy to join this debate on the Bill before us entitled the Land Adjudication (Amdt.) Bill, 2017. And I am also happy, Mr. Vice-President, to contribute to continue upholding the principles of freedom and democracy as enshrined in the Constitution of our Republic. And I am so happy that the hon. Attorney General, in spite of his earlier statement, was able to utilize his entire 40 minutes, to at least provide the population with greater clarity and understanding of this very important measure. So we are happy that he has taken up his full time, as I would also take up mine. Mr. Vice-President, this Bill to amend the Land Adjudication Act of 2000 seeks to provide for the adjudication of rights and interests in land where any claim made by an individual will be thoroughly investigated before settling such rights and interests in land in Trinidad and Tobago. And the adjudication process, as we understand it, given the measure that is before us, is supposed to be the final and authoritative determination of the existing rights and claims of people to land at that particular level. It does not mean, Mr. Vice-President, that if you are

UNREVISED 234 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) dissatisfied you cannot go to another level, which we will come to, and then you can go to the High Court and the Court of Appeal and to the Privy Council in the final analysis. Mr. Vice-President, one of the concerns that we have in the legislation, the hon. Attorney General indicated that this Bill, this Land Adjudication Bill, will benefit the people of our country. He also indicated that, in an effort to speed up this process and to provide the relevant and appropriate infrastructure and technology, we are into a loan arrangement with the IDB for some US $108 million, with US $100 million going towards Trinidad and US $8 million going towards Tobago. We have not had sight of the contents of the conditionalities and the terms of this IDB loan. We would ask the Leader of Government Business if he can table a copy of that loan agreement before this debate ends, or before we end the package of land reform measures that is before this honourable House, seeing that they are connected, according to the hon. Minister. Mr. Vice-President, there are some matters, I call them domestic matters, that we want to deal with very early, housekeeping if you want, very early in this debate. We had seen in the earlier legislation certain offices being created and we have also witnessed in this Land Adjudication (Amdt.) Bill, certain offices being created. We have seen where the chief adjudication officer, along with the deputy adjudication officer, they would have a certain period or a certain degree of experience as attorneys. And we would have also seen, Mr. Vice-President, where the Director of Surveys has been clearly defined in the legislation, and that is a very important office, as we would discover in the area of defining the adjudication area and the adjudication sections of the legislation. So that role of the Director of Surveys, as

UNREVISED 235 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) well as the chief adjudication officer, those two office-holders are very critical to ensure the proper management of this particular piece of legislation, Mr. Vice- President. What I would like to ask the Attorney General to clarify for us is that when we go to clause 4 of the legislation, it says that: “(1A). There shall be such number of Deputy Adjudication Officers who may be recruited as necessary for the respective adjudication areas.” Now, we do not have an idea how many adjudication areas, because that is going to be left up to the following persons. The Minister, by Order, will be issuing this particular order to determine areas of the country that would be designated adjudication areas and then, of course, sections. But he is doing that in conjunction with the chief adjudication officer as well the Director of Surveys, and they have under them those other adjudication officers. Mr. Vice-President, we are dealing with land, and we are dealing with people’s rights. We would like to propose an amendment very early that that order that the Minister, who happens to be the Attorney General, would be issuing under the relevant section of the law. And I am dealing with section 3, which says: “3(1) The Minister may by Order in such form as may be prescribed, declare any area to be an adjudication area, from such date as may be specified in the Order.” Mr. Vice-President, we would like the Minister, when he is declaring through this order areas as adjudication areas, that that order be tabled in the Parliament. [Interruption] Well, it will be the Minister of Legal Affairs. And I am sure it is going to be the Minister. Sen. Ramdeen: It does not say.

UNREVISED 236 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Sen. W. Mark: Well it does not define, Mr. Vice-President, which Minister. Sen. Ramdeen: We do not know. Sen. W. Mark: We do not know who would be responsible for land adjudication; if it will be the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries or whether it will be planning and development or the Attorney General. But we know that the Attorney General wants to be where the air is rare. So, clearly and so on, we do not know where he may end up. So, in terms of Minister, we do not know, Mr. Vice-President. But the key point I am making is that this is being done by Order, and we are suggesting that Order should be subject to an affirmative resolution of the Parliament. If you are going to deal, Mr. Vice-President, with that kind of power in the hands of a Minister, he just cannot whimsically issue an order, publish it in the Gazette and we who are the lawmakers are none the wiser. [Desk thumping] So it is our view that the Minister, when he issues his Order, it must be tabled in Parliament. It must subject to debate by the lawmakers of this country, so that we would be able to have checks and balances on the ability of the Minister of this— of any government to ensure that there is accountability in the whole process. So that is an area that we need to pay attention to. Mr. Vice-President, section 4(1A), as I said, talks about a number of deputy adjudication officers. But nowhere in the legislation, Mr. Vice-President, are we being told the qualifications of these people. It is not outlined in the legislation. So, again, that is an area, Mr. Vice-President, we would like the hon. Attorney General to clarify and we will want to probably help him in dealing with, for instance, what should be the qualifications of these persons. If we go to (1B), all we see in (1B) is that:

UNREVISED 237 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

“‘A Deputy Adjudication Officer shall be an Attorney-at-law of at least ten years experience in conveyancing and should be appointed by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission.’” Now Mr. Vice-President, that is for the Deputy Adjudicating Officer. What I am speaking about in clause 4, right, is that: “There shall be a number of Deputy Adjudication Officers who may be recruited as necessary…” Now, we do not know, Mr. Vice-President, if these Deputy Adjudication Officers are the ones who will also be attorneys-at-law, with at least 10 years of experience. That is not made very clear to us. What is also important is that as we go to subsection (d), we see where they are going to have what is called assistant adjudication officers. We see also, where a demarcation officer or survey officer, will also be established. And again, we would like to have some clarity on these matters. What would be the qualifications of the demarcation officer? What would be the qualifications of the assistant adjudication officers? And what would be the qualifications of the survey officer? We do not know. We have no idea. All we have in this legislation before us is the position of Director of Surveys, which is very critical in determining, along with the chief adjudication officer, areas and adjudication sections. Those are the areas that we have identified in the legislation for those particular officers. As we go deeper into the amendment, we talk about recording officers. Again, Mr. Vice-President, no qualifications. We do not know what qualifications or credentials this person must possess. But, that is an office in our legislation. So I think that the AG, in his speed to get things done, it might have been a genuine

UNREVISED 238 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) oversight on his part, and I am so happy that we took the decision to deal with these matters separately. If we had not done this, we would not have been able to point out these deficiencies in the legislation. [Desk thumping] But these are deficiencies that we are bringing to the attention of the hon. Minister. Mr. Vice-President, as we go on, there are some areas that are of concern to us. I am very, very concerned. I do not know if this is an attempt to dispossess those who are in possession. [Desk thumping] I do not know if this exercise that we are engaged in, is a scheme that is being promoted. Well not—all right, let me withdraw the word “scheme”, Mr. Vice-President. But I do not know if the Government is using stealth in this particular exercise where, if you do not read the googly carefully, you can get clean-bowled, and you do not know you have been cleaned-bowled, Mr. Vice-President. Mr. Vice-President, here it is we have a system that we have established in this country under the State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act of 1998. Mr. Vice-President, are these systems running in parallel? We have legislation before us on land adjudication and we are saying that these officers are going to be engaged in trying to settle disputes surrounding claims, as it relates to land. And, Mr. Vice-President, it goes on to say in clause 11, and I quote for you where: “(c) a person who, without a documentary title to land is in open and peaceable possession of a parcel of State land…” State land, eh, Mr. Vice-President, quote carefully. “and has been in such possession whether by himself or through his predecessors in title for a period of thirty years or more, the adjudication officer shall record title in the name of the State;” Mr. Vice-President, the adjudication officer is recording title in the name of the

UNREVISED 239 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

State. What does that mean? How are we translating that? If I am on a piece of property belonging to the State, and I have been there for 30 years or more, should I not be entitled to absolute title? This is saying that this is going to be reverting to the State. And I am saying: How can this be real? I am there for 30 years and above, but this is saying that: “the adjudication officer shall record title in the name of the State;” I should have absolute ownership of the property after 30 years because that is what the AG told us; that the law that we have to deal with later on, and a law that has been passed already, Mr. Vice-President, says if you are in occupation of State land for 30 years and above, then the State cannot extinguish your rights. So how come in this section, we are saying that the adjudication officer shall record title in the name of the State? I do not know what that means. Maybe I need clarification and maybe somebody can help me, who understands law. What does that mean? Because, Mr. Vice-President, it goes on in (d) to say: “a person has a good documentary title to a parcel of land and that no other person has acquired or is in the process of acquiring valid title to the land under any law relating to prescription or limitation, the adjudication officer shall declare that person as the owner of the parcel” —of land—“with an absolute title and record it…;” So, is that not contradictory? On the one hand, I am there. I do not have documentary title, Mr. Vice-President. But I have been on the land. It has been established that I have been on the land for 30 years and above, but I do not have proper title. You are saying you are going to make out this land in favour of the State. But on the other hand, you saying that if somebody has good documentary

UNREVISED 240 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) title, you are going to say it is absolute title and the land is yours. Is something not contradictory about that? Is that not in contradiction to the laws of the country, Mr. Vice-President? That is why I made the point earlier on, when I began to speak, whether there is an attempt by this Government to dispossess those who are in possession of land in Trinidad and Tobago. [Desk thumping] Is this a—I do not want to say a “scheme”, because that might be a bit deceptive. Mr. Vice-President: All right. But just, because that is bordering imputation. I could understand the argument that you are making, in relation to the particular clause, but when you keep going back to that imputation in the sense of the Government have some sort of scheme or whatnot, then try and stay away from that, that line of reasoning. So you have made the argument and you can move forward now. Sen. W. Mark: So, what I am seeking, Mr. Vice-President, we are here to go behind the law and we want to correct. Because this has to be corrected. Something is wrong with this. So I am serving notice on the Government, through you, that we will be amending this. We will be amending this. Somebody who is without proper documentary title, but they are in possession of the land for 30 and/or more years, should be entitled to absolute title and ownership of the land. [Desk thumping] So I am just indicating, Mr. Vice-President, that that is an area that we would want to look at. Mr. Vice-President, I go to another area that is of concern to me, (da), clause 11. Hear what it says: “a person is in possession of, or has a right to a parcel of land but an adjudication officer is not satisfied that such person is entitled to be recorded under (b) or (d)…”

