Dear Editor,
Lurlene Nestor’s January 25, letter in SN captioned, ‘Some reported statements by the presidential candidates did not reflect the position of the PNCR’ is a massive red flag. One has to wonder if Ms Nestor isn’t Robert Corbin’s mouthpiece in this letter. The PNC broke new ground in Guyana when it established the nation’s first partial presidential primary election. I commended them for it but warned of dangers. Ms Nestor’s letter stirs up a hornet’s nest of those potential dangers. Danger Number One: Ms Nestor confirms that Mr Corbin is still a potential candidate for party leader at the next congress near the end of 2011. Danger Number Two: Ms Nestor suggests that the party leader aka Corbin could become opposition leader as the position of party leader and opposition leader could be merged by the PNC.
Let me say that if the PNC allows its party leader (Mr Corbin in this case) to become the opposition leader, it would be an assault on democracy, fairness and justice in this nation. How could an individual who chose not to run for the PNC presidential candidacy and not to run for the nation’s presidency utilize internal party shenanigans to usurp the position of another individual who actually ran for the PNC presidential candidacy and for the nation’s presidency? The possibility of Mr Corbin becoming the opposition leader is very real as the PNCR Central Executive and General Council is stocked with Corbinites after the fallout of the last party leader election which was smeared with allegations of fraud. However, it is simple: if you didn’t run for the party presidential candidate you have no business becoming opposition leader sitting from the sidelines and taking the spoils of someone else’s hard work.
The PNC presidential candidate will be elected by a wider section of membership and in a more open process than Mr Corbin ever was. Then such candidate will be elected in the general elections by not just members of the PNC and PNC supporters in the wider society, but also by those who decide to vote solely for the candidate. How could a sidelines-sitting party leader be allowed to grab that candidate’s diligent work, particularly if he/she improved the fortunes of the party at the general elections? Internal party manoeuvrings should not be allowed to derail the expression of the democratic choices of the people of the nation. This potential danger gleaned from Ms Nestor’s letter lurks in every single political entity in this country. It must be confronted, challenged and stopped. It is the heart of a terrible disease in this nation’s political system. That disease lies right in the political parties themselves. They are corrupt, flawed, broken, autocratic and failed. When they win elections or seize power, they spread the disease to the rest of the nation.Always.
Yours faithfully,
M Maxwell
