Dear Editor,

Ralph Ramkarran, Donald Ramotar, Clement Rohee, Moses Nagamootoo and Robert Persaud are the frontrunners for the next PPP presidential candidate. A very staid, uninspiring and lacklustre class of candidates with a lot of baggage. While it is a reflection of the dearth of quality in the party at large, the system of selection aggravates this problem. A different process of open selection akin to the American system by the wider party membership would help to discover any hidden gems within the party. At its last Congress, 1020 delegates showed up representing the 183,887 votes the PPP received in the 2006 election. 913 of these individuals elected the Central Committee of 35 members. These 35 members then elected an Executive Committee of 15 members. The 35 essentially picked out 15 from among themselves. This group of 15 decides who will assume the biggest position of power in the land, the executive presidency. The 35 and 15 are usual suspects. They never change and are inimical to change.

This process is flawed. Just like the inner political process of selection of every party in this nation is flawed. Ironically, the AFC is no different from the PPP with respect to the selection of a presidential candidate. The PNC process is best. The 1020 PPP Congress candidates are specially accredited and must be carefully selected to attend the Congress. These delegates are not truly representative of the party, but representative of the manner and direction in which the party wants results of the Congress to flow. The entire process needs transformational change, beginning with the sham that is paraded as accreditation/qualification of delegates.

From the outset, this process seeks to give the reins of ultimate power framed by the 1980 constitution to an individual to wield. It is only a matter of time before this backfires spectacularly, when an unscrupulous power-thirsty individual gets those reins and wreaks havoc in Burnhamite fashion. The early signs of this movementmay be evident in the Jagdeo regime, which has attempted to sideline the party’s leadership from government. Someone with more gumption will arise in due course and take this failed system for a ride and flip the equation like

Burnham did when the presidency did not serve the party any longer but the party served the presidency. A PPP presidential candidate is not beholden to the wider party because they did not elect him. He is only beholden to the inner circle of 15 and as a smaller group it is easier to break from them.

The system of party patriarchs like the Jagans and a narrow inner circle picking candidates is flawed. The selection of Jagdeo and the earmarking of Robert Persaud, both good party people but poor leaders, is a reflection of this problem. Cheddi Jagan was the humble giant who carried this party for years without the need for a proper examination of leadership for the future. Since his passing, the Jagan method has not delivered. It is time to change the system to an open participation forum where leaders are picked from a bigger pool of delegates properly representative of the grassroots foundation of the party. This act of handpicking future presidents and placing them in the Executive Committee as a stepping stone to the top is archaic.

As the party likely to command the largest bloc of votes at the next general elections, reform is vital not for the PPP but for the nation which cannot afford to be saddled with poor leadership for the next five years. The undemocratic process of nomination of the most powerful position in the land within the PPP will come back to haunt them.

Yours faithfully,
Michael Maxwell