UNREVISED 241 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Mr. Vice-President, (b) is above and (d). “as the owner of…” I think that is a typo error, Sir. “the parcel with absolute title, the adjudication officer may nevertheless declare that person the owner of the parcel with a provisional title and record it as such;’”; Mr. Vice-President, listen carefully to the language of this clause. It is what I call the doctrine of vagueness. [Desk thumping] And I am saying, Mr. Vice-President, there appears to be more that meets the ordinary eyes. Mr. Vice-President, when you are told or we are told a person is in possession of land, Mr. Vice-President, it tells you nothing about the period of time that this person is supposed to be in possession of the land. Is that person in possession of the land for three years? Mr. Vice-President, we have no regulations before us, in accordance with the law. The parent law talks about regulations. But we do not have any regulations before us. So what is before us is very vague. So what we are seeing is a person is in possession. So, Mr. Vice-President, I want to ask you, based on information I have, I would not burden you with the name of the individual. I told you about that already this evening. But I am told that an individual is in possession of between 25 and 40 acres of land at a place called Mon Jaloux Farm. Sen. Gopee-Scoon: You come back with that again? Sen. W. Mark: No, no, no. This is possession, Mr. Vice-President. This person is in possession of land, and this person, I understand, was taken to court by the Government to get out of the land that he was first occupying. And the man has

UNREVISED 242 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) now returned to the land and he is planting 25 to 40 acres of land. Now, Mr. Vice- President, if this man is doing so, we would like to know under what authority he is doing so. And maybe the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries, who is here and who might be able to clear the air when he speaks, Mr. Vice-President. Mr. Vice-President: Senator, I am just trying to gauge the relevance of what you are saying. Sen. W. Mark: Mr. Vice-President, the relevance is very clear to the legislation, possession. You have something here which says: “a person is in possession” And that person is being given a provisional title. That is the relevance. Mr. Vice-President: And again I am still trying to figure out how you are tying what you are saying in relation to an individual owning a particular parcel of land, which he is planting on, in relation to this. Sen. W. Mark: But I am trying to give an example like how the Minister gave an example earlier. Mr. Vice-President: That is fine. Just tie it in really quickly for me, because you are talking about a particular clause under the adjudication Act that is before us, in relation to possession and certain actions to be taken and then you are talking about an example. So tie that example specifically to the clause you are talking about or the Bill in front of us. Sen. W. Mark: Mr. Vice-President, all I am trying to do is to get clarification on this matter. I am asking, Mr. Vice-President: How does this particular provision in the legislation fit into this picture that I am painting, that a gentleman is in possession of 40 acres of land? I am saying that the gentleman is known to the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries. And I am asking the Minister of

UNREVISED 243 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Agriculture, Land and Fisheries, here and now, whether he is aware of an individual by the name of Mr. Ricky Ramcharan who is in possession of 40 acres of State land? I am asking the question: Whether this gentleman has a proper licence to be on that land? That is what I am asking. That is the question. I am not too concerned whether he is a farmer. [Crosstalk] 9.00 p.m. Mr. Vice-President: Okay, okay. Sen. Mark, again, again, I am going to have to ask you. I am finding it difficult to see where it is relevant in relation to the adjudication Bill that is before us. Because you have called the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries’ name, you have called the person’s name, the person is planting on the land but we are dealing with adjudication here. So I have asked you to tie it and you have not done that so I am going to ask you to move on from that to your next please. Sen. W. Mark: So, all I am asking is simply this. Can we be told by anyone— can anyone tell us whether this man has a licence? Or is he squatting, and has he been given permission to squat? That is all I am asking.

[MADAM PRESIDENT in the Chair] In the meantime, may I ask—Madam President, I am glad that you are back. Let me address you directly and ask the hon. Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries to tell us a couple of things here. Madam President, I am interested in determining here tonight what is the period of time an individual could be in possession of State land, because it is not outlined in this section, for him to be given by an adjudication officer what is called a “provisional title” in order to say he is the owner of the land. That is what I am trying to clarify, because this is vague. It says nothing about the title. [Desk

UNREVISED 244 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) thumping] It tells us nothing about the period. Madam President, I want to tell you as I press on, and I want to get some clarification as I go on, in the state of Victoria in Australia, you know, there is a whole process that is involved in these matters. And I will come to the whole concept, Madam President, of adverse possession. [Desk thumping] Madam President, I will talk about that, because that is in this particular Bill that is before us and, you know, Madam President, what is interesting. I want it tell this Government something. Do not proclaim—first of all do not assent to this law. Do not proclaim this law until you bring regulations to this Parliament, so that we can be clear in our minds [Desk thumping] that this is not law that is designed to ensure that certain people get land at the expense of others. That is what I want to ensure. Madam President, I am shocked at the vague provisions that they put in this legislation, and they expect us to come here and just give them—and the Attorney General is telling us “deal with three one-time, deal with four one-time”, Madam President. It is a good thing, we have the wisdom to ignore the Attorney General and deal with these things separately. [Desk thumping] Madam President: Sen. Mark, your contribution—even though you are now in the final stages of your contribution you are starting to repeat yourself a lot, and I am going to ask you to, you know, be a little more specific and move on to your new points. Sen. W. Mark: I have to be careful with you, you “does be” watching me on TV. [Laughter] I have to be careful with the President. The President looking at me on TV, you know. The President could tell me, “I am repeating myself here”. So “she watching” my contribution on TV. Anyway, I like that, but I will guided by

UNREVISED 245 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) you, Madam President. I go on to that, but I will be guided by the President. Madam President, I go on to the same section 11, I go onto (c) of that section and it deals Madam President, with what is called adverse possessor, so it says: “(2) Where an adjudication officer records title in the name of the State under”—the particular—“section (1)(c) or (e), he shall serve notice on the─ (a) adverse possessor...” So is the chap on Mon Jaloux land, if this become law, would be described as an adverse possessor? And what I am asking, Madam President, it is indicating to that adverse possessor, that he may approach the Land Tribunal to determine whether he has rights to a vesting order based on adverse possession. Madam President, you know law as a lawyer, as an attorney-at-law. We have to be precise, I have looked in the amendment Bill. I have looked at the parent Act that is before me, Madam President, and nowhere have I seen the definition of what adverse possession means. And remember this is law that ordinary people will have to be consuming. And if ordinary people, we are talking about adverse possession, and we are talking about adverse possessor, where are those definitions in the legislation so that people can understand what we are talking about? [Desk thumping] So, this is something that our side would like to bring in terms of an amendment, so we can understand clearly, so the people can understand what is in adverse possession and what is an adverse possessor? We need to get that very, very clear. Now, Madam President, in the case of New South Wales and Victoria state in Australia, these are matters that are, in a very surgical and clinical way, are defined for the citizens. Because like in Trinidad and Tobago, in parts of

UNREVISED 246 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d)

Australia, New South Wales, Victoria, there are Australian citizens who are squatting. But what they do is that they outline in their laws clear procedures for those citizens to follow if they want to actually gain title to the land. And the concept of adverse possessor and adverse possession, these are concepts that are not new to the people of Australia. So, we are being told about these things here Madam President. But as I said, there is no definition, we have no regulations. We do not know what is going on, and the AG wants us to support this, you know, and we pass it. No we need regulations so we can understand these things a little more. Madam President, as you go to subsection (b) it also says that the: “(b) Commissioner of State Lands or other relevant authority having control of the particular land, indicating that the land is in occupation by an adverse possessor.” So it is not only the adjudicating officer telling this person who is in adverse possession— Madam President: Sen. Mark, you have five more minutes. Sen. W. Mark: Yes, thank you very much Madam President. It is not only the adjudicating officer, who is telling this individual, who is in adverse possession that you go to the tribunal, but you also have the Commissioner of State Lands indicating to what is called or other relevant authority having control of the particular land indicating that the land is in occupation by an adverse possessor. Madam President, I want to ask you something. I want to ask this honourable House. If we have 250,000 people who are squatting in Trinidad and Tobago, the vast majority of them are poor. They are vulnerable, they are not rich, they are not part of the 1 per cent in our country. Madam President, at the end of

UNREVISED 247 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) the day, when these people have to go from one level to another level— So first of all, they try to settle to settle their claims at the level of the adjudicator. He is there trying to bring about settlement in disputes, in terms of interest and rights re land. He is trying to bring about settlement. If he does not succeed there, Madam President, you now go towards what is called a tribunal, which we will deal with very shortly. Having done that, Madam President, if we are still not satisfied you go to the court, High Court. Then from the High Court, you can go to the Court of Appeal and your final destination is in fact the Privy Council. Madam President, I ask the question: Where would ordinary people in this country would get that kind of money to go, first of all, to the tribunal? Do we have legal aid? Madam President, through you, can I ask the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries or the Leader of Government Business, is there a provision in the legislation for the provision of legal aid for those citizens who have to go to the Land Tribunal? [Desk thumping] I have not seen it in the legislation. So it means to say that the ordinary person has to go in his own pocket and get a lawyer to go to the tribunal. And, Madam President, you then have to find a lawyer if you are not satisfied with the outcome to go to the High Court, and then to go to the Court of Appeal, and to the Privy Council. So, Madam President, this Bill is not going to benefit in the way that the Attorney General is telling us. The people of this country, you have to put provisions in place to make it easier for the ordinary people to access land and to be able to own their own homes. So you have to provide them with aid, legal aid, have money put aside for those ordinary people who might want to access justice. So, Madam President, I am very, very concerned about the concepts that we

UNREVISED 248 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Mark (cont’d) have introduced here. They are very good concepts in many respects, but we need to define those concepts for the country and for ordinary people. So that there will be no doubt in their minds what their rights are and what their entitlements are. Madam President, we intend to circulate a number of amendments aimed at strengthening the legislation and aimed also at bringing greater clarity to the ordinary people when they consume this piece of legislation. Right now it is totally unclear, and totally confusing to ordinary people. And you get the impression, that this law, if it is not properly tightened, could be manipulated and used in the interest of the few, against the interest of the many. That is what this Bill is about, [Desk thumping] and we have to look behind this thing carefully. And I could understand, because even the Minister of Agriculture, Land and Fisheries is on public record as showing the manipulation that can take place in his own Ministry. So I understand the challenges that is faced by this society. It is our duty as law makers to protect the poor, to protect the underprivileged, to protect the vulnerable, and those who are in need of our defence and we will work with the Government to ensure that this legislation is tightened so that those who are really in need, Madam President, of land, of homes, of getting involved in agricultural development, they are given that right to do so. Madam President, with your leave I want to thank you for giving me this opportunity to express myself. [Desk thumping] Sen. Melissa Ramkissoon: Thank you, Madam President. Yes there are still some of us on this side. I am not alone, I have my support. So, I know we are all tired. We have been here for 11 hours plus and I know the debate is going to go into 13 hours. So I have to say that truly as one of the probably youngest or younger Parliamentarians, we do hope what we do here would be taken with heed,

UNREVISED 249 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) and strong thought because we do expect it to be implemented and enforced and not just be part of something to do. Because we are here to debate now, 11 hours later, a Bill to amend the Land Adjudication Act, 2000 to be amended. And the reason why I started by saying I do hope we can enforce what we have written here—because if we look at an amendment that is on page 9 which is clause 11(7)(b), it goes back to how we had defined what is State lands and what is going to be protected. And one of it is that the adjudication officer, he has certain powers that we have discussed in the parent Act but if you look at section 7: “(7) Notwithstanding subsection (1), an adjudication officer shall not make any declaration in respect of State land under subsection (1)(b), (c), or (da) which─ (a) is declared to be...protected area or Forest Reserve under the Forests Act;”—or— “(b) is declared to be an environmentally sensitive area under the Environmental Management Act”—which is the EMA. So, Madam President, that for me is a very big ticket, because if the adjudication officer cannot make a decision on it, then who now is going to move someone who is in an environmentally sensitive area. And if it is the TTPS, and they have not done so yet, or in the existing current Act it has it. So they have not done it for maybe 10, 20, 30 years; now, what next? So, Madam President, that is why being here for so long, what we have heard many Senators before spoke about the vulnerable, the poor, but these persons are poor, they are in these areas, are you going to evict them? And that is where I have the area of concern. It is great to have debates. But implementing these things is very important and it will not be a waste of any person’s time or effort.

