Now Keith Rowley, with political egg on his face, is trying to shoot the messenger for expressing the views of many within the party and warning of the consequences of an ill-advised motion of no confidence that, as predicted, backfired on Rowley and made the People’s National Movement (PNM) look bad.
And Rowley is attempting the same cloak and dagger kind of assassination that he used to take down Patrick Manning. He is getting PNM members to stage a coup and take away Lee Sing’s job as Mayor of Port of Spain.
Of course he is distancing himself from what is happening, saying only that he would let the party decide if it wants to bring disciplinary charges against Lee Sing.
However he has made it clear that Lee Sing’s intervention was not welcome. “No general likes to know that...the first time the enemy fires his salvo, you turn tail and start firing on your own troops. No general likes that,” Rowley told reporters on Monday.
It is clear that Rowley is not going to tolerate dissent within the PNM, never mind that he talks about democracy.
For years he fought like a worm in a guava to get Manning out of the way until he went too far and challenged Calder Hart. Manning kicked him out and the quiet fight became an epic public conflict.
Rowley eventually had his revenge when he openly campaigned against his leader in the 2010 general election while telling the PNM faithful not to desert the PNM ship.
Once the election was over he and his loyalists ejected Manning from the leadership and from the PNM headquarters. He then made sure all challengers were moved out of the way so he could inherit the party, something he desperately craved.
In the nearly two years since the dramatic turn of events, Rowley has disappointed his party and those outside who had become fed up of Manning and had hoped that Rowley would add value to the party and rebuild it as the dominant institution it once was.
He did neither. He lacks the ability to control and lead his small Parliamentary caucus. And instead of being a responsible opposition leader, he is getting a reputation as a rabble-rouser, often raising issues without proper research. His racist accusations against Attorney General Anand Ramlogan stand out as one of the more glaring episodes of a Rowley misstep.
Rowley has also failed to take the PNM forward into the 21st century, keeping it right where it was back in 1956 – a single ethnically based political organisation that keeps the society polarized.
At the same time he continues to find fault with the highly successful experiment in democracy that has propelled Kamla and her partnership into office as a truly representative organisation of the people.
Now that Lee Sing is seeing beyond tomorrow and suggesting that the party become more democratic and responsible, he has become a target. That says a lot about Rowley and his leadership.
I have known Lee Sing for more than 30 years and I can say one thing about him that those who know him will corroborate – he is dedicated to his party and puts party ahead of individuals.
That is why when Manning had run his course he had no difficulty with bidding his friend farewell.
The party’s movers and shakers are not pleased with Rowley and neither are they happy with the conflicts and confrontations that have been hurting the party long before the 2010 election.
After two years, they know that Rowley is not going to take them back to government. And that has Rowley on the defensive, attacking every shadow that crosses his path.
Rowley is an angry man. Anger is a dangerous thing; it creates fear and instability and erodes freedom because it causes people to clam up and not speak out. It is a fatal attribute of a weak leader whose selfish tantrums cause damage instead of solving problems.
Rowley’s dilemma is how to take charge while standing in a political mine field that he helped create.
In the nearly two years since the dramatic turn of events, Rowley has disappointed his party and those outside who had become fed up of Manning and had hoped that Rowley would add value to the party and rebuild it as the dominant institution it once was.
He did neither. He lacks the ability to control and lead his small Parliamentary caucus. And instead of being a responsible opposition leader, he is getting a reputation as a rabble-rouser, often raising issues without proper research. His racist accusations against Attorney General Anand Ramlogan stand out as one of the more glaring episodes of a Rowley misstep.
Rowley has also failed to take the PNM forward into the 21st century, keeping it right where it was back in 1956 – a single ethnically based political organisation that keeps the society polarized.
At the same time he continues to find fault with the highly successful experiment in democracy that has propelled Kamla and her partnership into office as a truly representative organisation of the people.
Now that Lee Sing is seeing beyond tomorrow and suggesting that the party become more democratic and responsible, he has become a target. That says a lot about Rowley and his leadership.
I have known Lee Sing for more than 30 years and I can say one thing about him that those who know him will corroborate – he is dedicated to his party and puts party ahead of individuals.
That is why when Manning had run his course he had no difficulty with bidding his friend farewell.
The party’s movers and shakers are not pleased with Rowley and neither are they happy with the conflicts and confrontations that have been hurting the party long before the 2010 election.
After two years, they know that Rowley is not going to take them back to government. And that has Rowley on the defensive, attacking every shadow that crosses his path.
Rowley is an angry man. Anger is a dangerous thing; it creates fear and instability and erodes freedom because it causes people to clam up and not speak out. It is a fatal attribute of a weak leader whose selfish tantrums cause damage instead of solving problems.
Rowley’s dilemma is how to take charge while standing in a political mine field that he helped create.
Sooner, rather than later, the PNM would have to decide if it wants to keep Rowley and remain where it is or move into the 21 century with a leader who is willing to build a truly national party and get back to government.
Jai Parasram | Toronto 06 March 2012
No comments:
Post a Comment