What are Brigadier Granger’s long-term political prospects if the PNC loses the elections?

Jun 21, 2011 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The letter, “We are aware of no outreach by the Brigadier to Indo-Guyanese villages,” (KN, June 20), by the person who preferred to be known as ‘Canada-based Guyanese’, basically asked the PNC presidential candidate to step out of the PNC box, with its ethnic-based support trappings, and venture into traditional ethnic-based trappings of the PPP: Indo-Guyanese villages.
If the unnamed writer (a Q.C. graduate) is to be believed, he, being of Indian extraction, has expressed public support for the Black PNC candidate, even though Indians have traditionally supported the PPP and Blacks the PNC.
But here are the writer’s main reasons for supporting the Brigadier’s candidacy for the presidency:
1) The PPP’s failure after 1992 to reverse the many misdeeds of the previous administration, including the return of (Indian-owned) private properties allegedly ‘nationalized’.
2) The current PPP/C administration has sunk the nation to new depths on a variety of important matters, including alleged corruption and criminality.
3) The writer encountered many, regardless of race, who said the Brigadier is “not like the rest of them” (race-based politicians), but an “honest, hardworking professional”. And that regardless of Brigadier Granger’s virtues, it remained to be seen if he could trump traditional Guyanese race-based voting patterns, and whether he would be sucked into the vortex of party politics.
4) Despite that, the writer and his associates all agreed that the Brigadier was the man most likely to return law and order, introduce ethics to Guyanese government, and deal with corruption in ways that would allow us to return to set up businesses. Just as importantly, they believed Granger would behave in a way many of them learned to appreciate at Queen’s College: be blind to race, and act purely on merit.
I love reading the letters columns, if only to learn how Guyanese think on issues, and this is one letter, if it is authentic, that hits the issues button. The Indian writer is literally seeking out the PNC candidate on issues. It is akin to a fan seeking an autograph of a favourite entertainment star, except that in this instance, the writer has gone out of his way to cite reasons for engaging the PNC candidate.
I have long expressed my backing of the AFC, but this does not mean I do not want to see, read or hear the candidates as they press flesh and talk directly about issues affecting people. No one really wants to talk about race, because race is not an issue among people, but it’s an issue that has been exploited for partisan political gain.
Even the AFC youths want an end to race-voting. Enough already!
But to press flesh and make the rounds in villages and communities that host different races require resources, including money for campaign materials, transportation, accommodation and meals. And of the three parties, the PPP is the only one with access to an abundance of money. So far, the PPP has been making great use of its incumbency as the government to run around making promises and handing out checks and donating resources.
The PNC, once in the same position as the PPP of enjoying access to the state’s treasury for election campaigning, is now dependent on the goodwill of mostly ‘Diasporans’ with some support from locals.
The AFC, the smallest of the three contesting parties, must also depend on the goodwill of ‘Diasporans’ and the support of some locals.
In this context, therefore, the two parties with limited financial flows must plan their election campaign to obtain maximum benefits, and not just run helter-skelter playing catch up or simply to make PR impressions, but I believe once an election date is set, we can expect to see the two other parties campaign in earnest.
However, there is one thing the writer and others of his persuasion need to be reminded of pertinent to the PNC presidential candidate: PNC Leader, Mr. Robert Corbin, has made it clear that whoever is the party’s candidate, must not go out on the campaign trail and talk his or her opinions, but must stick to the party’s manifesto or talking points.
Brigadier Granger may be the PNC presidential candidate, but the PNC Leader is the one who calls the shots. Selah! Just as many are questioning whether the PPP’s Donald Ramotar will be his own man as long as Bharrat Jagdeo is calling the shots, many are also questioning whether Brigadier Granger will be his own man as long as Robert Corbin is calling the shots. Selah!
For example, during one of the town hall style meetings in the PNC primary for a candidate, a questioner asked whether the PNC candidate will automatically become Opposition Leader if the PNC loses the elections, but gains enough votes to form the parliamentary opposition. Brigadier Granger reportedly was among the candidates who said something akin to a yes, but this was swiftly met with a letter from a prolific PNC letter writer, who chastised candidates for not sticking to the party’s talking points.
Apparently, if the PNC loses but retains the main parliamentary opposition status, the Opposition Leader’s position is not up for grabs and should not be a talking point.
On the other hand, if the PNC candidate can pull it all off, then will he have to take his cue for running the government from Sophia? Frankly, if he can pull it off, the least we all can hope for is that he makes good on our expectations of a 180-degree turn from this madness being passed off as governance.
But it still makes you wonder, apart from being the presidential candidate, what really are Brigadier Granger’s long-term political prospects if the PNC loses?
Emile Mervin

---

---