UNREVISED 250 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d)

We need to ensure—I know, Sen. Mark spoke about regulations but you have to think through how it is—who are you going to give the powers to move these persons if they are in a sensitive area? But nevertheless, I will join in the debate because I did read the amendments, and I did have two areas of concern that I would like to point out at this point. Unfortunately I am not seeing any of the technocrats in the room, but the Senators are present so hopefully they can take some notes for when the Attorney General does return to the Chamber. The first point which I would like to raise is clause 4 of the amendment which deals with the Demarcation Officer. And, Madam President, as we know demarcation is the act of creating boundaries really in a person’s land. And we are asking here that the subsection 8 of the parent Act be repealed and we are substituting a new subsection. So: “(8) A Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer may─ (a) with the permission of the owner or occupier; and (b) on giving reasonable notice to the owner, at any reasonable time, after the notice is given, enter upon land within the adjudication area for the purpose of demarcating or surveying any parcel therein.” And so, in other words, they have permission to enter your property once they have a notice and you have—the owner has gotten it in a reasonable time. But when we go to: “(8B) Where the owner or occupier under─ (a) subsections (8) and (8A) refuses to give consent for the Demarcation Officer or survey Officer to enter”—the property.

UNREVISED 251 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d)

So, they do not have permission anymore to enter, and despite: “(b) subsection (8A) fails to identify himself within the period set out in the Notice, the Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer may apply to a judge for an order authorizing the Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer to enter onto the land for the purpose of demarcating or surveying the parcel.” And my question here, Madam President, so you have served a notice to the owner. They have still failed to acknowledge your notice—well not your notice, but the demarcation officer’s or survey officer’s notice. Now you are going to ask a judge to now make an order authorizing now this person gets—give them access and now Madam President, what is the time period now? So we have lapsed two weeks because you have to obviously advertise this notice that was initially asked for in (8A) and now after failing all of that, now you have to go to a judge. So that is additional time period, either a week or two weeks. And that is my concern. The length of time now that by putting in all these provisions into the provisions or into the clauses or the Bill maybe—well to protect citizens. But for those who are failing to comply with the initial notice now we are going to ask a judge which now lengthens the time or lengthens the process and do we really want that? And no, we do not want this extremely lengthy period, because maybe this case may be one of many and it might just fall through the cracks, because of how many properties need to be surveyed, and how many persons may have to come before the adjudication officer, and all these things. Madam President, we understand the workings of the court system, we understand our shortcoming and I am just saying, I would dislike to see this being added and become a shortcoming

UNREVISED 252 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d) of this present amendment that is being brought before us. So, that is clause 4F, a simpler note for now, with a notice that I have seen that is in relation to clause 20 of the amendment. And this is a simple one, which is a consequential amendments. And I have noticed a lot of the amendments have been to really assist with language and now consequential amendments. And it had listed a number of clauses that need to amend “the Adjudication Officer” wherever they occur and substituting the words “an adjudication officer”. And only today during the piloting we learnt that the reason we are being so stressful from moving the word “the” to “an” is that we are opening up now to have more adjudication officers be able to access your case or be able to perform their functions that we want. So that leads me to a question: Why then did we take the liberty of adding sections 3, 4, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 14, 15, 19, 24 and 26, but not 20? Why was section 20 excluded? And this is the simple amendments that we are talking about and it is very unfortunate that the technocrats are not here to take note. [Madam President indicates technocrats’ presence in the Chamber] Oh, they are here. Thank you, Madam President for highlighting that to me. I really did not notice. But—and section 20 in the parent Act which deals with objection against adjudication record and it does have here where notify the adjudication officer in the prescribed form and the manner of the grounds of his objection. So simply I think maybe they just need to amend to include section 20 in the long list of section that have been listed before us. So it was a simple amendment that could be done before reaching to a committee stage. And in that same note if we look at clause 11.

UNREVISED 253 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramkissoon (cont’d)

Same point, 16(a) says that again “the adjudication officer” and this was part of the amendments. So, if we are amending it to allow more adjudication officers to give you the functions that you want from the process then why when you have brought an amendment you have reverted back to “the”? So there are specific reasons you want only one adjudication officer to deal with these matters then so be it. But it was just points that I raised, so clause 11(16)(a) we need to understand that it needs to either be changed to “an” and even 16(b) it also continues such was. So, Madam President, I did want to raise these comments before we reached—or before we went into the committee stage because I did not want to raise it then. I think these are things are simple matters that can be addressed if it so be it. And I do not want, unfortunately my energy level is not as it should be and I do not want to deter the House any longer, so I thank you for the opportunity to speak briefly on this amendment and I do hope these suggestions brought forward can be taken in a good light. I thank you. [Desk thumping] The Minister in the Ministry of Finance (Sen. The Hon. Allyson West): [Desk thumping] Madam President, I thank you for allowing me to join this debate on this very important matter. Just to put it in context, the objective of the suite of legislation that I would repeat we really should be debating as a whole is to provide certainty in respect of interest in land to simplify proof of ownership to facilitate the efficient execution of transactions and with respect to this particular Bill that is before us, to address issues where there are disputes on ownership and interest in land why is this so important. Madam President, it is because we have, as Trinidad and Tobago, a total of 1.98 square miles of land for the benefit of 1.37 million people—a very small land mass indeed, which means that land is a scarce resource. And in the absence of

UNREVISED 254 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) and therefore valued resource, and in the absence of a buoyant stock exchange, in the context of low interest rates offered by our financial institutions given the paucity of other investment instruments and opportunities, land is one of the few areas of investment and perhaps the form that offers the most secure opportunities. And if the last two decades are anything to go by in Trinidad and Tobago, the singular form of investment that tends to offer the highest return to investors. So, Madam President, the issue of land is dear to the hearts of many and it is very important which is why we are trying to regularize ownership and deal with disputes in relation to land so that we can get it right so that people can properly enjoy this scarce and valuable resource. So in light of that, Madam President, it is important to ensure that we can easily identify each person who has an interest in land and the nature of that interest. This is important for owners, other persons with interest, potential financiers, investors business, because land is owned by each of these people. It is a significant source of security in terms of financing in terms of getting involved in business. So it is really critical for various people in various spheres and activity, and we need to get it right and we need to do it now. For example, Madam President, it is amazing and Sen. Richards would have raised this point during the debate on the Valuation of Land Act or the Property Tax Act, it is amazing that in 2018 people are still relying on receipts issued by the land and building taxes—receipts issued under the Land and Building Taxes Act as proof of ownership of property. It was never intended to be that. It should not be relied on as a source of evidence of ownership, but it is because of the paucity of the system that deals with land registration and land recognition. And what we are seeing now, when the

UNREVISED 255 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d)

Board of Inland Revenue is now refusing to issue certificates under the land and building taxes legislation is that people’s business affairs are being held up because they cannot get evidence of ownership of land which is just not a sustainable state of affairs. You cannot possibly be relying on a receipt for the payment of tax as evidence of ownership. But this is where we are. So that just demonstrates how important it is to correct this situation and to correct it now. So people are not able to transfer their land. They are not able to sort out their affairs with WASA and so on because they do not have clear evidence of land because they can no longer get receipts from the Land and Building Taxes Unit. So that leads to another issue raised by Sen. Richards during that debate that I mentioned earlier in that it is clear that, given the history of how we operate in Trinidad and Tobago, that the payment of property tax by occupiers of land will lead people to believe that this creates an entitlement to the land which will increase the number of disputes we have in relation to the land. And that is one of the reasons why the passage of this particular legislation is so critical to deal with those disputes because it would be untenable to allow people to continue to believe that the mere payment of taxes gives them a right to land and it is necessary for us to put a system in place to adjudicate on disputes, to properly register land to identify who has proper interest and so on, so that we can move away from this system that a receipt—as during a discussion on radio. 9.30 p.m. During a discussion on radio, just a couple of weeks ago, a gentleman called in and said he is going to pay his land and building taxes—he is going to settle the obligation under the Property Tax Act, because he will then get a receipt and this

UNREVISED 256 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) receipt is golden. So you will see that even in 2018, there is this misconception about the connection between paying tax on property and interest in land. This legislation, Madam President, I am confident, will move us a long way in dispelling that notion which is quite incorrect. The legislation will promote the registration—or, the suite of legislation will promote the registration of all interests, and it will promote the adjudication of all claims which are not always pursued as vigorously as they should. This legislation, in my view, will force people in the direction of registering their claims, adjudicating on their interest so that it is clear. Now, the reason why I think that this will force people to do that is because the Registrar will issue a certificate that is indefeasible. It is conclusive proof that the people who are listed on the certificate are the ones who have interest. So the people who choose not to register their interest, and who choose not to pursue their claims will be at a disadvantage, and they will probably lose that interest or lose that claim to somebody who does not have notice because they are not listed. So, Madam President, there are a couple of clauses that, in particular, I think are compelling that we need to action right away so that we can get this clarity, and we can get this register up and running. Clause 16(2), for example, deals with adverse possession, and although Sen. Mark has a concern about what is adverse possession, I think in the context of the legislation it is very clear. The Attorney General will deal more specifically with the language and so on, but what the adjudication process seeks to do is to identify the person who should be recognized as the owner, but it acknowledges that there may be people who have been living on the land or who may claim another interest, and that interest will operate against the interest of the recognized owner; that is somebody in adverse possession.

