Some Questions for the AFC

Oct 05, 2014 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Like every other Guyanese, I believe Mr. Rohee continues to project himself as the nations’ revolving circus clown. So, when I read the KN article dated October 2, 2014 and captioned “AFC is “sheepishly singing” from PPP Hymn book – Rohee” I looked past the name Rohee and focused on what I am about to learn about the AFC. So, ignoring Rohee’s insinuations I decided to rely on the independent comments made by a senior operative of the AFC, coupled with additional information reported in the article. In the article it is reported that the AFC had expressed an intention to form a government of National Unity. However, in an effort to further promote the AFC’s position on its “Government of National Unity” concept, the report went on to quote senior AFC member, Mr. Nigel Hughes, as saying that “the AFC will also welcome persons who are currently serving under another political party,” but noted that they “must be of quality.”
Editor, having read these statements, as expressed in the news item, I am forced to ask the AFC these pointed questions;
1.      At what point of the AFC’s life-cycle did it decide that it will promote this idea of a “government of National Unity? I am aware that organizations, like ordinary social beings, do and are capable of changing course and position, since not only insects can metamorphose.
2.      How is the AFC’s concept of a government of national unity different from the APNU’s Blueprint and model? Is this difference in the name, in that the AFC does not prefer to have the word “Partnership” in its concoction or is it that the letter “A” makes that big difference? Or does the difference lies in the positioning of the words “unity” and “government”? Guyanese people will need this clarity, as they are already accustomed to the APNU’s brand of a National Unity government as is outlined in the organization’s concept document.
3.      What does the AFC mean when it speaks about “welcoming persons, in its unity government, who are currently serving under another political entity? Isn’t this what the APNU has done and continues to do?  As per its manifesto! Or is the AFC’s approach different because it does not support the APNU model of targeting both individuals and organizations? Which means that the AFC might only be interested in attracting individuals and not necessarily organizations?
4.      The question of who the AFC hopes to have join its “unity government”, also caused me to do some careful analysis. I noted that in the press report, Mr. Hughes is quoted as saying that those individuals, whom the AFC hopes to invite under its perceived, umbrella must be “of quality”. This particular caveat provoked me to ask the AFC to define for Guyanese what it means when it speaks of “people of quality”. Is the AFC saying to us that the AFC only has “people of quality?” If this is to be concluded, then it is only fair that the AFC, explain to those whom it hopes to attract what qualities they need to exhibit in order to be deemed “of quality” and therefore becomes capable of associating with the AFC. I have observed this kind of “we better than dem” kind of mentality projected throughout the social media comments by some who seem to speak for the AFC’s leadership. Having read this article, I am inclined to believe that those social media comments have their foundation in some written or unwritten policy of the AFC. If not, the AFC may consider it wise to make certain definitive statements. I have written time and again about the lack of respect the PPP government demonstrates toward the people of Guyana, whom they view in very low terms. Sadly, the interjection of this “must be of quality” proviso by the AFC can be seen as a reflection of this dismissive posture.
5.      Since the AFC has intimated that it is looking to form a national unity government, is it saying that the already established APNU, which has attracted more than ten political entities, other organizations and individuals, is not capable of attracting the AFC’s support? If so, why not, is it that the APNU might not be of that “high quality” the AFC speaks of? If the AFC’s political philosophy is grounded in a belief that it is better than any, then one may have to question the every action of the AFC in order to determine whether its political agenda is driven by a sincere quest for good governance or whether its program is rooted in a desire to achieve “opposition political hegemony”. Let me state clearly that, I do believe that political parties have a right to desire to be on top, as the whole nature of politics rest in securing political power. However, I do believe that practical and smart politicians pay attention to reality and understand that political strength is not given to the party by itself but rather that strength rest with the people. Real political leadership is not determined by how much one party thinks it is better than the other, but by the confidence people have come to place in that party, owing to its work in their community, overtime.
6.      Noting the AFC’s comments, within recent times, is it fair to conclude that the AFC does not believe that its brand will be a good fix under the APNU’s tent? Or does the AFC believe it will be in its interest to have the APNU fold up its tent and squeeze under the, contemplated, AFC tent?
7.      Finally, in my list of questions, does the AFC really believe that by now intimating its interest to form some big tent coalition, it will be helping the people of Guyana to vote out the present regime? Does the AFC really believe in such wishful thinking? In politics timing is everything. I am not in any way intimating that the AFC might not be capable of attracting some “high quality” people to walk under its tent. However, my question remains does the AFC seriously believe it can, at this time, organize such a coalition to successfully vote and dethrone the tyrant that parades as government?
8.      What is the AFC’s present objective? Is it to, simply have the APNU’s support to pass the No Confidence Motion, or is to ensure that good governance is returned to the people of Guyana now! If it is the latter, I believe that the AFC needs to do some serious realignment of its political strategy lest its actions aid in the perpetuation of the current cabal on the people of Guyana. The most politically naïve of us would tell you that the chances of the APNU winning the next election is a three-way race is higher than the AFC’s. So, the AFC will have to decide whether its immediate objective is to continue to be, as it says, “the third force” or whether it will be on the side of the people.
From what was reported in the KN article, it appears that the AFC’s current focus is on getting the No Confidence vote passed and possibly looking out for National Elections. I believe those of us who understand the psyche of the PPP would agree that they will have to be dealt with on all fronts. We have seen this regime stall important national decisions in the court system as it tries to buy time to consider its next ploy on the people. It is therefore critical that the people of Guyana use every legitimate avenue available to them to realize good governance and real democracy in Guyana. For this reason, it would be good to know of the AFC’s position on Local Government Elections (LGE). We know that the APNU has embarked on an extensive and rigorous campaign, nationwide, to demand that the people, after fourteen long years, are able to elect their local leaders. Will the AFC support the APNU and the people of Guyana in this noble quest for LGE? The people’s quest for democracy must not be bound up in a single “No Confidence Motion”. The PPP must know that LGE is not a substitute for National Election or vice versa. The people are ready for any and all elections, all are important. It is not Rohee’s call to ask or say which one the people should have, but rather it is the people who dictate what happens in this scenario, and what I have seen thus far indicates to me that the people are ready for all elections, even though the PPP has clearly indicated that it is not ready. The table is turning!
Lurlene Nestor

---

---