Latest update April 6th, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- Gov’t rejected three cheaper Chinese bids to finance, construct gas plant
- Corentyne mom kills 7-year-old daughter, injures infant son
- Trump threatens ‘hell’ for Iran over Hormuz Strait as deadline approaches
- US$214M still with Exxon – AFC warns of quiet deal as audit dispute drags on
- Govt. launches border patrol unit in Region Nine
Robert, Irfan, Anil: Two minus one
Jul 30, 2008 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon
There are literally millions of ways that you can tell the personality difference between individuals. Some comparisons are very common place.
One that I heard quite often is that you call two persons who live in identical economic circumstances and have the same level of education with the same social resources at their disposal.
You give five dollars to both of them and tell them to come back within a week’s time to display their progress with the money. One shows up broke. The other turns his sum into twice the original amount.
Another well known example is about a group lost in a jungle. One insists that they should stand their ground and wait for help because he is afraid of what is out there. His colleagues push for them to move on and face the odds they will encounter, if any.
Last Sunday, the media put three young PPP Parliamentarians on display. The result provides the researcher with valuable insight into the nature of the PPP’s leadership.
Asked by the media for a comment on the importance of his party’s congress for both his organisation and the country as a whole, this Central Committee member and senior cabinet Minister indicated that to speak on the event he has to get permission from General-Secretary of the Party.
Here are the words of Mr. Robert Persaud: “Unless I get permission from the General-Secretary to speak on the congress, I wouldn’t say anything.
I want to be guided by the General-Secretary. I would speak on any matter relating to agriculture but not the congress.
The identical question was put to Mr. Irfan Ally, junior to Mr. Persaud in years of service to the PPP. Junior to Mr. Persaud in terms of status in the central committee since Mr. Ally does not have voting rights. Junior to Mr. Persaud in Parliament because he is a backbencher. Mr. Ally flowed.
He told the media that crime and social security, encompassing economic matters were important issues that the congress will have to deal with.
He went on, “…we as individuals…would have to strive to make the party stronger…and more relevant to the changing conditions nationally, regionally and globally.”
Next in line was Anil Nandlall. Unlike Robert Persaud and in the same vein of Irfan Ally, Mr. Nandlall offered his views.
His comments were curiously interesting. He told his interviewer that the difference with the present congress was that in previous conferences members of the PPP abstained from lobbying for support for leadership positions. Now he asserts this is openly done. I deh wukking hard as usual.
Let’s quote him on this dimension of the PPP’s internal dynamism (so to speak): “It was almost unheard of, but people are doing it now.”
Not a person to be shy, Mr. Nandlall further stated that he believes that this congress may deal with the way the party will select its presidential candidate.
So there we have it. Different strokes for different folks. The most senior of the three totally eschewed any comment whatsoever on the congress. Mr. Persaud’s stance is bewildering to say the least in terms of internal democracy in the PPP.
Mr. Persaud belongs to the highest forum of the PPP – the Central Committee. One would like to think that he has the latitude to give his views on the broad meaning of the congress.
Why would he need permission from the General-Secretary in order to speak to non-particular, wide issues of a positive nature of the congress?
Isn’t that the commonsensical task of every member of the PPP’s central committee and executive committee?
Shouldn’t every PPP leader shout down from the roof top that the Diamond event is important to the PPP and Guyana because it will strengthen the PPP and help Guyana to develop faster?
Why would any leading light in a political party not want to tell the public of the positive value of the annual convention or periodic confabulations of his/her organisation?
The authority to disclose the specificities of the event obviously rests with the General-Secretary. But Mr. Persaud was not asked for details.
Mr. Nandlall took a correct position when he indicated that he would not discuss the agenda of the congress.
I have three questions for Mr. Persaud. Does he need permission from the President to speak on the general importance of upcoming legislation in Parliament?
Secondly, if asked what the positive value of Carifesta is, will he need to refer that question to the relevant Minister?
Thirdly, can he tell us if he thinks the PPP’s 2011 campaign will be a positive one or he cannot comment on elections matters unless given permission by the General-Secretary?
Really, Mr. Persaud, really!
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.