UNREVISED 257 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d)

We know that there are a lot of instances of this, not only squatters, but other people who claim to have this adverse possession, or evidence shows that they have adverse possession, and this legislation, in my view, will force us to actively deal with settling those matters. So we move away from the uncertainty: “Well, I have lived on the land for 30 years, so I know I have a right” or whatever it is, because the adjudicator, they will go in there—the land is demarcated, borders are drawn, owners are registered—and if somebody in adverse possession wants to pursue his adverse possession, then there is a process to do that. And if he fails to do that, it seems to me he is conceding his right and, therefore, it forces us to address the issues that have created so much confusion and so much uncertainty with respect to our landownership for so many years. And, to me, it is a process that is definitely and direly needed so we can get to a point where we know what land is clearly owned by the State. Who is making a claim? Are those claims legitimate? What land is owned by which individual private person, and it is clear, it is registered; everybody has evidence of not only the owner of the land, but anybody who has an interest. I do not see how anybody could dispute the relevance and necessity of this legislation. The land also, in my view, very importantly, protects—this is again clause 11, which amends section 16(2). It protects protected forested areas, environmentally sensitive areas and land identified for public purpose. Yes, in response to the comment made by Sen. Ramkissoon, it will be necessary to determine what we do with persons who currently occupy that property, those types of property, but it seems to me that in identifying these specific areas, we are recognizing that those specific areas are areas that have to be protected for the benefit of all the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago. So they cannot be compromised

UNREVISED 258 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) for the benefit of a few. So, either there is a way to regularize them in that context without compromising the property or they could be relocated to ensure that they are not deprived, but we have to come to a point where we recognize that there are certain things that must be seen on a global basis for the benefit of Trinidad and Tobago at large, and it is not: “Oh well, this person, these two people have been on…” Let us say somebody has been living in the Caroni Swamp and jeopardizing the longevity of the protected species in there, the national bird. Should we say to them, well, you have been there for long enough, you should stay, or should we say to them, we recognize that you need to be housed and comfortable, so we will make provision for you, but this property is protected. So we have to look at the bigger picture and ensure that the few are not compromising the many. So this is a provision that I think is particularly important that we need to deal with and address. Clauses 6, 8 and 14 all deal with notices that need to be published in respect of the operation of the adjudication process. And what it is seeking to do, importantly, is to ensure that there is a sufficient period of notice and sufficient sources of notice so that anybody with an interest in land that is being dealt with by the Registrar has the opportunity to bring this matter forward and have his claim adjudicated. That is an important process to prevent the inadvertent loss of a claim that somebody may have. I think it provides a reasonable amount of protection. It requires you to be aware and involved, but it does provide protection to somebody who otherwise may have lost a claim simply because the period of notification is not sufficient or the avenue for notification is not wide enough. It is important also at clause 17 that they stipulate that after we go through

UNREVISED 259 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) this process of adjudication, your ownership—your entitlement to the property or whatever interest you have in the property—is certain and final. So that gets rid, going forward, of any further debate and dispute. So, it seems to me, Madam President, that those three areas in particular of the legislation provide the kind of approach that we need to provide to settle land in Trinidad and Tobago. I do not know that I have come across any other jurisdiction where there is so much dispute in relation to land. It is very pervasive in this land of ours and it needs to be settled. I remember some years ago trying purchase property in Tobago, and the owner of the property, I am sure, genuinely believed that she was trying to sell me this property that it was hers. But when we did the search, we realized that although she may have had a piece of property on that slope, the one that she thought was hers was not, which begs the question: How can we expect Tobago to survive without regularizing the position of their property? It needs to be done, it needs to be done now. So, Madam President, as I said, in my view, this Bill will force us to deal with the registration of our interest in land and will force us to deal with disputes that we have in relation to interest in land. At the moment, there are people who voluntarily refrain from registering their interest in land or dealing with their claims. One of the reasons for this is that there is a school of thought out there that if you do not perfect a purchase, a conveyance of land, that you just continue to own the equitable interest under a deed—under a sale agreement that no stamp duty materializes, and people are happy to avoid stamp duty indefinitely—and when I say “indefinitely” I mean for years and decades—by just not perfecting their title. I think this, together with other legislation that the AG intends to bring,

UNREVISED 260 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) will move us away from things like that and we can reduce the likelihood or the occurrence of stamp duty avoidance which is fairly significant at this point in time. Another area of tax avoidance, which failure to register interest in land produces now, is the tax that would arise on short-term capital gains. Now, Trinidad and Tobago does not have a system of taxing capital gains, but it does impose corporation tax or income tax on gains from the sale of assets when those assets are purchased and sold within 12 months. So, for example, when One Woodbrook Place was being constructed, the process of financing of that project was to sell the interest in the various units as they were being built, and what a lot of speculators did was that they purchased interest in a lot of the units there, but sold them quickly, turned them over, and made a significant return. If we had a proper land registration system, it would have been easy for the Board of Inland Revenue to recognize those transactions and to tax the short-term capital gains which were in the millions of dollars. And so, introduction of this system, will allow us to address that in large part. And, Madam President, I can only imagine the impact that having a proper, indisputable land registry would have on agencies like the Minister in charge of State lands, like T&TEC, like the Water and Sewerage Authority, like TTPost, all of which require knowledge of all the property in Trinidad and Tobago to effectively do their job and provide their services. What happens now is that each of the individual units have to go out and gather this information and none of them have perfect information. Once we go through with this system, we will get to a stage where we have an almost perfect register of lands and all of these agencies can rely on that. I can only imagine how much further ahead we would have been in the introduction of property tax, for

UNREVISED 261 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) example, if we had this register in place before we pass the legislation. So, Madam President, as I said, essential legislation is required now. The system of adjudication of land, I think, is simple. It is effective and it will get us to the place where we need to get to where we can clearly identify who owns what, who has an interest in what and we can rely on the register that is before us. Specifically, in response to one of the questions raised by Sen. Mark with respect to the qualifications, I do not know if he or I would be the one misreading the legislation, but I am seeing qualifications for each of the officers. 9.45 p.m. Section 4(1) indicates that a chief adjudication officer must have at least 10 years—must be an attorney-at-law with at least 10 years’ experience in conveyancing law. The deputy adjudication officer, the same thing. That is section 4(2) of the Act. The qualification for the appointment of the demarcation officers is to be prescribed by the President, save that the minimum requirement is that the person must be a survey officer—must be a Trinidad and Tobago land surveyor with the meaning assigned to it under the Land Surveyors Act. So I have seen minimum qualifications for all of those positions contrary to what Sen. Mark said. So, Madam President, it is difficult to conceive that in 2018 that we do not have in Trinidad and Tobago where land is so scarce and precious, a comprehensive and dependable register of all parcels of land in Trinidad and Tobago, and the titles and rights attaching to those parcels. This is something that is required for the conduct of business, for the security of ownership of private property, for the negotiation of loans, and so on, and provision of security. These various pieces of legislation, including the Adjudication of Land Act would get us

UNREVISED 262 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. The Hon. A. West (cont’d) there. I fully support the work done by the Attorney General and his team, and I commend this legislation to the Parliament for its passage. I thank you, Madam President. [Desk thumping] Madam President: Sen. Ramdeen. [Desk thumping] Sen. Gerald Ramdeen: Madam President, thank you for the opportunity to contribute to this debate on an Act to amend the Land Adjudication Act, 2000. I hope, Madam President, in my contribution to be able to shed some light on particular provisions that are proposed to be amended in terms of the principle legislation, Act No. 14 of 2000. Madam President, I am not going to repeat what we have said today. I just want to say that, apart from the right to liberty, I think the right to property is a neighbouring most important right that is guaranteed to each and every citizen under the Constitution, and there are specific provisions that touch and concern in a very intrusive manner the right to property that each and every citizen is guaranteed under the Constitution by section 4(a). Land law is not a straightforward subject, and it is one that we must be very careful about when we interfere with the right to property, because it is very easy, Madam President, to make very generalized statements and not understand the impact of what we are doing, and unless we understand exactly what we are interfering with and how we are interfering with it we can defeat the aims of the legislation. I think we all understand what is the aim of this piece of legislation to set up this land adjudication tribunal, and the Attorney General was at pains to be able to explain, clause by clause, what is the purpose and the intent behind this particular piece of legislation. But, unfortunately, Madam President, I think that what we are presented with does not achieve what the Attorney General intends to achieve by

UNREVISED 263 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) the passage of these amendments. I want to go straight to the amendments to section 16 and demonstrate to each and every one, and to the people of Trinidad and Tobago the most fundamental of errors that this legislation has made, or the drafters; and the Attorney General is not responsible for drafting. Section 16, with the amendments that have been proposed by the Government, seeks to treat with the issue of adverse possession, and the Minister in the Ministry of Finance says it is a very simple matter and there is nothing to really dispute about the sections that are being amended by section 16. Madam President, I have had the opportunity and the privilege to practise before the courts of this country in this particular area and I think I have a working knowledge of what the requirements of adverse possession are, and I want to respectfully say that the legislation does not conform to what the law of adverse possession is. And it cannot be—it cannot be—I say that with great conviction that the legislation represents the law as it pertains to adverse possession. Let me demonstrate why. By virtue of section 16(a), (b) and (c) as proposed to be amended, what the legislation seeks to do is to give this body that is created by statute—and let me just place as the fundamental basis of what I am saying, is that we are creating a creature of statute. This tribunal has no inherent power. This tribunal can only exercise the specific powers that are given to it by the legislation, nothing else. Its powers are limited within the four corners of what the legislation allows it to do. Now, let us take section 16. There are two elements that are provided for where you have land that is in possession that is private lands and lands that are in possession that, what we commonly call State lands. But let me demonstrate to you, Madam President, the fundamental error of this legislation. It says:

UNREVISED 264 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

“a person who without a documentary title”— So it is just a pure possessor; a squatter, as they would say. —“is in open and peaceable possession of a parcel of land other than a parcel which is State land”— So we are referring to private land. —“and has been in such possession whether by himself or through his duly authorised agent or his predecessors in title for a period of”— 16 years is the amendment—“or more, he shall declare”—that is, the adjudicator—“shall declare the title of such a person to be absolute and record it as such;”. Madam President, that piece of legislation, if we had done as the Government had said, to debate these pieces of legislation together, and we would have passed this piece of legislation without recognizing the error of this piece of legislation, it would have affected every single person who this thing applies to, and let me explain why. [Desk thumping] It is settled by the authority of the highest court, and when I say the highest court—let me start—it is settled by the Privy Council out of an appeal from Trinidad and Tobago in Goomti Ramnarace. It is settled by the House of Lords in an appeal from the Court of Appeal of the United Kingdom in J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham, that was appealed to the European Court and it was settled by the Grand Chamber of the European Court of Human Rights, that the elements of adverse possession are twofold. What this legislation provides for is simply factual possession. So that the animus possidendi, which is the intention to possess as though you are the owner is absent from the legislation. It is absent in 16(b), it is absent in 16(c), and if this legislation was passed in that form, I do not think we understand what the consequences are. The consequences are that for

