Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

Nowhere in the civilised world are parties engaged in alliances treated with such disdain

May 23, 2015 | By | Filed Under Letters 

DEAR EDITOR,
I write this letter conscious of the likely risk of offending comrades in APNU and thousands of its supporters who are at present enjoying and celebrating the electoral defeat of the PPP/C, the coming to office of the APNU+AFC coalition and the installation of our newly-elected Head of State, His Excellency, President David Granger.
At the outset, let me state that in spite of the remarks which I am forced to make I wish to take this opportunity in this my first letter since the victory of May 11, 2015 to congratulate Mr. Granger and the members of the APNU+AFC Coalition on their historic performance at the just concluded elections.
In politics it is often said that the timing of political interventions is essential to achieving much sought after political objectives. However, there are times when such considerations can be counter-productive to the people’s interests. I feel very strongly that this matter which I will allude to must be addressed publicly at this time. If it is not, we will be setting a dangerous precedent that can have negative effects on our collective political aspirations.
I feel an obligation to myself as a political activist and as a member of the WPA’s leadership to express my concern and dissatisfaction that President Granger in his capacity as the leader of APNU, did not and presumably, has not seen it fit to call a meeting of APNU’s executive members to discuss and reach an agreement on our post- election responsibilities.
This failure to act on Mr. Granger’s part has taken place in spite of efforts by the WPA to have APNU’s executive meet on these matters. Further, the failure to initiate meeting/s of APNU’s Executive has to be seen in the context of the WPA’s protracted efforts to have this critical decision-making organ of APNU function as it was intended to do, thereby facilitating the making of important decisions of the alliance.
I find it hard to accept that the common courtesies and respect for comrades which civil political relations dictate, in this case was not followed. Nowhere in the civilised world are parties, which are engaged in alliances with each other, treated with such disdain.
This letter is limited to the issue of the failure of the executive to meet at this historical juncture in the life of APNU and the country when important matters of the organization, the government and the state have to be decided on.
Tacuma Ogunseye

Replies sorted oldest to newest

A coalition isn't a coalition unless the input of all parts are allowed to me made and taken into account.

 

Why is this man wrong to state his opposition when decisions are made by a narrow group.  Indeed many are worried about the huge number of ministers (more than what the PPP had) and the randomness and lack of clarity in the role and functions of some of these ministries. Who decided all of this?

FM

Tacuma Ogunseye's very measured criticism regarding APNU and the coalition's post-election decision-making is not out of place

 

Leadership needs to step up . . . democracy must also be seen to work

FM
Originally Posted by redux:

Tacuma Ogunseye's very measured criticism regarding APNU and the coalition's post-election decision-making is not out of place

 

Leadership needs to step up . . . democracy must also be seen to work

At the very least tell us more about the ministries of Communities, Social Cohesion, Citizenship, and Governance.  Also what is the Ministry of Business supposed to do?

 

It all smacks too much of identifying the people who should be rewarded, and then building ministries around them.

FM
Originally Posted by caribny:
Originally Posted by redux:

Tacuma Ogunseye's very measured criticism regarding APNU and the coalition's post-election decision-making is not out of place

 

Leadership needs to step up . . . democracy must also be seen to work

At the very least tell us more about the ministries of Communities, Social Cohesion, Citizenship, and Governance.  Also what is the Ministry of Business supposed to do?

 

It all smacks too much of identifying the people who should be rewarded, and then building ministries around them.

it's a clumsy way of conforming to the letter of the Cummingsburg Accord

 

minista bloat and the fact that stalwarts are being rewarded with name ministries is not unexpected given the jockeying for power and the division of spoils per agreement

 

as i said elsewhere, what the coalition is attempting to do is extraordinary and daring; they need some space to get it right

FM
Originally Posted by redux:
 

as i said elsewhere, what the coalition is attempting to do is extraordinary and daring; they need some space to get it right

From comments that are being made even many coalition supporters are confused, and definitely the 49% who voted against them are.

 

Yet we have yet to hear any real explanation.  NOT GOOD!  Especially now that we hear that some of these ministries will not be able to function until the budget is passed. 

FM
Last edited by Former Member

Add Reply

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