Dear Editor,
Misses Amna Ally and Volda Lawrence have rushed to the defence of PNCR Leader, Mr. Robert Corbin. They were responding to what appeared to be an organised letter-writing campaign to put pressure on Mr. Corbin to do the decent thing and allow the evolution of the PNCR by removing himself from its leadership. These letters raised a number of issues such as Mr. Corbin’s non-suitability to be leader of any viable political party, financial accountability in the PNCR and the lack of support for Mr. Corbin in Linden – once the bedrock of PNCR support.
Misses Ally and Lawrence made a number of points. They said or implied that;
1. The letters were written by persons in the PNCR leadership who want power and called on those persons to wait their turn.
2. That the PNCR has forums at which these issues can be discussed.
3. Mr. Corbin was popularly elected and as such no one has the right to question his leadership
4. The membership of the PNCR is firmly behind Mr. Corbin.
I wish to make some comments on these matters.
1. Mr. Robert Corbin is such a liability to the PNCR that it is amazing that he has not voluntarily removed himself and allowed the party to evolve.
2. It cannot be that Ally and Lawrence feel that Corbin is the best the PNCR can do since the response of PNCR supporters in Linden and across the country shows clearly that Corbin failed to motivate or excite the PNCR support base.
3. Ally and Lawrence’s loud praise of Corbin’s greatness must be because of personal considerations. History is replete with examples of unpopular and incompetent leaders who were supported to the death by people who were part the inner circle and who benefited both tangibly and intangibly from the leader continuing in office. PNCR members and supporters must beware of these people. When they come to you promoting Mr. Corbin they do not have your interest in mind instead they just want to continue to enjoy the personal benefits.
4. When I saw the spate of letters in the press I took them at face value. That is to say that I accepted that they were written by concerned members of the PNCR support base. I now know that this is not so. Misses Ally and Lawrence all but told us that the letters were written by people in the PNCR leadership who want to remove Mr. Corbin. In their rush to expose their colleagues in the PNCR executive they have also exposed the fact that there is concern in the PNCR leadership about accountability. As the saying goes “if patwah come from trench bottom and seh dat hurie deh deh believe um.”
Now that Ally and Lawrence have tacitly accepted that there are accountability issues in the PNCR they have exposed what they were trying to defend. If Mr. Corbin has friends like Ally and Lawrence he does not need enemies.
5. If the forums in the PNCR are so useful why do Ally and Lawrence believe that executive members of the PNCR have to seek public disclosure to have matters addressed. If I am to believe what James Reece wrote in one of his letters, when the leadership of the GYSM started to speak out about issues that affect them a special meeting of the PNCR members in Georgetown was called with the sole purpose of hurling abuse at the GYSM leaders who were present. Could Ally and Lawrence say if it is true that some members of the PNCR are afraid to raise issues because of the hostility directed at them thereafter by people who are in Mr. Corbin’s inner circle? Is it true that at the last PNCR General Council a despicable attack was launched against a member of the GYSM who dared to speak out? Is it true that one of the persons in Mr. Corbin’s inner circle took the floor and made outrageous remarks about the young lady’s father claiming that he is a PPP supporter and as a result that disqualified her from speaking on issues? Is it true that Mr. Corbin generally abuses the privilege of the podium by launching scathing attacks on some members of his leadership who he believes do not support him to continue as leader? If all of these things are true then Ally and Lawrence’s claim of a forum being available is just a lot of hot air.
6. In any democratic system where periodic elections are the norm people do not have to await turns, they put themselves forward. The claim that Corbin was elected and therefore is immune to criticism and challenge is a dangerous development. This is a thinking that says that once the members are foolish enough to elect you to office they no longer have the right of choice to remove you. Ally and Lawrence do Mr. Corbin no good by giving the impression that he supports this kind of thinking. Guyana does not need any political leader who thinks like this.
Reading Ally and Lawrence I guess we can now look forward to the witch hunt that will be launched against the sections of the PNCR executive who Ally and Lawrence believe are not supporting Mr. Corbin continuing as leader. Is this the kind of democracy that Mr. Corbin espouses?
Yours faithfully,
Angela Barnwell