UNREVISED 265 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) anyone who is a landowner, that is a very familiar position with all of us who are landowners, that you tell one of your family members, build a house or go and occupy that piece of land, and he goes there with your consent, under the law of adverse possession he could never be in adverse possession, because he is occupying with the consent of the paper title owner. He must occupy the land with the intention to treat the land as his own. The legislation is absolutely absent with respect to the intention to possess. So if someone whose grandmother, or grandfather, or even their parents were to be the subject—let me put it a different way. If someone who is in possession of land by virtue of a consent of one of their brothers, sister, mother, father, grandmother or grandfather, goes under this piece of legislation, as presently drafted, and says, I have been in possession of this parcel of land for 16 years, he will be entitled to be declared to be the absolute owner under the terms of the legislation as presently drafted, because the legislation does not cater to the intention to possess as the owner, which is the second limb of the law of adverse possession. Madam President, let me just put on the Hansard, because it is very, very important—the Attorney General, I am sure, I am positive, will understand where the submission is coming from. I referred to a case earlier called, Goomti Ramnarace v Harrypersad Lutchman, found in (2001)59, West Indian Reports at page 51, and this is what the Privy Council said: “Generally speaking, adverse possession is possession which is inconsistent with and in denial of the title of the true owner. Possession is not normally adverse if it is enjoyed by a lawful title or with the consent of the true owner.” So we have before us a piece of legislation that says everything that must be

UNREVISED 266 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) satisfied with respect to factual possession, but there is absolutely no requirement that the person who brings this application before this tribunal has to satisfy a requirement of having the intention to possess as the owner, and that is in relation to private land and that is in—well, I will get to the position with State land in a minute. But, Madam President, allow me for the sake of completeness to put on the record that the law, as I expound it, is to be supported by a very recent decision by Mr. Justice Devindra Rampersad delivered on the 25th of July, 2017, in which I just happened to be for the winning party, but that is not important. But Justice Rampersad referred to the very celebrated decision of the House of Lords which changed the law in J A Pye (Oxford) Ltd and Others v Graham, and referred to the important cases that I would like the Attorney General, who I know he will look at:, Powell v McFarlane, a very well-known case in the Property and Compensation Reports (1979), 38 Property and Compensation Reports at page 452; and the more recent decision of the Court of Appeal of the United Kingdom in Topplan Estates Ltd v Townley, which came after the decision of the European Grand Chamber in Pye and Oxford. And this is what I wish to commend to the Attorney General and to the Government, and to those who are responsible for drafting the legislation. The first part of the quotation that I am reading from comes from Lord Justice Parker at page 1369. It is to be found at page 2004, England and Wales Court of Appeal Civil Decision at paragraph 71: The first requirement is adverse possession is factual possession. It refers to the quality of possession of the person claiming to be a squatter. It refers to Lord Browne-Wilkinson at paragraph 35 in Pye, and Lord Craig. And I

UNREVISED 267 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) want to make this point, this is one of the most powerful compositions of the House of Lords at the time. It consisted of Lord Hope, Lord Browne-Wilkinson and Lord Hutton. And what I want to emphasize to the Attorney General is this, second, the word “possession” in the expression “adverse possession” means no more than the ordinary possession of land per Lord Browne-Wilkinson at paragraph 36 of Pye. And this is what is important, Madam President. However, in order to establish possession in this context the squatter must prove- (a) “sufficient objective acts of constitute physical possession (“factual possession”) coupled with (b) an intention to possess (animus possidendi). Occupation of the land alone”—which is what the legislation required— “Occupation of the land alone is not enough, nor is an intention to occupy which is not put into effect by action.” That learning, Madam President, was applied in Toolsie Persaud Ltd. v. Andrew James Investment Ltd, a decision of the Caribbean Court of Justice, Justice de la Bastide and Justice Hayton delivering the majority judgment of that court where they stated for our jurisprudence: “Thus, the position is that a claimant to land by adverse possession needs to show that for the requisite period”— In these two cases I will demonstrate, one, 16(a) requires 16 years, 16(c) requires 30 years. —“(and any necessary predecessor) had (i) a sufficient degree of physical custody and control of the claimed land in the light of the land’s circumstances (“factual

UNREVISED 268 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

possession”), and (ii) an intention to exercise such custody and control on his own behalf and for his own benefit, independently of anyone else except someone engaged with him in a joint enterprise on the land (“intention to possess”).” 10.00 p.m. So, Madam President, there is a fundamental flaw in the drafting of this piece of legislation in the amendment that we propose with respect to section 16(b), and with respect to section 16(c), because as it stands we have provisions in this country where under the legislation that I referred to earlier in my last contribution, which is the Land Regularisation of Tenure Act, Chap. 57:05. The Attorney General has referred in the last debate to the way in which that was carried out and the different areas and who did what. What is important about that piece of legislation—there is a very dangerous provision in that legislation—is that not many people understand that an application for a Certificate of Comfort under that particular piece of legislation, when or if that application is made or granted, at the time it is made, it is an acknowledgment of title of the title owner. And when that application is made, the time stops running for the purposes of adverse possession. So all of those people who have been granted Certificates of Comfort—I have had many cases in which, because you have applied for a Certificate of Comfort under the provisions of the Act, time stops running. You might be in possession for 20 years and you acknowledge the title at that point in time, the time stops running. But you know what this piece of legislation will do? This piece of legislation will reverse that legislation because those people who the State has

UNREVISED 269 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) given a certain degree of security, by virtue of the fact that they have acknowledged the title and the State is now in control of how their tenure will develop, pursuant to that piece of legislation, can now come under this piece of legislation and say, notwithstanding, I have acknowledged the title and I have been in factual possession for this period of time. I can now claim to be the absolute owner. So you have people who by virtue of the conjoint effect of these two pieces of legislation can claim they have a right if they have been in possession, pursuant to the State Land (Regularisation of Tenure) Act, Chap. 57:05, to a lease of 199 years. But they might choose, I do not want a lease for 199 years. I want the fee simple vested in me. So that notwithstanding the operation of that Act, the amendments that we are proposing to this piece of legislation will cause those people to not have the control which that Act gives to the Government. They will now have the fee simple in all these large parcels of land that the Attorney General has described in all of these areas, vested in them in their own rights. The difficulty with that is that I am sure that when that legislation was piloted in 1999 by a UNC administration to give people 199 years, it was put there so that the State would retain the ability to control the covenants that are attached to the leases that are given for 199 years. And this piece of legislation will reverse that in all of those circumstances. So that you can have someone under this legislation as presently drafted, you could have someone who has a lease—who has a lease—and has been in actual occupation pursuant to that lease, and can then come and say, notwithstanding that, I would like to have the land vested in me. The important thing is this; if the Act is carried out and the powers are exercised in the manner in which it is represented

UNREVISED 270 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) here in black or white, or in red as I have it with the amendments, the Land Tribunal has no inherent power to deny that person their application, because the person would have satisfied the requirements of the statute as presently drafted. So that, through you, Madam President, I commend to the Attorney General the decisions that I have cited. The law as it presently is represented with respect to adverse possession in our jurisdiction, there is one decision that I am sure the Attorney General is very aware of, which is the Smith and Benjamin decision which is Civil Appeal 67 and 68 of 2007, where the English principles that I have cited were adopted as part of our law by Justice of Appeal Mendonça delivering the majority judgment in that particular appeal on adverse possession. So, Madam President, we can save the legislation by the Attorney General proposing in relation to 16(b), in addition to the period of 30 years being cut down to the period of 16 years, that an amendment be inserted after the period of 16 years or after the entire sections before the semicolon, “with the requisite intention to possess as owner”, and that will satisfy the intention—with the intention to possess as owner. This is very, very important, Madam President, because even in the law of adverse possession we recognize that there would be successive, what we call as land lawyers, “tacking on” of possessions, and the law recognizes that predecessors in title who have been in possession can tack on their ownership to create the requisite period for the purposes of acquiring a title by adverse possession, and eclipsing the title of a legal title owner. There is something very strange about this piece of legislation, when one looks at the amendment that is being proposed by the Government with respect to section 16(c), and compare it to what is provided for in section 16(b). I raised this

UNREVISED 271 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) with the Attorney General, and I want to put it on the Hansard. In my respectful view the new section 16(c) which reads: A person who without a documentary title... So we are back into the realm of an ordinary trespasser, to put it in proper legal terms: “a person who, without a documentary title to land is in open and peaceable possession of a parcel of State land that has been in such possession whether by himself or through his…predecessors in title for a period of thirty years or more,”—an—“adjudicator officer shall record title in the name of the State”. Well, there seems to be some incongruity between (b) and (c) because where you have private lands and you have been in adverse possession of private land, the title of the occupier is recorded as being absolute as against the paper title owner; that is 16(b). Where you have State lands and you have been in occupation for the requisite period of time—I am sure the Attorney General will be able to explain how or why or what is the policy, that even though you are in adverse possession for a period of 30 years the title is recorded in the name of the State. I want to commend to the Attorney General that first of all the same substantive material error that was made—or omission I should say, to put it a little bit more refined way—the omission that was made with respect to section 16(b) also applies with respect to section 16(c), and therefore in order for the legislation to represent what the law of adverse possession is with respect to possession of State lands, it requires that the intention to possess, the animus possidendi, must be inserted as a requirement for someone who is in possession of lands that are belonging to the State.

UNREVISED 272 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d)

It is a very, very interesting argument that arises out of these provisions, which is that in our jurisdiction there are a number of special purpose state enterprises that are set up, that by virtue of them being set up for particular public purposes they are vested with large parcels of land. e TecK is an example. EMBD is another example. What I want to just put on the record is that we must be very careful when we take these decisions. I do not know if they were considered at the time these special purpose state enterprises were set up. But where you have State land, land that belongs to the State that is then transferred to a special purpose state enterprise, for all intents and purposes the shareholder is the Minister of Finance, Corporation Sole, but the protection that that land, that for all intents and purposes belongs to the citizens of Trinidad and Tobago, by vesting that land in these special purpose state enterprises you actually cut down the protection that these pieces of legislation gives to the State, which is that you must be in occupation for 30 years in order to acquire an adverse possessory title against the State. But when you vest the land in a special purpose state enterprise, like EMBD or e TecK, they will lose title to those parcels of land for a period where that land is in occupation of a trespasser or an occupier for 16 years, and it is a very, very significant consequence of doing that. Madam President, I want to go to section 4 of the legislation which, by virtue of the amendments, provides for this chief adjudication officer, deputy adjudication officer and assistant adjudication officers. Right away the Attorney General in piloting the Bill said that there were certain constitutional issues that I am sure the Cabinet would have dealt with, because this has to have gone to Cabinet before it has been brought here, and approved by the Cabinet. I want to flag immediately that it is very difficult to support section 4(4) of

