-Duncan says; indirectly takes jabs at opponent ahead of AFC’s national conference

AS the Alliance For Change (AFC) continues its attempt to cling onto political existence, the party’s dwindling membership has started its internal ‘mud-slinging’ ahead of the national conference.

This time, Opposition Member of Parliament (MP), Sherod Duncan, has indirectly taken some jabs at his opponent, Attorney-at-Law and former AFC Chairman, Nigel Hughes.

Duncan stated that persons cannot resurrect and participate only when the party has its national conference. He emphasised need for consistency.

The current AFC General Secretary, during an online broadcast titled ‘Road to AFC National Conference 2024’, noted: “I want to see us elect people that have this party at heart. I’ve seen some people only come live around national conference time.”

He said that he would like persons to offer themselves up to leadership as long as they can commit themselves to being active members and do not only become visible during party’s national conference.

Further, persons must be committed to building the party not just in areas that have the “limelight,” he added.

Duncan then went on to say: “Nobody should be able to come and pay $4,800 and walk away with a whole political party.”

Earlier this month, the party held its Nomination Day and AFC Executive Member and MP, David Patterson, Hughes and Duncan were nominated for the leadership position.

However, Patterson, in a joint statement with Hughes, declined the nomination and has since thrown his full support behind the attorney.
Referring to him as the “best candidate,” Patterson had contended that Hughes is the perfect choice to lead the AFC.

However, while the ‘mud-slinging’ has not been as loud as their parliamentarian spouse, the A partnership for National Unity (APNU/PNC), there have been attempts within the AFC to discredit those who are vying for the top-ranking positions.

Notably, during the party’s Nomination Day proceedings, the AFC’s Railway Line, Kitty, Georgetown headquarters appeared deserted. The party members’ minimal attendance on what was expected to be a well-attended event was obvious.

Only recently, the AFC attempted to recreate its image from that of its former coalition party, APNU/PNC; however, People’s Progressive Party (PPP) General Secretary, Bharrat Jagdeo, flagged the party for “lack of credibility” and “poor” track record.

“The AFC has long lost credibility,” the PPP General Secretary said, adding that although the party promised to change Guyana’s political sphere, its brief stint in office proved otherwise. The AFC turned out to be the most unprincipled set of leaders we’ve ever seen… They were more vocal than some PNC persons in trying to rig the elections,” Jagdeo said.

The people, in 2020, went to the polls and peacefully gave a mandate to the PPP/C to govern.

Guyanese, after casting their votes, had to endure a five-month wait for the results of the general and regional elections as they witnessed suspicious and questionable acts and a slew of legal challenges.

During this time, the patience of the electorate was tested, as electors observed what was described as attempts by the then APNU+AFC administration to rip the democratic fabric of the nation, with “delay tactics” which were openly criticised by a wide section of society.

It was only after the legal challenges and international intervention that a national recount of all votes cast was convened and the figures showed that the PPP/C received 233,336 votes, while the APNU+AFC coalition got 217,920 votes.