Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

National Alliance policy is “another ploy to delay the inevitable” – AFC

… remains resolute on no-confidence motion

 

September 2, 2014, By Filed Under News , Source - Kaieteur News

 

The Alliance For Change (AFC) is doubtful that there is any offer that the government could put on the table to restrain the party’s initiated no-confidence motion. The AFC is convinced that this new initiative of a national policy “is not genuine and is another ploy to delay the inevitable.”

 

The party has thus registered its non-intent to contemplate the “Government’s newfound inclusive policy.”

 

General Secretary of the AFC, David Patterson believes that the government is currently “pulling rabbits from the hat,” and is trying its best to stall general elections.

 

AFC General Secretary David Patterson

AFC General Secretary
David Patterson

 

He told this newspaper that government is seeking to promote its national policy, but is yet to state the approach of this national umbrella. Moreover, he explained, the People’s Progressive Party’s (PPP) General Secretary, Clement Rohee has noted that there is need for an alliance, but declared that the opposition has to build trust; “and in building that trust, they want the opposition to do things, and agree on things -we find unreasonable -without question.”

 

He continued that it is currently unclear what the government is up to, but said his party will not accommodate them in carrying out its delay tactics. It was pointed out that the opposition has been more than reasonable with the government in their operations in Parliament.

 

Patterson said the opposition has related its concerns and dissatisfaction on many issues with the government, but is usually ignored. “Even before this no-confidence motion, we wrote to the government expressing our concerns over the illegal spending of money and they told us put up or shut up, saying basically to bring on the no-confidence motion.”

 

“They did not even hint that they would review our concerns or give it some thought… The government was also given a 10 point plan, which they had no intention of considering.” Patterson hinted that the government is not to be taken seriously on its recent initiative.

 

As it relates to A Partnership for National Unity (APNU), the AFC General Secretary said the party is moving ahead with its no-confidence motion and is optimistic that APNU will lend its support in removing the incumbent PPP-government. This is despite, Opposition Leader, David Granger saying that APNU is willing to sit with the PPP to discuss its national alliance policy.

 

Patterson said that Granger has always advocated for a one nation move, but as it stands, there has been no discussion between the two opposition parties on the PPP’s recent pronouncements. He said there has also been no discussion as to whether there might be matters to discuss or negotiate which could possibly lead to the withdrawal of the no-confidence motion.

 

He said the AFC expects APNU’s unconditional support of the no-confidence motion and “considers the PPP’s attempts as ‘willy-nilly,’ as they will try anything to stall the motion.”

 

There are two possible occurrences which political analysts say will most likely be forthcoming; the ruling party will either call early elections or face the history making moment and become the first government to be voted out of power. There is also the perception in some quarters that none of the major parties are ready for general elections. Continuous deadlock has gripped the two sides of the House and the opposition is convinced that only fresh polls can make the change. The opposition also is convinced that the PPP will seek to frustrate the no-confidence motion and employ various delay tactics.

 

Granger has noted however, that APNU believes that it is time to do away with this ‘winner-takes-all’ attitude. He said he supports the “national alliance” principle being promoted by the PPP, but expressed keen interest in knowing the full details since the opposition parties have not yet been engaged.

 

Source -- http://www.kaieteurnewsonline....-the-inevitable-afc/

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Patterson said that Granger has always advocated for a one nation move, but as it stands, there has been no discussion between the two opposition parties on the PPP’s recent pronouncements. He said there has also been no discussion as to whether there might be matters to discuss or negotiate which could possibly lead to the withdrawal of the no-confidence motion.

 

He said the AFC expects APNU’s unconditional support of the no-confidence motion and “considers the PPP’s attempts as ‘willy-nilly,’ as they will try anything to stall the motion.”

 

National Alliance policy is “another ploy to delay the inevitable” – AFC … remains resolute on no-confidence motion

September 2, 2014, By Filed Under News , Source - Kaieteur News

The no-confidence motion was presented and considered acceptable by the Speaker of the National Assembly.

 

The next step is the dialogue and official approval in the Legislative Assembly.

