Transparent PNM leadership needed

HEADWINDS in American politics provide a timely warning about the need for greater transparency when it comes to leadership transitions within local political parties.

If politics is about trust, officials need to do a better job when it comes to outlining successorship and creating room for rising talent through facilitating elections to party posts.

Based on recent events, we believe this applies particularly to the PNM.

By this stage much ink has been spilled about developments, or lack thereof, within the ruling party.

The Prime Minister has dismissed all of it, criticising commentators, political operatives and even editorial writers, saying none know what they are talking about.

Yet if there is a lack of knowledge about the nature of PNM decision-making, that is thanks in no small measure to the culture of secrecy which Dr Rowley himself has done little to dispel.

He has repeatedly dropped breadcrumbs about his retirement, as though the citizenry are Hansel and Gretel trying to find their way home. The more he says, the more convoluted things often become – as noted by one PNM official recently.

Such is the atmosphere of innuendo and uncertainty, even Stuart Young, in his capacity as party chairman, told the media on October 19 that there was “some confusion” among PNM membership as to when the tenures of key party officials will expire.

The party’s cancellation of its 51st annual convention was, in many respects, the apogee of its poor accountability. The abrupt move was announced by way of a statement which consisted of one sentence.

No reason was given. Nor was it stated under which authority the decision was made.

It emerged the decision was made by party leadership and then “ratified.”

And this was an event which some have anticipated for years, and in a party with a long history of conventions going back to Dr Eric Williams.

It is the prerogative of a prime minister to determine the timing of a general election, and it is clear the move may relate to Dr Rowley’s thinking and strategy on a national level.

But is that the proper way for internal party matters to be handled?

For a party that often boasts the alternative to it is “chaos,” it does not bode well when the timing of internal polls is down to how a leader feels when he wakes up in the morning.

The UNC has been criticised for similar issues in recent times.

Crucially, cancelling conventions abruptly, while generating tactically valuable surprises, does not inspire confidence that national parties are operating on any basis other than vaps.

We need more solid foundations and timelines on which to anchor future leadership.

And we need fixed general election dates.