Dear Editor,
Ralph Ramkarran stated in his letter in the SN online edition dated Sunday, January 2, 2011, `The Central Committee is the only constitutionally constituted body authorized to decide on the presidential candidate.’
I am of the opinion that the CC does not say anything about the CC being authorized to decide on the presidential candidate. The Constitution of the PPP does say that between congresses the bodies to make decisions are the CC, special conference and special congress.
In any event I find it very interesting, the debate around the use of the secret ballot in the election for the Presidential candidate of the People’s Progressive Party, of which I am a long-standing member and activist.
I fully support the right of the contending candidates to demand a secret ballot. The argument by current General Secretary, Donald Ramotar (one of the contenders for the position) that there was none before is ridiculous. Comrade Ramotar is factually incorrect. The truth is that there was no need for a secret ballot, because the previous candidates were elected unopposed as there were no other contenders. However there were so many contests in the CC with regards elections to the executive and these were by secret ballot.
The current contest for the PPP presidential candidate is being carried out within the context of Presidential intervention and support for a particular candidate combined with the fact that so many of the voting members at the Executive and Central Committee are directly employed by the State and are at the mercy of the President with regards the security of their employment.
What happened to Navin Chandarpal, O’lall, Moses and Rajendra Bisessar is concrete proof.
It is my view that we are the party and we have elected those in the Central Committee (CC) to serve us. We must ensure that we place persons in power who will serve our interest and the country’s interest and not in the interest of a cabal.
If the leaders do not denounce their bad habits and mend their ways then we must reclaim the party by leaving them stranded. We must take the party back from them.
With regards the Presidential candidate, I would prefer someone creative, someone who can adjust to change and someone who can initiate change.
In this regard I am reiterating my demand for the presidential hopeful to initiate changes especially ones that would deepen the democratic process. One candidate has expressed that the decision by the membership is the only one he will accept. I compliment him and hope he is not side-tracked from that pro democracy call. Another candidate has accepted that that is the direction to follow but seems inclined to leave the decision in the hands of the CC. I am calling on him to advance that demand for the membership to decide.
Members should write to the leadership and also utilize every forum to push for their involvement.
Too many things have transpired in secret. This secrecy and fear that the publicity would affect the party negatively has allowed too many corrupt leaders to remain in office. I recall the matter of the sports car given by one contractor to a Minister.
Today the same wave of secrecy has spilled over into the government as we have all these secret deals taking place between investors and the government. Sometimes the only ones aware are those in the OP. The latest one is the land given to high level officials of the PPP and the government on the sea walls at Sparendaam.
I seek some clarification as I understand that a few of those who have obtained house lots sold their house lots that were given to them by the government of Guyana. I understand that this is prohibited by law.
With regards criticisms against contenders for taking the debate public I say come off this nonsense about internal party secrecy and suggest they follow the example of VI Lenin of the working class party of Russia He allowed open debate within the party’s paper which was distributed to the public. Minority views could be understood by and debated by the public.
We have begun to take note of those who are afraid to place themselves before the members of the PPP.
There are those who wish to bypass them; those who feel that the members do not count, that “we pass fa grass” because the goat bite we all the time.
Well it’s my opinion that the members should no longer tolerate the contempt with which sections of the PPP leadership hold them.
I recall and compliment the contender, Moses Nagamootoo who in an interview with the press stated that the PPP’s recent announcement that it will select its presidential candidate for the next elections via the traditional procedure has come as a surprise and indicates to members that “they no longer count.”
Democracy that involves decision making by the members must become the talk of today in every forum, in every meeting and at every district and regional conference.
If the members do not commence this type of action then those who have compromised the PPP’s working class commitment will continue to embrace the rich, the corrupt, they themselves becoming corrupt in the process, at the expense of the working people.
I must add that such a commitment to the working class can be a useful basis, possibly the only basis upon which to build national unity and national consensus.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Bisessar
