Dear Editor,
No one wants Mr Robert Corbin to fail. Mr Corbin’s failures translate to a failure for the party, its constituents, and the country. There are justifiable concerns about a dilapidated PNC, and Mr Corbin’s inability to confront the PPP’s oppression and be the voice of reliance. Considering that Mr Corbin has presided over this degeneration and remains incapable, after six years, of offering some semblance of militancy and protection, the calls for him to go are of his own making.
As leader of the PNC and chief custodian of its philosophy Mr Corbin has to lead. No one expects Mr Corbin to be Mr Forbes Burnham or Mr Desmond Hoyte. But persons expect him to uphold the principles of the PNC and the Guyana Labour Union (GLU) that Messrs Burnham and Hoyte led. He has not. No one can say, with honesty, that Mr Corbin has bettered Mr Hoyte’s militancy, or even maintained it.
What we have been seeing is a determination on Mr Corbin’s part to shed the PNC’s legacy like hot bricks. The GLU, the party’s labour arm, was given away by Mr Corbin; strategic alliances once forged are abandoned; Region 2 has no parliamentary representative thus no oversight or representation for the people of this region; in Region 4, which was won by the PNC, the PPP was given the vice-chairmanship and the powerful chairmanship of the Finance Committee; there has been a halt to militant legal and executive oversights; and there has been substantial intellectual bleeding of which Mr Corbin cannot feign innocence.
When Mr Corbin’s leadership comes under scrutiny, the usual response is a personal attack. The only exceptions to such treatment are President Jagdeo and the PPP. The PNC refuses to debunk or address the public claims made by Christopher Ram, Sunday Stabroek’s editorial and Rickford Burke. Mr Ram was labelled an ‘elitist.’ But the commoners − the man in the street − identifies with the issues raised by this ‘elite.’ Others have faced a similar fate.
If PNC members want Mr Corbin as Leader of the Party, then that’s their prerogative. Regrettably, it is a tactic successfully used so far to deflect attention from Mr Corbin’s inaction and to resist justified concerns made by non-members.
The office of Leader of the Opposition is a constitutional office. The salaries and benefits are paid for by taxpayers’ money. Mr Corbin holds this office. If Mr Corbin refuses to deliver as Leader of the Opposition, it remains the concern of citizens, and we have to demand accountability. We, the taxpayers, can demand Mr Corbin demit office if his performance encourages the violation of our rights and compromises the well-being of our country. It should become part of our national conversation.
Yours faithfully,
(Name and address provided)
