Dear Editor,
In Sunday Stabroek dated August 10, the headline stated “PPP Central Committee votes…Ramkarran disappointed, cites lobby against him”. I find this very interesting. It is obvious from his statement that he recognizes the real possibility of lobbies against candidates. I now ask him if he recognizes that this kind of lobbying was conducted in the past to affect other candidates.
Mr Ramkarran should know many of the other leading members, members for over 25 years who were in the trenches, who were placed in the lock ups and suffered job wise as well as physically in addition to being academically qualified, have contested over the years and did not get in.
He would also be aware that a number of persons who became members of the party relatively recently were catapulted into the leadership defying democratic norms and logic.
Mr Ramkarran must know of persons who did very little if nothing at all for the PYO and the PPP but were given big positions including the position of ambassador possibly because of family connections and friendship.
Mr Ramkarran should know of other persons who were marginalized by the party leadership because they were outspoken and were critical of the way the party and certain leaders functioned.
If Mr. Ramkarran wants to suggest that his case was the first then he can do so.
Would Mr Ramkarran explain to us how it is that congress, the highest forum of the party, took a decision to have 20% Civic and this was flouted by the executive, and central committee of the PPP. Is Mr Ramkarran in agreement with the government being over 60% Civic? Did he as an executive member of the party oppose the undemocratic flouting of a congress decision?
We know that Mr. Ramkarran feels good about himself as the speaker of the Parliament but does he realise that having over sixty percent Civic has resulted in other members of the party, some of whom are more qualified than many of the Civic, being left out and that as a consequence they would be upset. Some of these members endured suffering at the hands of the PNC in ways that Mr. Ramkarran never did.
How does Mr. Ramkarran view the fact that Moses Nagamootoo at one time obtained the second most popular votes at congress and the Central Committee did not see it fit to elect him into the executive? Should Mr Nagamootoo have felt as upset as Mr Ramkarran feels now and should he have made his feelings known to the press.
Yours faithfully,
(name and address provided)
