–following series of actions, attempts to sideline parliamentarian as party’s chairman in the region
The following is the full text of a letter from a concerned senior member of the PNCR:
“The political rift Between Aubrey Norton and Jermaine Figueira deepens with the latter’s removal from the chairmanship of the party in Region 10 over the weekend.
The internal tensions within political parties often serve as a reflection of broader ideological or personal conflicts.
In the case of the opposition party led by Aubrey Norton, the recent dismissal of Hon. Jermaine Figueira from his role as regional party chairman for Region 10, highlights a growing rift that could have lasting implications for both the party and Figueira’s political career.
Jermaine Figueira, an MP from one of the opposition’s strongest support bases, has been a prominent figure within his region and nationally. Known for his wits boldness and dedication to tangible, on-the-ground work, Figueira has been consistently and actively involved in social upliftment and philantrophic work to aid his community development. Unlike many politicians who remain distant from their constituencies, MP Figueira has consistently engaged with his community, contributing to its growth and providing much-needed support and representation. His commitment has earned him not just political popularity but also a solid reputation as a dedicated and hard working servant of the people.
However, his leadership approach focusing on a different kind of politics and representation for people beyond talk has drawn sharp criticism from some of his party comrades including the leader Mr Norton.
Aubrey Norton’s most recent action to remove M.P Figueira from his position as regional chairman of the party in Region Ten, citing a lack of political engagement, has raised eyebrows.
Norton claims that Figueira’s efforts have been concentrated more on what he termed as “social work” rather than political mobilization, which he argues is the primary responsibility of a party leader in a politically strategic region.
This move, however, seems more than just a managerial or strategic decision. It follows a pattern of actions aimed at weakening Figueira’s influence within the party. From threatening to recall him from Parliament to stripping him of his shadow ministry portfolio and erasing his name from the party’s list during its last congress, Norton’s actions appear targeted at sidelining Figueira, one of his most respected and loved MPs.
The core of this conflict seems to lie in the differing political visions, positions and leadership styles of Norton and Figueira. While Figueira prioritizes community engagement, representing people and engage in social philanthropy work that brings real tangible help and assistance to people, Norton seemingly demands a more aggressive, politically-driven approach from his regional leaders. This divergence in priorities has fueled a series of confrontations, culminating in Figueira’s removal from the chairmanship to the installation of an interim management committee of old comrades, bodies of Mr Norton, some of whom reside overseas to oversee the region’s affairs.
The implications of this ongoing and unnecessary conflict are significant, not just for Figueira but for the party as a whole. MP Figueira, is seen as a rising star with a bright political future, now finds his position under Norton’s leadership increasingly precarious. Norton’s apparent personal campaign against Figueira has cast doubt on the latter’s prospects within the party, leading some to question whether Figueira can continue to thrive under such antagonism.
Furthermore, the removal of Figueira from a key leadership role in a region where he has built strong grassroots support could backfire for Norton. By alienating a popular MP like Figueira, Norton risks creating further internal divisions that could weaken the party’s cohesion and its ability to effectively challenge the ruling government months away from an election.
Additionally, Norton’s decision to replace Figueira with an interim committee suggests a lack of trust in Figueira’s leadership, which could further erode confidence in the party’s internal stability.
At the heart of this situation lies the broader question of what constitutes effective leadership within a political party. Is it the ability to mobilize political support, (which no one else has demonstrated better than figueira,) to win elections, or is it the capacity to serve and uplift communities through tangible, social contributions?
Figueira’s supporters would argue that his community work strengthens his political position by building trust and loyalty among voters. Mr. Norton, however, seems to view political work as separate from, or even more critical than, social engagement, leading to this confrontation.
The conflict between Aubrey Norton and MP Jermaine Figueira reflects deeper issues within the opposition party regarding leadership styles and priorities. As Norton continues to consolidate power, Figueira’s political future appears increasingly uncertain. Whether Figueira can navigate these challenges and retain his influence remains to be seen. What is clear, however, is that this internal struggle could have far-reaching consequences for the party’s future and its ability to maintain strong, unified leadership.”