AFC Cabinet Ministers did not care to distinguish the party from APNU

IN this column, two weeks ago, I suggested that AFC is declining in support and electoral prospects because, while in office, its senior leaders did not care about the wellbeing of their activists and known supporters, who toiled with the party. Too many comrades were left on the sidelines for too long. This aspect of the leaders’ ‘office occupancy demeanor’ pains my soul to this day.

Since writing that article, some AFC folks called me to say that AFC leaders are livid and have labelled me “ungrateful,” because I had a “good position and a fat salary”. So, why should I make such statements? You see, that’s the thing with the AFC leaders, outside of themselves, they do not view party activists as having made tangible contributions that are deserving of a seat at the table or a participant to the spoils of government. So, all activists who worked in the government during the coalition rule must somehow be eternal genuflecters to the party leadership for their good graces.

I’ve said this in other places and I will repeat it here for emphasis. No one in the AFC can accuse me of being a slouch or one who shrinks when tasked, nor can they accuse me of not taking creative initiatives that brought tangible results. In fact, I dare anyone to reproach my contribution.

I will NEVER allow anyone in the AFC to take me on a guilt trip. I made a solid contribution and just like them, I deserved to share in the spoils of administration. That said, I made those comments to acknowledge the many wounded activists who were left on the sidelines. This is nothing new to those who lead the AFC. It was a constant crusade I waged within the AFC during the entirety of the life of the coalition government, it is not about me.

This past week, I read a statement by former AFC parliamentarian, Trevor Williams, and I suspect that he too is labelled “ungrateful.” How galling it must be for him to criticise the epitome of omniscience and infallibility. In this missive, I want to address two issues from Trevor’s commentary. One, the reduction of the party to a clique of desktop politicians who hide behind press releases and two, the poor handling of the security sector.
Those of us who participated in the once vibrant effervescent party, today bow our head in shame when we consider how the party has declined rapidly. This decline started that very moment the appointees were sworn into office. The pledge to hold the two big parties accountable was abandoned; the lights were too bright, the perks of office meant more than the expectations of the people.

The AFC ministerial corps, chose, in practice, to merge with APNU and supported one misjudgement after another. AFC Cabinet Ministers resisted efforts to distinguish the party from APNU. There was no essential difference between an APNU and an AFC minister. In fact, AFC did not articulate one single comprehensive party driven policy measure for the entire time it occupied government. Since the implementation of the 1980 Constitution and proportional representation, no other party holding the seat of government has ever experienced so much hemorrhage of its senior and recognised membership. As a matter of fact, RDC councilors in almost every region voted with the PPP because of AFC’s inability to make independent commonsense proposals.

When challenged about being indistinguishable from APNU, the leaders often claim, as an example, that they opposed APNU’s parking meter contract. Let me state for the record, that, initially there was no resistance to the parking meter deal from any leader in the AFC. The facts are, that, Sherod Duncan was another of AFC’s neglected MCC councillors, even as Deputy Mayor. He opposed the parking meter proposal from absolute personal instinct. It was NOT party instructions. Duncan knew that that contract could not pass the corruption smell test, so he stood on the right side of history and voted with the PPP to stop the parking meters.

Sherod complained bitterly of a lack of support from the AFC leadership. Then belatedly, after protest of the parking meters took on a life of its own and out of sheer embarrassment, the AFC released a statement saying, “Sherod speaks for us.” No original thought or ideas from a cabal of leaders that had already resigned themselves to dance when APNU plays fiddle.

AFC is now woefully short of activists who can be effective among the people. This crop of AFC leaders could hardly show their face in certain neighbourhoods or reach out to inactive members. So, with dying puffs, the AFC gasps for its last bit of political air, polluted with the lingering stench of its own farts that were released while in office. It is not surprising that AFC’s entire activism is denominated into misdirected and uninformed press releases.

I come to the second issue, the security sector. In the Cummingsburg Accord, AFC negotiated for management of the Ministry of Home Affairs in its existing 2015 state. This meant that APNU could not, on its own, modify or in any way alter the portfolios of the ministry. Yet, without a single word of discussion and without knowledge of the AFC, the ministry was divided and major portfolios removed and placed under the management of APNU.

Not a peep or squeak was heard from the AFC, one of the earliest signs that those who held office were more concerned with holding office than keeping a promise to the people. From that moment, the minister became a defanged figurehead.

All major decisions came down from the presidency regardless of the views of the minister. It was well known that AFC had no comprehensive party plan for the sector. The minister operated on his own and under the dictates of APNU which relegated him one shade above notetaker.

In an effort to seem to be doing something useful, we saw mindless policies such as the ‘2am curfew,’ which inevitably accomplished nothing.