I write this article with the passion of my conviction and I expect dissent from those to whom it is not expedient. Nevertheless, I do not anticipate anything deleterious to my tenure as a budding member of the PNM arising from it, since I am sure that the party welcomes constructive and robust criticism for its improvement. The fact that the PNM is perhaps at its lowest point in recent history is no secret to anyone. Undoubtedly, the party is experiencing record highs of desertion, abandonment and rejection by known PNM affiliates, supporters, and activists and, might I add, with good reason.
It is clear to all that our current leader's lack of ingenuity and crossover appeal is a major causative factor of this predicament. Indeed, the task of succeeding the phenomenal Patrick Manning is not as elementary as Dr Rowley would have had us believe in the months preceding May 2010. It is needless to assert that his appointment was a regressive step. Having contributed substantially to the badly lost general election, one must have doubted his suitability for the role of stewardship in the party in the first place. After his appalling and staggering escapade, that did irreversible damage to the party's foundation, where has he found the temerity to now act as saviour?
Even if that hurdle was overcome, having been devastatingly beaten at the local government elections as his first order of business was an alarming indication of what was to follow. This alone constitutes an untenable situation for any leader, but this situation gets materially worse. The obtrusive and glaring distinctions between Rowley and Manning cannot be disregarded or swept under the rug. Regardless of one's political preferences, and notwithstanding the man's alleged transgressions, Manning is a difficult individual to replace. He is a fount of political experience, possesses an unprecedented acumen for the politics, is a respectable diplomat by nature and is able to manoeuvre and navigate through treacherous terrain with elegance and sturdy hands. Every single prediction made by him during the election campaign has come to pass.
Members of the PNM must be asking in their own minds whether the appointment of Rowley was a prudent decision, and the only people who appear to answer in the affirmative are known friends, advocates or admirers of the individual. How painful it must feel for Rowley to assume the position of leadership knowing that his best efforts can never stand up to the legacy left by his predecessor.
It is my view that Rowley is undoubtedly a fierce politician and a valiant debater, but it does not follow that he has the requisite attributes of a modern and dynamic leader. Simply put, whether we accept it now or later, the PNM will never win a general election under his leadership.
He is just unable to appeal to a populace as diverse and dynamic as ours. Let us start by facing the facts. It was clear to me that his fitness for the task was in question from the date that Manning resigned as leader. I recall the outrageous display of some hooligans at Balisier House. I remember the tremendous disappointment that I felt to see a leader, who has delivered the party from the verge of extinction, become the subject of vitriol, hatred and contrived, mob-like behaviour. The sarcastic smirks of some of those present have not yet left my mind. As though this was the dawn of a new paradigm of politics. One where we encourage further and promote such extremities of spite and disrespect whether actively or by acquiescence.
A real leader would have immediately intervened to put this right. A dignified leader would have stood on principle and immediately reprimanded those responsible. A modern leader would have had the political maturity to denounce such indiscretions with impelling force. A dynamic leader would have took that opportunity to declare that, regardless of the divergence of political philosophies and indeed the former leader's mistakes, he ought to leave with the accolades of which he is deserving. Rowley sat there quietly and failed to intercede. He missed that golden opportunity to distinguish and put himself a cut above the rest. I feel impelled to state that my support for the party is unwavering and non-negotiable. I will not falter for one moment in my belief that the PNM is the only political entity in our country with a history, tradition and foundation worth mentioning.
By the same token, though, it is disturbing and unsettling to know that it has come to a place where the party's most scrupulous minds are not brandished or utilised for its advancement. It is my view that Christine Kangaloo is the most apt and fitting for the role of leadership. She can easily bridge the gap between the diplomat and the working class and I need not say that she is well poised for a spirited battle against our current Prime Minister. Dr Amery Browne can also be nurtured, tweaked and moulded into our future leader as the raw materials are there and there are others. Rowley is not the answer. Of that I'm sure.
Gideon Mc Master
Via e-mail