being charged these days took a sudden twist this week. A PLP Parliamentary candidate is accused of removing a tenant's belongings from an apartment he owns and placing them outside in the rain. That is not exactly a good example of the way the PLP constantly promises to protect and care for tenants. When they make those promises there is always an implication that the present Government supports landlords and does not look after tenants.

The PLP has been advocating the rights of tenants for a long time, and rightly so, but now seems to be in the position of having to deal with a PLP candidate who is a landlord. So far it does not seem to be dealing with it very well.

According to this tenant, she was preparing to move to her own home in a month or as soon as it was completed, her rent was paid and there was no eviction order against her. She said the problem with her landlord arose because he wanted to raise her rent for the three bedroom unit from $2,100 a month to $3,000.

As we see it, no landlord can go along and simply dump a tenant outside without court orders. The process is set by law and takes some time to execute. In any case, evictions should be accompanied by a bailiff and normally take place in the presence of the tenant and only after a tenant has failed to take heed of court orders to vacate. Magistrates are generally reluctant to issue such orders if the tenant has nowhere to go.

Television coverage on Tuesday evening of a very well spoken and clearly able tenant in front of a door with a large "no trespassing'' sign, her family possessions dumped in the yard, was very dramatic. It was made even more so because high winds and rain were forecast. It must have caused a deep shudder in a political party which is attempting to turn housing and high rents into a major campaign issue.

A PLP spokesman has been quoted as saying: "The Progressive Labour Party recognises that both tenants and landlords have rights and protection which are enshrined in legislation and we believe unequivocally that these procedures must be protected and upheld.'' It is probable that in this dispute, like so many others, there are two sides to the story. We are hampered, and the public is hampered, because the landlord has not made a statement giving his side of the story. Despite an emergency meeting to discuss the eviction with their candidate, the PLP has been silent, even though this newspaper has tried very hard to get comments.

Thus the matter is left to fester.

Any candidate, no matter what political stripe, seeking to represent the people in public office, has a duty to answer questions especially when it involves something which his own party has moved to the top of the agenda. The same is true of the political parties. The PLP has been knocking spots out of landlords recently by calling them "gouging'', "rapacious'', "uncaring''.

Now if the shoe fits...