Former United National Congress (UNC) minister Dr Fuad Khan has delivered a controversial message, thanking what he described as racists within the People’s National Movement (PNM) for helping the UNC secure its parliamentary majority, while warning that the resulting concentration of political power could threaten democracy.
In a video shared on social media, Khan, who described himself as a lifetime UNC member despite claiming he is no longer recognised, suggested that racial prejudice among some traditional PNM supporters contributed to the party’s defeat in the 2025 general election.
Khan alleged that some PNM supporters refused to vote because the party was being led by Stuart Young, whom he described in racial terms as Chinese rather than Black.
He sarcastically thanked those individuals, arguing that their decision not to participate helped deliver the UNC’s parliamentary majority.
However, Khan’s remarks took an unexpected turn when he questioned whether that electoral outcome was entirely beneficial for Trinidad and Tobago.
Speaking as a citizen rather than celebrating purely along party lines, he expressed concern that the government’s parliamentary strength could weaken political checks and balances.
His warning centred on the dangers of concentrating too much authority in the hands of any administration, suggesting that excessive power could create conditions for authoritarian governance.
The UNC secured 26 of the 41 seats in the House of Representatives in the April 2025 general election, giving it more than the three-fifths majority required for certain legislation. However, the government does not hold the two-thirds or three-quarters majority required in the House for particular constitutional amendments.
Khan’s allegation that racial prejudice influenced the decisions of PNM supporters remains his interpretation of the election. The voting figures do not establish the racial motivations of those who abstained.
His comments ultimately presented a political contradiction: thanking alleged racial prejudice for contributing to the UNC’s victory while questioning whether the resulting concentration of power could undermine the democratic safeguards intended to protect the country.