UNREVISED 273 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) this legislation which says that: “Subject to subsection (9) the terms and conditions of service as well as the qualifications for the appointment of the…Demarcation Officers, Recording Officers and Survey Officers shall be prescribed by the President.” I wonder if the Attorney General would be so kind, having read out that section— that is the section that the Attorney General in piloting the Bill indicated was the section that deals with the terms and conditions of the adjudication officer, deputy adjudication officer and the assistant adjudication officer, but it really does not say that. Do you want me to give way? Hon. Al-Rawi: No, continue. Sen. G. Ramdeen: Madam President, on the clear reading of the amendment as it presently stands, that section does not apply to the chief adjudication officer, the deputy adjudication officers and the assistant adjudication officers. It says expressly that: “Subject to subsection (9) the terms and conditions as well as the qualifications for the appointment of the…Demarcation Officers, Recording Officers and Survey Officers shall be prescribed by the President.” So I am going to flag that for the Attorney General. Hon. Al-Rawi: Sorry about that, I was catching up. I had to take a call. Hon. Senator, if you could just clarify for me; you are looking for the terms and conditions of the chief adjudication and—so you have got the other bits there and you are looking for the answer to those. Thanks, I got it. Sen. G. Ramdeen: I am just saying that in the piloting of the Bill by the hon. Attorney General, I think the Attorney General referred us to subsection (4) of section 4 as being the particular section that deals with the provisions for the three

UNREVISED 274 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) senior officers, if I can use that term to describe them, and it just does not say that. It may well be that that may be an omission, but there is no other provision that provides for the terms and conditions of the chief adjudication officer, the deputy adjudication officer and the assistant. Hon. Al-Rawi: Thank you Senator for giving way, and I will say it quickly. Have you reflected upon subsection (2)? “The terms and conditions of service of the…”—Chief and Deputy Adjudication Officers—“shall be prescribed in accordance with section 141 of the Constitution”? Sen. G. Ramdeen: I have, and that refers us back to the Salaries Review Commission, which is limited to the approval of the salaries and conditions of service. I am not sure that that treats with what you are doing with subsection (4), and I will tell you why. The powers that are given by section 4 subsection (4), is really powers that are being exercised by the Cabinet, pursuant to section 80 of the Constitution. It would not apply, Attorney General, and I will tell you why it would not apply. Under section 141(1): “The Salaries Review Commission shall from time to time with the approval of the President review the salaries and other conditions of service of the President, the holders of offices referred to in section 136(12) to (15), members of Parliament....” So the review provision is not the setting. It has to be set, and 141 will deal with the review of it. But your explanation in piloting—sorry, Madam President, through you to the Attorney General, the explanation of the Government is that this is one of the hybrid examples where the Cabinet will exercise these powers, but

UNREVISED 275 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) because the appointments are made by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission you will have enough buffer to satisfy the constitutional requirements of independence and non-executive interference. 10.15 p.m. What I am saying is that, in order to achieve that, I do not think that pursuant to the provisions as they are represented here, to put it two ways: one, the powers that you explained which is the hybrid example of the Cabinet setting the terms and conditions as you have done in other pieces of legislation will give you the power to do that here, and that is pursuant to a proper application 141(1). So, I would expect that if that is the power that the Cabinet has given pursuant to the legislation, that it will fall under what is here by virtue of subsection (4). Secondly, I want to suggest respectfully to the Attorney General that this is a piece of legislation that I think the Government has suggested the Opposition is prepared to make certain suggestions that I hope that the Government will take on board, and the Independent Bench will exercise their independent judgment on whether this satisfies the public interest. But I had indicated before, Madam President, in another debate, that we are on very dangerous ground in setting up these, and this particular tribunal is one that has very intrusive powers in relation to the right to property. And in another decision of the Privy Council, that right to property is one that is protected by the due process provisions of section (4). And for due process to be satisfied under section (4), the law requires that the adjudication be judicial and it be due. Those are the two fundamental requirements that come out of the Privy Council decision in Thomas v Baptiste, and I do not respectfully agree that simple appointment by virtue of the JLSC of the chief adjudication officer and the

UNREVISED 276 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) deputy adjudication officer and the other deputies that may be recruited, and that is another point I will get to in a short while, will satisfy the requirements of the Constitution, and I have always said this in relation to these particular matters. The jurisprudence in our country has reached the point where we can, those who practise public law can say, with a certain degree of confidence, that the courts in this country have established a principal of political insulation from political interference in these types of situations. And in those circumstances when we set up these bodies that are supposed to exercise powers that affect the rights of citizens, and in this particular case the property rights of citizens, you must be very careful if we are not passing the legislation with—first of all, we should, to give the protection that the Constitution affords to those rights— Madam President: Sen. Ramdeen, if I may just ask you, you are dealing with section (4) of the parent Act as opposed to clause 4, because clause 4 of the Bill that is before us, you are dealing with something that clause 4 is not really treating with. Sen. G. Ramdeen: I am dealing with clause 4 of the amendment which seeks to amend section 4 of the principal Act. And what I am dealing with is the way in which the amendments, that is 4(1A) and 4(1B), which are totally new sections that are inserted into the principal legislation, are affected in terms of constitutionality. Madam President: I know what you—continue, Sen. Ramdeen. As you progress I will make the point again. Sen. G. Ramdeen: As you please, Madam President. So, the suggestion that I wish to make, Madam President, is that in order to satisfy the requirements of constitutionality that the Attorney General consider the provisions of section 111 of the Constitution as regards the security of tenure of these officers who are going

UNREVISED 277 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) to be appointed pursuant to the amendment that is suggested, that is the chief adjudication officer, the deputy adjudication officer and the assistant deputy adjudication officer. Yes, Madam President. And I want to suggest to the Attorney General that provision is made for the terms and conditions of officeholders as prescribed by section 111 of the Constitution be incorporated into the terms and conditions of these particular officers. And I want to also suggest to the Attorney General that as with the provisions in terms of the Tax Appeal Board that the salaries of these officers be charged on the Consolidated Fund, so that there can be no interference with their terms and conditions by the Executive. Madam President, pursuant to the section that we are being asked to amend by section 4(1A) which is the amendment that: “There shall be such number of Deputy Adjudication Officers who may be recruited as necessary for the respective adjudication areas”. That is what the Attorney General suggests. The difficulty that I have with that particular section is that, whereas section 4(1) provides that these appointments are being made by the Judicial and Legal Service Commission, and there is a power that resides that says, so many shall be recruited, it does not say by whom is going to determine the number of persons to be recruited. It says that they shall be recruited, there is a power to recruit, there is a power to appoint, but it does not say who is going to determine how many deputy adjudication officers are needed for the purposes of carrying out the provisions of the Act. Madam President, in those circumstances and having regard to the— Madam President: Sen. Ramdeen, you have five more minutes. Sen. G. Ramdeen: Thank you, Madam President. Madam President, in those

UNREVISED 278 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) circumstances and having regard to what I have outlined, I want to just summarize in the time that I have left and to indicate to the Government that we will be presenting a number of amendments to the legislation to fix what I consider to be serious defects in relation to the drafting as it presently stands to achieve the aim that the Attorney General expressed when the legislation was piloted in his contribution, and those amendments will be focused on the amendments to section 16 of the principal legislation and section 4. There are certain amendments that I would not have the time to go into, but which we will present as well, Madam President, with respect to the manner in which the adjudication is done under the particular provisions of Part IV, which is under the subheading of Preparation of Adjudication Record and Principles for Adjudication, as well as Part V which is the Objection and Finality provisions and the time periods involved, and the rules that seem to be applicable to someone who seeks to object to an adjudication made by these officers. Madam President, this is a piece of legislation that I think we all recognize, as with the last piece of legislation that we debated, that provides the mechanisms in which to better come to the position that we all want to reach which is, we will have a proper registration of title or a registry that contains all of the titles to land whether they be private land whether they be State land and the interest that has to be registered. One understands, very clearly, what is the purpose of the tribunal that has been set up here and the attempts that have been made, but one of the reasons why these pieces of legislation have remained on the books for so long is because we have not had the opportunity to put things in place properly to do so. And while the Attorney General said, we are 10 years, 18 years, in the 18 years if we had

UNREVISED 279 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ramdeen (cont’d) passed it, 10 days from the 18 years we would have gotten it wrong as it presently was. And therefore, I am happy to contribute to this debate and to be able to provide, I think, a contribution that will help us to get it right after 18 years, and to be able to put into effect a piece of legislation that will provide the public with an opportunity—both those who are occupying private lands and those who are occupying State lands—with the opportunity to have a registered title which I think we all think would be in the best interest of not only land owners, but in the interest of the Government of Trinidad and Tobago. So, I hope that the contribution that I have made will be taken on board by the Government, and when the committee stage reaches we will be able to arrive at a formulation to achieve the aims that the Attorney General has said of this piece of legislation, and with those few words, Madam President, I thank you. Madam President: Sen. Ameen. Sen. Khadijah Ameen: [Desk thumping] Thank you very much, Madam President. Madam President, I want to thank you for this opportunity to contribute to the Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2), Bill, and after the contribution of Sen. Ramdeen, I think the Government—in fact, Trinidad and Tobago would have benefited from free legal advice, [Desk thumping] a free legal opinion that I am sure could have otherwise cost the State, we have been hearing about legal bills, bills for legal advice in some other debate. So, I trust that the suggestions put forward and what was outlined by Sen. Ramdeen will be taken into consideration. And considering that we are at this very late hour at 10.25 p.m., I know that, and we are scheduled to finish the sitting at 11.00, it gives the Government the opportunity to ponder on the opinion put forward to do some more research and to

UNREVISED 280 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) come back at the next sitting whenever that may be with better, and this is not to take personally, please, Mr. Attorney General, it is not that I am saying that you— Madam President: Sen. Ameen, please, please, get to the Bill, please, and to the discussions. Sen. K. Ameen: Thank you, Madam President. I just want to say that it is not for any person on the other side to take personally, but that— Madam President: Sen. Ameen, you know, you are continuing in the same vein. Could you please get to your point. Sen. K. Ameen: I thought I might finish my sentence, but I will move on. Madam President: Yes. Yes. Sen. K. Ameen: I will move on. Madam President, this happens often, you know, they decide to stay late and then get agitated and they cannot finish the people’s business. [Laughter] Madam President: Sen. Ameen, I do not know—Members, please. I have made a ruling, Sen. Ameen, I certainly hope you were not directing that remark to me. Sen. K. Ameen: No. No. No. Madam President: Okay? So continue. Sen. K. Ameen: No. No. No. Not at all, Madam President, I am addressing you, so when I say “they” it refers to others. Madam President, I want to make a point with regard to the powers that will be given to the demarcation officers, to survey officers. I am not comfortable with the level of, well there are reporting mechanisms, but the checks and balances that would have been in place for these officers. Demarcation officers and surveys officers are given certain powers in this amendment. Having worked, having been in local government for 10 years and having

UNREVISED 281 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) seen what happens on the ground with land disputes, and the opportunity for any sort of intervention without verification, without that check and balance, to me, Madam President, leaves room for fraud to be legitimized. Where there is provision for boundary changes to be made and the neighbouring parties who share the boundaries are required to give permission, whether that permission, well, they will give permission and then the survey officer will make the recommendation, the demarcation officer, they decide that the permission given is okay to be taken into consideration. While I appreciate that that would expedite the resolution of any dispute, it also leaves room for situations where there are family disputes, for example, and one person knows the demarcation officer or the survey officer, it puts people at a disadvantage when they are unable to read or understand the situation. There are no measures in places to ensure that the persons making the decision are fit in terms of their mental fitness, their capacity to make a decision or that they are, in fact, present whether it is by permission in a letter which is signed or by a sworn affidavit or by giving testimony to someone outside of the deciding officers such as the survey officer and the demarcation officer. 10.30 p.m. That, Madam President, is something that I foresee will cause serious problems later on. You also have issues where persons agree to shift their boundaries for public purposes. So, for instance, it may be to make way for a watercourse or some sort of public convenience. It may be to provide for a road to be widened. People decide to shift their boundaries for all sorts of reasons, and in a case where the one party may be a private owner and the other party may be an authority like the regional corporation, or where we have—

