She blew in just about two weeks ago. Not like a gale as one might have expected, but more like a puff of smoke, wafting around her “comrades” in the PPP presidential nomination race.
Why, Gail? We feel we should not only be asking why presidential advisor and MP Gail Teixeira is in the running for that oh so coveted nomination, but also why now.
Oh we know all about the nomination by the Women’s Progressive Organisation (WPO), but another of Gail’s comrades Indra Chandarpal was also nominated by the WPO and she declined. So why did Gail say yes?
It has been bandied about that Gail is the PPP’s response to Faith Harding declaring an interest in being the nominee for the PNC. But despite all her fiery posturing in the past, it is obvious that Gail is no Faith.
Whatever else might be said about Faith, her entry to the other fray on the other side had a certain pizzazz. And she was and is ready to stand up and say why she, rather than any of her colleagues, deserves the nod.
Gail’s “I accepted the nomination… I expect that we will all behave in a disciplined manner and with decorum as the party considers the nominees,” fell rather flat. There were definitely signs of a great effort being made not to rock the boat, although Gail’s fellow party stalwarts have all but tipped it over. Her off-side response to their antics was that this is not the time for displays of testosterone, but for wise debate and agreement on the way forward. Score half a point to Gail; 10 more if she was also including her boss in that statement. But we don’t think so.
Gail has also cautioned against attempts to “gender-ise” the issue. Hinting perhaps, that her nomination was not tokenism, not benevolent sexism and not an attempt to remove the perception of ‘old boys’ club-ism’ in the PPP line-up. We’re not 100% convinced.
Gail said she feels Guyanese voters are likely to embrace any candidate who brings something additional to a presidential race and that the main issue is what a particular candidate stands for. We don’t know exactly what is the ‘something additional’ Gail will bring, but there must be something, mustn’t there or she would not have accepted the nomination. We have heard her spout the party line about building unity and trust and a developmental agenda. We are not moved at all; that speech could have been made by anyone with political aspirations whether in or out the PPP.
We are still to see what defines Gail – what makes her a suitable candidate for the party’s nomination and the presidency. But we suppose we will have to wait and see if the PPP leadership deems her “a fit candidate to lead”. Gail’s stance or lack thereof could be construed in several ways, or even misconstrued, hence our question: why, Gail?
