Murray lost the vote for leadership of the PNCR because delegates felt he would not make a strong leader

Dear Editor,

Mr Murray lost the support of many members/supporters of the PNCR for the following reasons. When he was chairman he supported the government on the EPA and after the party qualified that position he resigned as chairman. In addition, Mr Murray allowed Mr Vincent Alexander and team to criticize the party in public. Mr McAllister criticized and ran down the party in the media. Mr Aubrey Norton did the same thing and accused the leader of wrongdoing until sued for libel. Mr Mervyn Williams too went to the press with another criticism, and Mr Van West Charles was the last to tarnish the image of the party in the media, something not allowed in the party’s constitution, and yet Mr Murray did not see fit to offer a word of caution to these persons for their indisciplined behaviour.

Lo and behold these and others who were candidates for leadership of the party decided not to    run, but backed Mr Murray to contest against Mr Corbin, knowing that they and Mr Murray could not have defeated Mr Corbin in any poll.

Mr Murray had failed to garner Indian support for the party; a check showed between 20-25 Indian delegates/members present, and if you multiply that by 10, you will get 200-250 members as there is a delegate for every 10 members.  Where were Mr Murray’s supporters?

Whoever said the voting was based on race, was not speaking the truth. African Guyanese in the party liked Mr Murray but many did not vote for him as leader because he had abandoned the chairmanship over a single criticism, and feared he would not make a strong leader.

I would like to ask Messrs Murray, Van West Charles, Norton, Alexander et al to demand of the central executive of the party that they include their team in the decision-making, building of and uniting the party (shared governance). I think they will and must not reject the team.

Yours faithfully,
Michael Hazel

Around the Web