Dear Editor,

THE motions of no confidence against the leader of the PNCR and the Coalition, Mr. David Granger, are likely to backfire in a big and ugly way, because those who have tabled the motions and are seeking to run for office are part of the failings and failed leadership of the party. It is not only the leader who has failed, but also the entire leadership; they must bear collective responsibility for the mess they have all created, and for what they put this country through for months. Therefore, none among them have any moral standing to table those motions.

The entire Central Executive Committee must go; they have failed the people. They attempted to rig and then put the country through five months of uncertainty. It cannot be right for them to now gang up against one man, when, in fact, they are the problem. Now they appear like knights in shining armour, pretending to want to save the party from the path of destruction they set it upon. They should resign en bloc; the entire pack should go.

In any case, what gives those who are challenging Mr. Granger for leadership the idea that they are better than he, or can actually do a better job than he did over the last decade? They must tell the people of this country. And if Granger is removed, which one of those challenging him can take the place of leadership. We have seen how some of them performed in ministerial positions: Miserably poor. Others are indisciplined.

The current Party Chairman has shown a pattern of mistakes, yet they want Guyanese to show confidence in their unknown abilities to lead a formidable opposition, and work with the government in a way that would benefit all. I believe that they are basically delusionary.
Finally, any move by individual aspirants of leadership to oust Granger that is not in keeping with the party’s Constitution will be discredited, fail and blow right back in the faces of those who are involved. More importantly, they should tell us what does the party’s Constitution say about such matters of no-confidence motions, and public vilification of the leader.

Yours sincerely,

Anthony Subner