Dear Editor:
Stabroek News, in its October 4, 2019 column captioned “APNU+AFC PM candidate has to be discussed”, reported “President David Granger yesterday deflected questions about whether Minister of National Security Khemraj Ramjattan would be the APNU+AFC coalition’s Prime Ministerial (PM) candidate for the 2020 elections.” This is not surprising as Mr Ramjattan's candidacy presents a series of dilemmas for APNU which is basically the PNC as far as decision making is concerned.
Mr Ramjattan's candidacy is supported by the AFC but it is now generally accepted by most informed political analysts that this party no longer has the support it received in 2015. The first consideration is whether the AFC would be able to attract enough votes to ensure an APNU+AFC majority. If not, should it be given the PM's position or, should there be greater attention to the Amerindian vote and therefore consideration given to an Amerindian candidate? With the Justice & Liberal Party headed by a person of Amerindian ancestry, the votes from this segment of the population is now more critical than ever before. Would a PNC member of Amerindian ancestry be a more attractive choice?
The other factor to be considered is Mr Granger's health. With Ramjattan as the PM, should Mr Granger be unable to complete his term as President, assuming the coalition forms the next government, Mr Ramjattan would become the acting President. If the PNC officials and/or supporters are not happy with such an arrangement, would Ramjattan hand over the Presidency as was done by Mr Sam Hinds during the PPP years? I believe the PNC would want to retain the Presidency and this could be a major issue if Mr Ramjattan is not agreeable. A PNC member of Amerindian heritage would more likely concede the Presidency to a more senior official of the PNC and therefore be a more acceptable PM candidate to the party.
The article quotes President Granger: “A Partnership for National Unity and the Alliance for Change are discussing the Cummingsburg Accord of 2015 and [PM candidate] is one of the issues that will have to be discussed but I cannot say now who I’ll be running with… I can assure you that the two groups are reviewing the 2015 accord and we hope to come up with a revised accord”. Should Mr Ramjattan be given this position, it is likely that succession to the Presidency will be a key point in the revised Cummingsburg Accord with the AFC having to forego the Presidency should Mr Granger become incapacitated.
Although the AFC seems to be strongly committed to Ramjattan's candidacy, this could change during the negotiation process. In my view, at this time the AFC needs APNU more than APNU needs the AFC. The last local government elections exposed the electoral weakness of the AFC, hence it is in a poor position to make demands. In politics, self interest is often more important than friendship or principle. The Nagamootoo-Ramjattan fight for the PM position is the most recent example of this. Should APNU leaders decide to play hardball, AFC leaders are likely to renege on Ramjattan's candidacy in order to retain their own positions. In my view Mr Ramjattan's candidacy for the PM position under Mr Granger in the upcoming general election is a long shot.
Harry Hergash, Toronto |
Dear Editor:
Like the rest of the world Guyana has been changing as indeed it must to avoid being left behind in the globally competitive environment. In this context it is easy to lose sight of certain fundamental principles of decent human behaviour and become entrapped in the proverbial rat race or dog fight or survival of the strongest as the media has been reporting to be the case especially among various groups of Guyanese leaders.
In this regard I am reminded of an address given by His Holiness the Aga Khan in Pakistan many years ago in which he warned about changing the anchors of acceptable behaviour; I quote the relevant paragraph below:
“I have observed in the Western world a deeply changing pattern of human relations. The anchors of moral behaviour appear to have dragged to such depths that they no longer hold firm the ship of life. What was once wrong is now simply unconventional, and for the sake of individual freedom must be tolerated. What is tolerated soon becomes accepted. Contrarily, what was once right is now viewed as outdated, old-fashioned and is often the target of ridicule”.
I thought of bringing this to the attention of my Guyanese compatriots having regard to the distressingly unmannerly, uncouth and unconventional behaviours Guyanese in all strata of our society from manual workers to Members of Parliament as reported in the daily media.
In our search for solutions to the apparently endemic, backward divisiveness in our society it is incumbent on all of us to hold steadfastly to the anchors of acceptable behaviour and like the Aga Khan, the Mahatma Gandhi, the Rev Martin Luther King and the indomitable Nelson Mandela have demonstrated over the years all across the world, call upon our own leaders, our own comrades to reflect on the counter-productiveness of finger-pointing and strive to work together in search of cures for our self-inflicted wounds.
Nowrang Persaud, Berbice, Guyana
|
Dear Editor:
Tamara Khan had the unmitigated gall to stand in front of the National Toshaos Council and attempt to belittle participants.
Stabroek News reported that Mrs. Khan asked how many participants had read the Constitution, only a few hands were raised and she asked if they were going to “live this way forever” as it relates to not understanding the Constitution.
Did Tamara Khan ask her boss Caretaker Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo if he understood the Constitution as he made his case for 34 votes being needed for a majority of the 65-member National Assembly? Did she advise Nagamootoo that his call for a third umpire review of Basic English and mathematics was irresponsible? Does Tamara Khan understand that an election should have been held by the 21st March 2019 following the passage of the No-confidence motion? I could go on but I believe the point is made.
Tamara Khan compounded her disrespect to the gathered leaders by further stating “that village leaders can request the government for teams to visit the villages to explain the constitution in ‘Creolese’”.
Maybe Tamara should have asked the Toshaos to visit the Ministry of the Presidency and advise the incumbent on his responsibilities as a Caretaker President in ‘creolese’ as understanding the ‘language’ in the Constitution seems to be beyond him and his advisors.
On the topic of advice, I can offer these simple words to Tamara Khan “Humble yourself”.
Robin Singh via email |