RAPHAEL TROTMAN,  leader of the Alliance  For  Change party and its prime ministerial candidate in the recently held national  elections, is reported in the Kaieteur News  of 7.1.12  as  indicating that he will not be present in the tenth Parliament, when that assembly convenes. If this is indeed true, then it will be the second instance of such action on the part of this very genial politician, who had withdrawn from House proceedings in the latter stages of the last National Assembly. On that occasion, he had cited ‘”the combative, competitive, and confrontational style of governance,” as among the reasons for his withdrawal.
Though no stated, direct reason can be gleaned from KN’s report, it can be deduced that his decision may have been influenced by the recently failed negotiations between his party and APNU to agree on a nominee for Speaker of the House.
From all that  has been observed from the gridlocked result of the negotiations  between the two opposition parties, it was evident that consensus, that necessary  and pivotal  element in this current constitutional scenario, was not at the centre of  the pathway(s) chosen, in discussions. Trotman must have been greatly disappointed by such an absence.
But, could his reported announcement of intended withdrawal be also linked to the fact, that his name, which was given as a possible nominee, may have also been rejected?  Did he receive the full support of his party, given that much publicised row between himself and   colleague, Khemraj Ramjattan over the party’s presidential nomination? Whatever the reason(s), such an announcement is indeed very surprising and significant for all that it portends.
Given the delicate  parliamentary balance that will exist in the imminent Parliament, this would have been  ideal for  Trotman, whose  reputation as a balanced and consensually driven politician would have surely been welcomed and influential in getting the nation’s business done. Is it a case, perhaps, of his not wanting to be associated with the precipitous challenges and possible failures of what the new dispensation may hold?
But such is the nature of politics–filled with possibilities and fraught with uncertainties, depending on the landscape and issue(s) therein, involved. It is the politician who must rise to the occasion with his/her particular understanding and vision and with fervent passion and eloquence; with the national good only in mind, represent what is right.
This writer is of the opinion, that this new dispensation offers a unique opportunity  for the very negative cultures, which this AFC  leader highlighted , to gradually be reduced and be replaced  by “forgiving and reconciling” politics, with each member contributing together, not for their respective  self glorification and aggrandisement, but for the onward, progressive transformation of the nation.
Therefore, as a senior leader in his own right, Trotman’s act of opting out can only be described as unfortunate, and perhaps selfish, since he would be missing a golden opportunity to realise the goals, he lamented, that are missing.