Dear Editor,
Up until a month ago, the PNCR’s 18th Biennial Congress, scheduled for this weekend, was viewed by observers as just another political exercise for party members and interested supporters. Then came the Oscar Clarke-Vanessa Kissoon ruckus in June, which not only resulted in Ms Kissoon’s suspension, but the emergence of a bitter rift between the party and members of its Linden constituency.
Days later, PNCR veteran and former General Secretary, Mr Aubrey Norton, hinted he will run against incumbent PNCR Leader, David Granger, for the post. This week, Region 10’s Chairman, Mr Sharma Solomon, announced he, too, will be contesting for the PNC leadership.
Another routine party exercise suddenly became a national public discussion, which extended to the diaspora, based on blogged comments and published letters. The attention of many will likely be on the outcome of this weekend’s elections, and for good reason: whoever wins the race for party leader will help to determine the direction of the party at a very delicate time in our national politics as a no-confidence vote against the government looms and the support of the PNCR’s umbrella, APNU, is pivotal.
Back on April 26, 2014, at the party’s Second General Council meeting for this year, Chairman, Mr Basil Williams, affirmed that the PNCR’s prime motivation is to regain the reins of government, while Leader, Mr Granger, in his feature address, challenged members to resist efforts internally and by external forces to divide the party, while assuring that the party will continue to work for unity in the labour movement.
While it is unclear what exactly the party has achieved to date relative to unity in the labour movement, Mr Granger’s party appears threatened by internal strife, while, externally, even the PPP has gone the non-traditional route of publicly urging PNC members to oust Mr Granger as party leader.
Mr Williams’ assertion that the PNCR’s prime motivation is to regain the reins of government now seems somewhat shaken, even though it appeared solid up until June 22, 2014 when SN reported, ‘Granger poised to return as PNCR leader.’ A month ago, none of the party’s leading members seemed interested in challenging Mr Granger for the top spot. PNCR MP, Mr Carl Greenidge, reportedly said, at the time, more important matters were engaging his attention.
The question one is now compelled to ask is: What exactly changed in the last month? Some appear to cite Mr Granger’s poor handling of the Clark-Kissoon commotion, but was that enough reason to prompt Messrs Norton and Solomon to jump into the race? By the way, Ms Kissoon, like these two new candidates, hails from Linden.
Others think that the Clark-Kissoon brouhaha, in conjunction with the appointment of a new Regional Coordinator without consultation, was the tipping point of Mr Granger’s seemingly lacklustre leadership against the PPP’s obstinacy on misuse of public funds and failing to uphold the constitution, despite his party sharing a parliamentary majority with the AFC.
There will be no end to speculation as to the true motivation behind Messrs Norton and Solomon going up against Mr Granger at the 10th and 11th hours, but what has emerged in the interim is a division of support for Mr Granger, on the one hand, and Messrs Norton and/or Solomon, on the other hand. This is an unusual development for the PNCR, which normally has its handpicked leader determined even before the Biennial Congress and merely goes through the motions of an election process.
At the PNC Congress in 1985, for example, when then Deputy PNC Leader, Mr Hamilton Green, allowed supporters to throw his name into the race against Desmond Hoyte, it was never really a race because Mr Green eventually withdrew his name, but only after making sure Hoyte got the message that Mr Green and supporters disagreed with the direction he was taking the party.
In February 2011, despite claims of internal democratization, the party’s choice for a presidential candidate saw requests for a recount by one contender, Mr Carl Greenidge, who lost to Mr Granger 279 to 264 votes. Another contender, Dr Faith Harding, who resigned from the PNCR Executive Committee in February 2012, reportedly alleged the party engaged in electoral skullduggery in its presidential primary. She reportedly claimed that the election favoured Mr Granger as the PNCR‘s resources were applied heavily towards his election, and that calls were made from the party bigwigs telling voters that the people in charge at Congress Place favoured Mr Granger and that was the way the vote should transpire.
The PNC had long been accused of rigging elections at the national level, but when Dr Harding made her charges public, that made it difficult for some who were inclined to support the PNCR, even with Granger at the helm, to do so. To his personal and professional credit, Mr Granger does have certain leadership qualities many desire in a president, but if the process that produced him was flawed then some may feel the ‘finished product’ could be compromised.
When the PNCR Biennial Congress and its anticipated accompanying elections process are over, there is another issue that is gaining traction in the national discourse: a pending no-confidence vote in a PPP regime that continues to defy laws and logic with near impunity. There appears to be a growing apprehension among Guyanese for something to be done to literally rein in the PPP regime, and since the PNCR is the de facto main parliamentary opposition, all eyes will be on who emerges as the PNCR leader to make that needed difference.
Yours faithfully,
Emile Mervin
