Friday, 03 February 2012 21:27
Chronicle:
What makes the Alliance For Change(AFC) believe that it can dictate to President Donald Ramotar and his PPP/C government when it must engage the latter in matters relative to the wellbeing of Guyana and its citizens? That this question is asked, is based on a report in the GUYANA TIMES, that this political party is “awaiting the call from the Office of the President to get down to the business at hand. ” This is relative to its representatives who will sit, along with its other opposition counterpart APNU, in a tripartite arrangement for consultations on the national budget.
Now, what is so barefacedly dishonest about this statement from the AFC, is that it conveys the incorrect impression that the PPP/C government is reluctant and even deliberately tardy in finalising such a meeting, when in fact it is fully aware of already scheduled talks, according to a statement from APNU’s Granger in the GUYANA TIMES
In a report carried in this medium, their sister party in the shady and dishonest arrangement of the grab of the Speaker’s chair, has more or less made a statement that can be construed as distancing itself from such an untrue stance. This party seems to believe that because of its pivotal position in the equation of the current Parliamentary configuration, it has the right to behave in a cocky and unreasonable manner.
But this is also devious and deceiving in every way, as such a position is intended to convey to the nation at large, inclusive of its constituents, that the government is either foot-dragging or deliberately creating a situation for political conflict.
The fact that David Granger can unequivocally report in the GUYANA TIMES that “APNU is engaged in a tripartite process with the PPP and AFC and we are aware that Mrs. Teixeira on behalf of the President has already called a meeting ”, is not only a thorough repudiation of the AFC’s statement, but also a reflection of the discordant relations between the two sides. No one will want to question the veracity of Granger’s statement, since it supports the fact of a similar statement from the PPP/C government of such an arrangement to which both parties ought to have already sent their principals.
Again, does the AFC understand its very critical role in this new political field? It must be reminded, inter alia, that this unnecessary antic is essaying at dangerous politics; and an attempt at brinkmanship designed to play to the national gallery to show “who run things.” Is this how such a political opposition party, now in an important role, expects to play its parliamentary hand?
Had this grouping been cognisant of its newly acquired and serious national responsibility, it would not have, first, conspired with APNU to greedily grab not only the Speakership, but also the Deputy as well; while second, it would have been true to its numerous electoral calls for consensual politics.
No one begrudges this party for its somewhat improved poll performance, and the critical balance that it now holds in the House. What is of essence, is how it will exercise this pivotal position in the coming period. Will it be for a display of power play, self glorification or for the advancement of the Guyanese nation? Their shocking collusion in the election for Speaker, mirrors an understanding of political power, in the classical display of self, rather than using same for the wellbeing of the nation, as this historic period truly demands. The current picture does not augur very well for the future.
If this is an indication of AFC politics in the Tenth Parliament, then the nation is at risk, and all Guyanese must be ready to resist such political deviancy without fail.
Last Updated on Friday, 03 February 2012 21:29
Chronicle:
What makes the Alliance For Change(AFC) believe that it can dictate to President Donald Ramotar and his PPP/C government when it must engage the latter in matters relative to the wellbeing of Guyana and its citizens? That this question is asked, is based on a report in the GUYANA TIMES, that this political party is “awaiting the call from the Office of the President to get down to the business at hand. ” This is relative to its representatives who will sit, along with its other opposition counterpart APNU, in a tripartite arrangement for consultations on the national budget.
Now, what is so barefacedly dishonest about this statement from the AFC, is that it conveys the incorrect impression that the PPP/C government is reluctant and even deliberately tardy in finalising such a meeting, when in fact it is fully aware of already scheduled talks, according to a statement from APNU’s Granger in the GUYANA TIMES
In a report carried in this medium, their sister party in the shady and dishonest arrangement of the grab of the Speaker’s chair, has more or less made a statement that can be construed as distancing itself from such an untrue stance. This party seems to believe that because of its pivotal position in the equation of the current Parliamentary configuration, it has the right to behave in a cocky and unreasonable manner.
But this is also devious and deceiving in every way, as such a position is intended to convey to the nation at large, inclusive of its constituents, that the government is either foot-dragging or deliberately creating a situation for political conflict.
The fact that David Granger can unequivocally report in the GUYANA TIMES that “APNU is engaged in a tripartite process with the PPP and AFC and we are aware that Mrs. Teixeira on behalf of the President has already called a meeting ”, is not only a thorough repudiation of the AFC’s statement, but also a reflection of the discordant relations between the two sides. No one will want to question the veracity of Granger’s statement, since it supports the fact of a similar statement from the PPP/C government of such an arrangement to which both parties ought to have already sent their principals.
Again, does the AFC understand its very critical role in this new political field? It must be reminded, inter alia, that this unnecessary antic is essaying at dangerous politics; and an attempt at brinkmanship designed to play to the national gallery to show “who run things.” Is this how such a political opposition party, now in an important role, expects to play its parliamentary hand?
Had this grouping been cognisant of its newly acquired and serious national responsibility, it would not have, first, conspired with APNU to greedily grab not only the Speakership, but also the Deputy as well; while second, it would have been true to its numerous electoral calls for consensual politics.
No one begrudges this party for its somewhat improved poll performance, and the critical balance that it now holds in the House. What is of essence, is how it will exercise this pivotal position in the coming period. Will it be for a display of power play, self glorification or for the advancement of the Guyanese nation? Their shocking collusion in the election for Speaker, mirrors an understanding of political power, in the classical display of self, rather than using same for the wellbeing of the nation, as this historic period truly demands. The current picture does not augur very well for the future.
If this is an indication of AFC politics in the Tenth Parliament, then the nation is at risk, and all Guyanese must be ready to resist such political deviancy without fail.
Last Updated on Friday, 03 February 2012 21:29
