WHEN the Alliance For Change (AFC) came on the scene back in 2006, the people who supported it had hopes and nurtured dreams that in addition to the PPP and PNC, there would be a credible third party. Although the party did not do nearly as well in the last election, it at least managed to get into parliament.
Today, the AFC is breaking up and breaking up fast. In  its wake it will leave a field of broken dreams. The party has gone downhill for a number of reasons, the most important of which are noted below.
Firstly, the AFC has never made good use of its presence in parliament. Everyone knows that the party did not go to parliament fully prepared, at least on a regular basis. On many occasions the AFC had absolutely nothing to say in legislative body. This situation should have been corrected a long time ago. Instead, senior members of the AFC made huge blunders in parliament and had to apologise.
Secondly, despite five years in business, the AFC failed to broaden out its appeal. Two things can account for this. Firstly, the AFC relied too much on press statements instead of spending the time to build a wider network on the ground. Incidentally, the PPP is brilliantly organized on the ground. Press statements can be useful, but they will not mobilize new party recruits. The other problem is that the AFC has relied way too much on the diaspora for both sustenance of spirit and material support. Moreover, there has been too much reliance on friends and relatives.
Thirdly, the AFC has flipped-flopped several times regarding its relationship with the PNC. This is a big mistake because the PNCR is a credible force in the country. Flip-flopping with the WPA has no consequence because that party cannot get more than half of one percent of the votes, and this is an optimistic estimate.
Fourthly, the AFC demonstrated unfathomable naïveté by adopting the romantic notion of a rotating leadership. This principle was the darling of the WPA, a party that squandered all the good work done under the leadership of Walter Rodney. Despite every attempt to pretend that all the ducks were in a row on this subject, time and again, the top leaders showed their hands. It was never good. They all wanted to be the top dog.
Fifth and finally, it should come as no surprise that Mr. Trotman has effectively resigned from the AFC. He was truly in a Catch 22. If he were to be faithful to his party he should have become the prime ministerial candidate, i.e., Ramjattan’s running mate. But if he were to fulfill his own political ambition, then he would have to sacrifice his party. He took the second option and by so doing may have ‘given back’ his constituency to the PNC. Is this part of the Hartley Plan?