The PNC should replace Granger if it hopes to survive

Aug 16, 2020 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

If I had to use the personal factor in academic analysis, I would put David Granger in front of Donald Ramotar. The former PPP president during his tenure was very nasty to me. His first act of repression, after he was elected as minority president, was to terminate my UG contract.
In December, Ramotar was sworn in. One month after, my contract was ended at UG. President Granger never directed any animosity towards me. But the personal factor in historical analysis is a distortion of history. I can only disrespect my education if I use subjective factors in a comparative assessment of the presidencies of Ramotar and Granger.
Ramotar was lackluster but he came into power with a rich experience in politics. Ramotar entered politics as an 18-year-old youth growing from GAWU shop steward to representing the PPP for eight years in Czechoslovakia, to being on the board of GuySuCo where he interacted with sugar workers, rising to the leadership of the PPP as its General Secretary. He made it to the presidency.
He was not charismatic and lived in the shadow of his dynamic predecessor, Bharrat Jagdeo. But his long praxis enabled him to gel with the ordinary folks. He was assured of his political self. In terms of the essential nature of politics and what is required of a leader, Ramotar and Granger cannot be compared; Ramotar is way ahead of him.
Any president that cannot ground with the masses and cannot relate to the media in a West Indian society is destined to fail and Granger failed. It is unbelievable that he has learnt nothing from his unsuccessful presidency. He will not serve the PNC successfully if made Opposition Leader. Mr. Granger is simply not made for politics.
Here now is an unlearned Granger. When asked by the media if he is returning to parliament, an unchanging Granger remarked: “That is a decision for my party. I’m a servant of my party and the party has not contemplated that…When the party makes that determination, it will be announced.”
That is a silly answer that no politician anywhere else will offer for one fundamental reason – the leader is the apex of the party and its most important decision-maker. Whatever is the party’s outcome, the leader has to explicitly tell his/her party what is, his/her decision as to his/her continuation at the helm. Granger has an obligation to over 200,000 PNC voters and the PNC to tell them if he would want to return as Opposition Leader then add a commonsensical caveat – it is up to my party to decide.
When a shortlist appeared for Joe Biden’s vice-presidential choice, each lady told the press that she thinks she has the qualities to serve as vice president. Granger should be asked and pressed by a relentless Guyanese media to explain if he thinks he can serve as a competent Opposition leader.
If any sane party that lost an election in a country that soon will have a huge income from oil, there will be introspections, reflections, self-criticisms, hard thinking and hard choices. It doesn’t seem the PNC has those qualities to travel down those logical pathways. It has just reaffirmed its support for its failed leader. Granger has lost the presidency of a country that will be taking off into a large horizon.
Granger has created a situation where unless the incumbent will suffer tsunamic implosions, then it will use a buoyant economy to capture votes, which will naturally come its way. This means Guyana can see decades of PPP victories. If the PNC has any hope of surviving and expanding and accept the possibility of a return to power, it cannot be under its current, mediocre leader.
Granger failed as leader of the PNC. He failed as president. The PNC ought not to continue with his hierarchical position. In Guyana, mad politicians abound. And mad people are in the APNU+AFC. Just imagine Khemraj Ramjattan confronted two Guyanese icons – Cheddi and Janet Jagan – and called into question their leadership qualities when he was a PPP executive. Raphael Trotman and Aubrey Norton tried to topple another icon – Desmond Hoyte. Vincent Alexander and Norton tried to oust Robert Corbin. Rupert Roopnaraine and Clive Thomas attempted to overthrow another giant – Forbes Burnham. David Hinds and Tacuma Ogunseye went to jail for using violence to remove Burnham.
Now look today who is the leader of all these names mentioned here – a man devoid of any leadership qualities – David Granger. I end with one of my favourite French saying as I have done several times before. “God is dead, Marx is dead, and I’m not feeling too well myself.”
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---