 

Discussions between groups are unrelated to the current no-confidence motion.

 

Simple matter -- Obtain a positive approval of the no-confidence notion and then proceed with the election which must take place within ninety days.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

If David Granger wants to fall in the PPP alliance trap, he can go ahead. Aubrey Norton and his followers are ready to migrate to the AFC.

APNU wants AFC to join their alliance and that is good. APNU supports the PPP alliance in principle, and that is NOT good. Gilly, please explain!

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

If David Granger wants to fall in the PPP alliance trap, he can go ahead. Aubrey Norton and his followers are ready to migrate to the AFC.

This is no trap. The PPP is already in a covert alliance with the PNC ask Jagdeo and corbin.

FM
Originally Posted by Cobra:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

If David Granger wants to fall in the PPP alliance trap, he can go ahead. Aubrey Norton and his followers are ready to migrate to the AFC.

APNU wants AFC to join their alliance and that is good. APNU supports the PPP alliance in principle, and that is NOT good. Gilly, please explain!

Cobs, you're sounding like a political virgin. Time to buss up yuh maidenhead.

APNU wants AFC in an alliance but AFC wants no alliance.

AFC and APNU voted together on certain specific issues in parliament. AFC put forward its no-confidence motion on the understanding that APNU will support. The AFC motion aims to bring down the PPP regime, period.

If APNU keeps its word and the motion is passed, elections are next on the agenda. The AFC will contest such elections solo, not as an APNU-AFC alliance as yuji and his Billy-boy gang have been suggesting.

Now, the PPP alliance proposal is clearly a move to stall elections and stay in power. If Granger takes his PNC to that alliance, it would be to keep the PPP in power and share government without elections.

AFC ent playing dat game. AFC wants elections, local government or general --- whichever the the PPP decides on.

 

 

 

FM

There will be no APNU PNC alliance you are correct Gilly the AFC has pretty much confirmed this the past few days and solidified their position.

 

I can't say I disagree with much of what they are saying actually I surprised myself and agreed with their reasoning for not joining an APNU Alliance.

 

I think the Grasshopper and many other entities are gonna be in serious caca come election day in GY 2015.

FM
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:
Originally Posted by Cobra:
Originally Posted by Gilbakka:

If David Granger wants to fall in the PPP alliance trap, he can go ahead. Aubrey Norton and his followers are ready to migrate to the AFC.

APNU wants AFC to join their alliance and that is good. APNU supports the PPP alliance in principle, and that is NOT good. Gilly, please explain!

Cobs, you're sounding like a political virgin. Time to buss up yuh maidenhead.

APNU wants AFC in an alliance but AFC wants no alliance.

AFC and APNU voted together on certain specific issues in parliament. AFC put forward its no-confidence motion on the understanding that APNU will support. The AFC motion aims to bring down the PPP regime, period.

If APNU keeps its word and the motion is passed, elections are next on the agenda. The AFC will contest such elections solo, not as an APNU-AFC alliance as yuji and his Billy-boy gang have been suggesting.

Now, the PPP alliance proposal is clearly a move to stall elections and stay in power. If Granger takes his PNC to that alliance, it would be to keep the PPP in power and share government without elections.

AFC ent playing dat game. AFC wants elections, local government or general --- whichever the the PPP decides on.

 

 

 

I read your response after I posted the thread entitle "let's clear the air". I understand where AFC stand at the moment, but something may change along the line. If APNU joins the PPP alliance as you suggested, that is because an early election result may be the same outcome as 2011, and Guyana would suffer the same gridlock as today. I believe the PPP is avoiding this problem at all cost. I think it is a smart thing to do. 

FM
Originally Posted by HM_Redux:

There will be no APNU PNC alliance you are correct Gilly the AFC has pretty much confirmed this the past few days and solidified their position.

 

I can't say I disagree with much of what they are saying actually I surprised myself and agreed with their reasoning for not joining an APNU Alliance.

 

I think the Grasshopper and many other entities are gonna be in serious caca come election day in GY 2015.

You is Mr TK Mr Horrse man? 

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×