UNREVISED 282 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d)

Hon. Al-Rawi: 46(1), Madam President. I am just trying to get a connection, please. Madam President: Sen. Ameen, try and make your connection a little— Sen. K. Ameen: More. Madam President: Yeah. Sen. K. Ameen: I am so sorry the Attorney General was not following. I was talking about the demarcation officers and the fact that they can make boundary changes and do it with the survey officers. [Desk thumping] Right? So, I know it is a “lil” rough, I know you have been here for some hours. So, I want to continue, Madam President. Where you have big developments taking place, private developments, and what I want to call the “small-man owner”, there have been instances where you have encroachment. I know personally that in cases where the bigger fish end up getting their way. So, I am raising this because, as I say, of my experience on the ground in local government. So, if there is a big development, there is some small private owner, sometimes the big development encroaches on the smaller owner’s property, and you could very well have a situation where the demarcation officer and the survey officers come forward and say, “listen, there was an agreement here, the boundary can be shifted.” Those things can happen, and we must ensure that we protect the interest of the person who is most disadvantaged, and I would not like to see that we give permission to an officer that is prescribed for the first time in law. [Continuous crosstalk] Madam President: Sen. Mark, please comport yourself! Please? [Interruption] No, and stop. [Interruption] No, no, right now I am looking at you Sen. Mark,

UNREVISED 283 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) please! Okay. And Members, please allow Sen. Ameen to make her contribution. Please abide by the Standing Orders. Sen. Ameen, continue. Sen. K. Ameen: Thank you, Madam President. [Desk thumping] I was on the point that this, with the introduction of—well, the amendment introduces the chief adjudication officer, and the deputy adjudication officer, and the director of surveys. However, while there are provisions for their terms and conditions in accordance with section 141 of the Constitution, there are other positions that will be established apart from the demarcation officers and the survey officers which I just spoke about, there will be administrative and research officers. I just want to ask how those persons will be hired. How their terms and conditions will be determined? In the absence of it being mentioned here or in the parent legislation, in my view it should be that the appointments take place through a service commission. I recall that some time ago when there was the attempt to collect assessments to do the property tax the question came up about whether the relevant department had the capacity in terms of assessors on hand, and we learnt through a report in the newspaper that 150 assessors were trained in six weeks, and the question comes up as to their capability to be trained in six weeks. And this could very easily happen with these same survey officers, and demarcation officers, and the other staff members as well who play a very critical role in decision making where land is concerned, and as often happens, you know, Members of Parliament and Ministers recommend people. So, there is a political influence in the hiring of these people, and they play a role that should not have that level of political influence. So, without making any suggestion that the Government is trying to provide jobs for the boys, and jobs for

UNREVISED 284 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) their members or supporters, I want to ask that we look at that in terms of how people are hired, how those various positions would be staffed, and who treats with their terms and conditions? Now, the other thing that I wanted to raise, Madam President. Very often when mention is made of adverse possession and squatters in particular, there is an assumption that squatters are totally lawless people. And I am saying this in response to something the Attorney General referred to when he was laying the Bill, and I want to share with the House, through you, Madam President, an example of the people of Pasea in St. Augustine South. I will brief. In Pasea that was part of the Bhadase Sagan Maraj estate, and those people were renting lands while Bhadase had a lease from the Government. After many years the ownership of the land—the lease—went back to the State, and those people remained tenants—who were tenants—remained confused as to who they should pay their rent to. Eventually they did start paying land and building taxes to the department, the regional finance department, but they were tossed around in terms of how they would get a title to their land. And different Governments did different things, but the fact is that their tenancy was acknowledged in different ways. So, there are some people who got short-term leases and so on, and many of them feel that they are entitled to a longer-term lease. There was an attempt to treat with them as squatters under the squatter regularization Act. But they are not squatters in the spirit of what that Act was meant to treat with. So, I think we must take that into consideration. We must take situations like that into consideration. And there are other instances like that. I am so happy that Sen. Ramdeen spoke before me, because he was able to

UNREVISED 285 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) very clearly go into the issue of adverse possession and how the oversight of the technocrats could negatively affect the owners, the original owners, as well as those who are in possession. Hon. Al-Rawi: 53(1)(b), Madam President. Sen. K. Ameen: Madam President, another area that I want to look at— Hon. Al-Rawi: Standing Order 53(1)(b) please. Madam President: Yes. Sen. Ameen, continue, but please remember my previous piece of advice to you. Okay? Sen. K. Ameen: Madam President, a matter was raised about situations on environmentally sensitive areas where people occupy areas that are considered environmentally sensitive. The fact that they should not—well, you cannot just— Hon. Al-Rawi: 51(b), please, Madam President. Sen. Mark: I think you are tired, you know. You should go home. Hon. Al-Rawi: I think you should be quiet. Sen. Mark: You should go home. Sen. K. Ameen: Madam President, and the— Sen. Mark: You are frustrating the place, man. You are abusing the process. Madam President: Sen. Mark, allow me to make—Sen. Ameen—the determinations, please. Okay? Sen. Ameen, continue. Sen. K. Ameen: Thank you, Madam President. I want to just touch on the issue of environmentally sensitive areas, because I am aware that there are squatter settlements, not authorized ones. There are authorized and unauthorized settlements on areas that were designated as reserves, areas that, well, could be considered environmentally sensitive. But even where it is not a squatter in the terms that would be treated with under the squatter regularization Act, when a

UNREVISED 286 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Ameen (cont’d) person makes a claim, and if they are considered to be entitled according to the provisions in land adjudication and in the amendments before us, and you cannot give that person title to that piece of land where considerations can be made for them to be, as I said, similar to the squatter regularization Act, for them to be given a parcel of land elsewhere. That is something that I think, between this Land Adjudication Bill and the other land Bills before us at this time, we should be able to treat with. Madam President, I just want to end by saying that the—[Desk thumping]—I know there are people on the other side hurry to go home. Madam President, I just want to end by saying that we in the Opposition, we support the idea of treating with a person’s or citizen’s registered interest in land being properly documented, making ownership of land and transfer of land more convenient, and more stress free, and so on. The idea of having a system for land and property to be properly registered and treated with is something that I see will further empower citizens, but we must be very careful and we must ensure that whatever we agree to now, which will have an impact later on, is very, very solid. So, in that regard I want to urge that the Government not speed on it. I trust that when we resume the debate some of the Independent Senators would be able to make contributions that will be taken into consideration when it comes to the committee stage where amendments will be proposed. Madam President, I thank you for the opportunity to contribute. [Desk thumping] Madam President: Sen. Obika. [Desk thumping] Sen. Taharqa Obika: Thank you very much, Madam President. I want to begin

UNREVISED 287 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) with a quote: “As long as there is a single worker whose shack is broken down and is told you have no place in the area the fight must go on.” [Desk thumping] The words of Tubal Uriah “Buzz” Butler, regarding the breaking-down by the colonial forces of squatters’ homes. Now, we must be vigilant— Madam President: Sen. Obika, please! Listen. I am running out of patience, not because of the time, you know, but because I am seeing here a—please, I am seeing—it makes no sense. Debate what is before us, please. Okay! [Interruption] Sen. Ameen, I am speaking to Sen. Obika, not you. Okay! So, Sen. Obika, begin your contribution. At the very beginning, be relevant to the matter at hand. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you very much, Madam President. [Interruption] Demarcation and the duties of officers. Let us move away from—[Interruption]. Now: “Where the owner or occupier under”—section “8(a) fails to identify himself”—for the period of time—“set out in Notice, the Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer may apply to a judge for an order authorizing the Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer to enter on to the land for the purpose of demarcating…” Madam President: Okay, Sen. Obika, is there a reason that you are reading the clause? Is there a reason? You see, I am very clear on what I need to do here, you know, and this is very late in the debate, there have been previous speakers, and we have already said to a previous speaker, there is no need to be reading the clauses. Make your contribution, refer to the clause, you do not have to read it word for

UNREVISED 288 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) word. Everybody has the Bill before them. Continue, Sen. Obika. 10.45 p.m. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you very much, Madam President. Sen. Mark: Just take your time. “Doh” worry. You take your time. [Crosstalk] The AG has to go home. Sen. T. Obika: Demarcation and the duties of officers. Let us move away from— [Crosstalk] Now: “(8B) Where the owner or occupier under— (b) Subsection (8A) fails to identify himself—for the—“period”— of time—“set out in the Notice, the Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer may apply to a judge for an order authorizing the Demarcation Officer or Survey Officer to enter onto the land for the purpose of demarcating—” Madam President: Okay, Sen Obika— Sen. T. Obika:—“or surveying the parcel”. Madam President: Is there a reason that you are reading the clause? [Crosstalk] Is there is a reason? You see I am very clear on what I need to do here, you know. And this is very late in the debate, there have been previous speakers and we have already said to a previous speaker there is no need to be reading the clauses. Make your contribution, refer to the clause, you do not have to read it word for word. Everybody has the Bill before them. Continue Sen. Obika. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you very much, Madam President. Sen. Khan: Say thank you and sit down. [Laughter and crosstalk] Sen. T. Obika: The purpose for reading the clause—[Crosstalk] Madam President: Sen. Obika, have a seat. Sen. Mark, please—

UNREVISED 289 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d)

Sen. Mark: “Is them I talking to”. Madam President: It does not matter, you know. Hon. Al-Rawi: They are tired. Madam President: It does not matter. If we want to continue the debate let us do it in a proper, orderly fashion. Sen. Obika continue, please. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you very much, Madam President. In answering your question as to the purpose for reading the clause, aerial photography is an integral aspect of this entire framework, in terms of land administration and in terms of adjudication. The mere fact that they have a position called the survey officer, speaks to that. Now, I want to establish some setting which has not been dealt with at all by any prior speaker on this debate. In 1994, aerial photography was done in the country. Twenty years thereafter, in 2014 under the astute leadership of Kamla Persad-Bissessar, Senior Counsel, we had another round of aerial photography done. [Crosstalk] Now, because nothing was done in the 20 years you can imagine the conundrum, Madam President, regarding the ability of persons to obtain vesting orders where the burden of proof is set very low. That bar regarding burden of proof being set so low, creates in itself an opportunity for corruption. Now, in 2014, under the People’s Partnership Government, this committee worked in collaboration with the Director of Surveys and, Madam President, you would understand the importance especially to the Commissioner of State Lands of an updated aerial photography register, whatever terminology would be applicable in this instance, cadastral and survey plans and so on, which basically would have formed the basis of a digitized system that the Government would be able to benefit from that this new incarnation of the PNM Government, definitely would

