The PNCR yesterday threw down the gauntlet to its partners in APNU+AFC, insisting that its new Head Aubrey Norton should become the Leader of the Opposition in Parliament but there was immediate resistance to this call which threatens an embarrassing public showdown that can also drag in former President David Granger.
As had been foretold by political observers, Norton’s easy win of the PNCR’s leadership at the party’s congress immediately put the position of current Leader of the Opposition Joe Harmon in danger as the latter has no base and was shepherded into the post by Granger, who, after losing the 2020 general elections banished a large number of senior PNCR officials from the Parliamentary line-up. Norton is not a Member of Parliament and it would be up to Granger as Representative of the List to make decisions on changes to the complement of MPs.
Yesterday’s press conference was the first overt declaration by the PNCR and Norton that they were intent on taking up Harmon’s position as Leader of the Opposition and Granger’s role as Representative of the List. The PNCR is the main component of A Partner-ship for National Unity (APNU) which also comprises several tiny parties.
While Granger did not contest for leadership of the PNCR last month, Harmon did and was handily beaten by Norton. The view has been expressed in political circles that since APNU is essentially the PNCR its Head should now become the Leader of the Opposition and that Granger should step aside as the List Representative. Observers note however that Granger had recognised the importance of becoming the List Representative to limit the chance of any challenge to Harmon’s role as Leader of the Opposition.
“The party Central Executive has decided that the Leader of the Opposition and the leader of the party should be one person and that I will meet with the Leader of the Opposition to discuss this issue shortly,” PNCR Leader Norton said in response to a question from Stabroek News at a press conference the party held yesterday morning.
Norton had last week told this newspaper that the issue of Opposition Leader would be discussed when the new Central Executive of the PNCR held their first meeting this week.
“One of the arguments that they made is that it has been the convention in the party and the second argument is that it provides for better coordination to control the activities of the party and for better strategising to ensure efficacy,” he said of the justification for having one person hold all three portfolios – PNCR Leader, Leader of the Opposition and List Represnetative.
Norton said that he and current Opposition Leader Harmon will meet before next week Wednesday to discuss the issue, even as he informed that he has also sought discourse with Granger.
But following Norton’s declarations, Harmon’s office issued a statement saying that the party must follow due process. “The APNU Partnership has an established structure and if the executive of a party in the partnership has a position and they wish to express that position; they should follow the established procedure,” the statement from the Office of The Leader of the Opposition said.
“The Office of the Leader of the Opposition is a constitutional office and is consequently governed by the constitution,” it added.
Confidence
Harmon’s position is supported by AFC Leader Khemraj Ramjattan who told this newspaper that he has confidence in Harmon’s leadership and he should serve his full five-year Constitutional post. “When you have legislative posts, you follow processes in accordance with the law. So not because the PNC Leader feels he should be Opposition Leader, Joe must leave. Joe has been appointed for five years and until such time he resigns or there is a No Confidence Motion against him by the APNU+AFC party block, he ought to serve. You can’t say, ‘this is what the party wants; haul yuh ass’ and that is it,” Ramjattan said
“I also know of no reason why we in the APNU+AFC would have no confidence in Joe Harmon,” he added.
Article 184(3) of the Constitution speaks to removing the Opposition Leader.
“Where one-third of the non-governmental members of the National Assembly represent to the Speaker that the Leader of the Opposition no longer enjoys their confidence, the Speaker shall call a meeting of all the non-governmental members at which it shall be decided whether the Leader of the Opposition shall be removed from office; the removal shall be effected by the votes of a majority of all the non-governmental members.
The law also stipulates that the election and removal from office of the Leader of the Opposition shall be by a show of hands.
For Ramjattan, the current nine AFC parliamentary representatives will have to vote if such a motion is brought against Harmon but they will first consult with their constituents.
He said they will be reminded that when they got into parliament they did not “appoint him [Harmon] for a year and a half but five years.”
He pondered the reasoning that with the AFC’s upcoming National Executive Committee meeting in March, if the public believes that those who do not win seats should also be removed from Parliament. “If I don’t win a seat, should Khemraj Ramjattan leave Parliament? I don’t think so,” he declared.
Yesterday, unnamed APNU members issued a statement in support of following the rules governing the coalition which had joined up with the AFC in 2015 to defeat the PPP/C at elections in May that year.
The statement said that members of APNU had received a number of calls from media personnel pertaining to statements in the public domain attributed to Norton.
They noted that in 2011 at the birth of the APNU a collective decision was made as to who would be Head of the list. In 2015 a collective decision was made as to who would be head of the list when the Alliance for Change coalesced with APNU.
The members noted that in 2020 the APNU+AFC agreed that the Head and the deputy Head of the list would be David Granger and Khemraj Ramjattan respectively. Those decisions were made and agreed upon as a collective.
“The members of A Partnership for National Unity are thus confused by statements which suggest any one party through its internal meeting can make ad hoc changes to agreements which were reached and expected to last for the tenure of the 12th Parliament.
“If there are issues or concerns that need to be addressed any member of the Partnership or coalition knows the method that should be used in addressing those issues or concerns.
“The members of the APNU would therefore expect that all members in keeping with the proper and ethical norms would bring their positions on matters before the APNU Executive for consensus and agreement rather than making public pronouncements on matters that cannot be decided upon by any one party”, the unnamed members said.
The statement added that members of A Partnership for National Unity have had no reason to question the abilities of Granger and Ramjattan as Head and Deputy Head of the list of the APNU+AFC, “we have had no reason to question the leadership of Joseph Harmon as Leader of the Opposition and we have had no reasons to question the abilities of any Member of Parliament”.
They added: “While we are yet to meet with the new PNCR Leader Mr. Aubrey Norton, we are expecting to have a good working relationship with him as we’ve had with former President David Granger”.
With both APNU and the APNU+AFC having their own rules for making decisions, observers say the PNCR and Norton would have no choice but to engage with the representatives of both APNU and APNU+AFC to address the PNCR’s views that its Head should also be the Leader of the Opposition and the Representative of the List.
Observers point out that this tumult is coming at the worst possible time for the PNCR and the coalition as it will distract from holding the governing PPP/C to account on important matters such as oil and gas legislation and the impending budget.