UNREVISED 290 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) be a beneficiary of that. So, I want to basically start that—that will be the beginning of my contribution, by stating that there was not “analysis paralysis”, but there was hard work, concerted efforts made by the People’s Partnership Government to bring this position [Desk thumping] of land administration where it should be in our country today. Now, another aspect of this issue, Madam President, is the reference to a unique parcel reference number, which really shows the direction that we should be taking this thing. However, it begs the question, since the hon. Attorney General, I do not know if he will be choosing to give some clarity in his wrap-up at the next sitting, since he chose to omit any reference to aerial photography or reference number, it was the work that was done in 2014 by the People’s Partnership, it begs the question: What of it? “Whither” that information? “Whither” the database that was being developed under the People’s Partnership?—and despite the Government’s boast of continuity and continuance of Government we are not seeing that. So, I wanted to echo the sentiments of Members on this side in the other place where that is concerned. Now, Sen. Ramdeen made a very good, of course, contribution regarding adverse possession and given my area is finance—I am hearing some revulsions from Sen. Cummings. I am not sure if he is coming to contribute, Madam President. [Laughter] But, again, you see—[Crosstalk] I cannot speak above more interruptions. Hon. Al-Rawi: Madam President, Standing Order 46(1), please. Madam President: Attorney General, sorry. Hon. Al-Rawi: Yes, please. Standing Order 46(1), over the last several minutes I

UNREVISED 291 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) cannot pick a point or a Bill. [Crosstalk] Sen. T. Obika: Sen. Cummings is disturbing me. Madam President: Sen. Obika continue, please. Sen. Ameen: “Oh God”, AG, please. Sen. T. Obika: I graciously oblige, Madam President. Now, Madam President, if we look to the duties and powers of these officers— Hon. Senator: Which clause is that? Sen. T. Obika: Are we in the committee stage? I am not sure if I should answer that question. Sen. Ameen: This is not committee stage. You just address the Chair, do not take on—[Crosstalk] Sen. T. Obika: Madam President, before persons enter premises of a land owner— Hon. Al-Rawi: Madam President, Standing Order 46(1), I realize you have been busy, [Crosstalk] but I am asking you to consider 46(1), please, Madam President. Madam President: Attorney General, please. [Crosstalk] I have ruled in the matter. I am listening to Sen. Obika. Sen. Obika continue, please. [Desk thumping] Sen. Ramdeen: Take your time, take your time. Sen. T. Obika: Madam President, I think it would impress some Members opposite if I refer to another aspect of my research. So, I have already mentioned clauses—[Interruption] the Attorney General was not listening. Now, the adjudication process, Madam President, there is one important thing regarding the selection of adjudication areas, and given that the Attorney General did not shed any light as to how the adjudication areas would be selected, I want to point to this

UNREVISED 292 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) honourable Senate, Madam President, if adjudication is undertaken in the wrong place, under the wrong circumstances, much money, effort and time could be spent with no practical purpose and objectives being achieved. So, the adjudication process— Hon. Al-Rawi: Madam President, Standing Order 46(1), please. Sen. Ameen: Oh, come on, you are being ridiculous now. Sen. T. Obika: The adjudication process, the first pillar of that process— Hon. Al-Rawi: Madam President, Madam President, Standing Order 46(1)— Sen. T. Obika:—is where there is dealing in land. [Crosstalk] Hon. Al-Rawi:—please, Madam President. Sen. T. Obika: This is an abuse of Standing Orders. [Crosstalk] Madam President: Both of you all cannot be on your feet, Attorney General, please allow Sen. Obika to continue. Hon. Al-Rawi: He needs to be relevant. Madam President: If I am listening to Sen. Obika, if I believe Sen. Obika is irrelevant I will call on Sen. Obika to be relevant. Right now Sen. Obika, I am allowing him some leeway. Sen. Obika continue, please. [Desk thumping] Sen. Ramdeen: Take your time, take your time. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you, Madam President. I think, in everything we do we must uphold the human tenet of respect. [Crosstalk] Now, the adjudication process. Where there is dealing in land, the more dealing there is, the greater will be the need for the registration of title. So, if we turn to the duties and powers of the demarcation officers and the process of separating the country into zones of adjudication, one key issue is, before persons enter the premises of a land owner the demarcation officer or land surveyors, the persons may have some issue with

UNREVISED 293 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d) people coming onto their land. So, public education is very important to ensure persons understand who are the persons, how are they going to be equipped, how are they to be recognized, because everyone here will be very aware of the situation with crime in Trinidad and Tobago and you will not want persons to be caught unawares and to allow unsuspecting—unknowingly, criminals into their premises. I want to switch to section 12 of the Act regarding the compensation for compulsory acquisition, Madam President. Now, not to run afoul with the Standing Orders I will just continue regarding the keyword, which is “compensation”. Madam President: What clause you are on Sen. Obika? Sen. T. Obika: Section 12 of the Act, being amended in subsection (1) [Crosstalk] Madam President: What clause are you referring to in the Bill Sen. Obika? [Crosstalk] Sen. T. Obika: Since I have to—[Crosstalk] Sen. Ramdeen: “Rel people you competing with, boy. Is because yuh good they cyah do that, you know. Because yuh good, dey harassin yuh”. [Crosstalk] Sen. T. Obika: Madam President, I was going under the premise that in the second reading we deal with the merits and the principles— Madam President: Sen. Obika! You are questioning?—I have asked, you know why I have asked? I do not know why you are still standing. I have asked because, actually, I am following you and you are talking about clause 12, you said section 12 and you are talking about compensation for compulsory acquisition. So, I want to know what clause you are dealing with in the Bill, okay?

UNREVISED 294 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d)

Sen. T. Obika: Madam President, I will move on to clause 4 of the Bill. I will look at clause 4 and clause 11 of the Bill. [Crosstalk] Sen. Ameen: Because he said eleven o’clock “allyuh hurry to go home”. Madam President: Sen. Ameen— Sen. Ameen: Look at the behaviour of all of them over there. [Crosstalk] Madam President, I apologize. [Crosstalk] Madam President: Sen. Ameen, please, have a seat. Hon. Senator: Sit down, sit down. Madam President: Listen, Members, Members, no. Sen. Ameen I have repeatedly said to you, please, lower your voice and stop focusing on the other Members, okay, all right? And that kind of outburst is not acceptable. Sen. Obika continue, please. Sen. T. Obika: Thank you very much, Madam President. Clause 9, section 12 of the Bill deals with boundary changes. I think that would appease many Members opposite who at this time are crying for their beds. [Desk thumping] Sen. Ameen: They are tired, they are ready to go. Sen. T. Obika: But we are here in the public’s interest. So the demarcation officers and the survey officers are the ones that are able to put forward the case for boundary changes. [Crosstalk] However, anti-corruption measures—Madam President, the din from the Attorney General is overbearing. Madam President: You have my protection Senator. [Crosstalk] Sen. Ameen: “Oh gosh, try to hush, nah”. Madam President: Sen. Ameen! Hon. Senator: Fish market. Madam President: Listen, this is really beyond my understanding at this stage.

UNREVISED 295 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d)

Sen. Ameen I have repeatedly cautioned you. If it is, Sen. Ameen, that I have to do it again I will not be very happy, okay? Sen. Obika, you really need to focus on the matter at hand, please! Sen. T. Obika: Madam President, the Attorney General stated that I was not dealing with the appropriate section. So at this point in time I need to read from the Bill as presented so that he can benefit from that. Apparently, he has not read the Bill. Sen. Mark: Forget the AG. Sen. T. Obika: So clause 9 of the Bill would amend: “Section 12 of the Act…in subsection (1)— (a) by deleting paragraph (a)”—and to require the demarcation officer to recommend to the adjudication officer the award of compensation, rather than the demarcation officer awarding the compensation. Now, if this misses the Attorney General regarding boundary changes of which falls in the remit of the demarcation officer then I am not sure if the Attorney General needs to go to rest at this moment. [Crosstalk] So, regarding anti-corruption measures, Madam President—now that I have put the Attorney General’s concern to rest, I see he is happy now, regarding anti-corruption measures, these are needed given this amendment in light of strengthening the ability of the public to feel confident that corruption will not step in and that the public’s interest will be protected. [Interruption] Madam President, the disrespect coming from Sen. Cummings is overbearing at this point in time. Talk about fish market?—please. Those words have no moment here. Sen. S. Hosein: Unparliamentary language.

UNREVISED 296 Land Adjudication (Amdt.) (No. 2) 2018.06.05 Bill, 2017 (cont’d) Sen. Obika (cont’d)

Sen. T. Obika: So, Madam President, I continue. Now, the Bill also speaks to the non-personal liability of officers. [Interruption] The Bill, I said, also speaks to the non-personal liability of officers. Sen. Ameen: Address the President. “Doh take them on”. Sen. T. Obika: I think at this hour I realize I have to repeat for many persons, but that is okay, having been a lecturer and a teacher for many years, it is okay. [Crosstalk] So, Madam President, I know I will have to continue the next time we meet [Laughter and crosstalk] where Members will be more fresh and more able— [Desk thumping] Hon. Senator: “Red and ready” to go home. [Crosstalk] Sen. T. Obika: —and more able to understand simple English. Hon. Senator: “Red and ready” to go home. “Red and ready” to go home. [Crosstalk] Sen. Cummings: Madam President, Standing Order, 46(1) [Crosstalk and laughter] Sen. T. Obika: However, the issue regarding—you could count? Hon. Senator: Sit down, sit down, Cummings, sit down. Sen. T. Obika: You could count? [Crosstalk] Sen. Cummings: Madam President, 46(1). Sen. T. Obika: So, Madam President—[Crosstalk] Sen. Cummings: Madam President, Standing Order 46(1), please. Sen. T. Obika:—given that these officers are not subject to— Hon. Senator: Sit down. Sen. T. Obika:—personal liability it raises—[Crosstalk]

UNREVISED 297 Adjournment 2018.06.05

ADJOURNMENT The Minister of Energy and Energy Industries (Sen. The Hon. Franklin Khan): Madam President, it is with a great sense of relief, [Laughter] a very great sense of relief [Crosstalk] that I will give Sen. Obika some time to prepare properly. [Laughter and desk thumping] Madam President, I beg to move that this Senate do now adjourn to Thursday the 7th of June, 2018, at 2.00 p.m. [Crosstalk] Hon. Senator: What day? Sen. The Hon. F. Khan: Thursday, 7th of June, that is this Thursday, at 2.00 p.m., where we will continue the debate on this Bill and hopefully start the third Bill on the Order Paper. [Crosstalk] Question put and agreed to. House adjourned accordingly. Adjourned at 11.00 p.m.

UNREVISED