Not a Good week for the NDP

(VP’s Note: I was writing an interminably long blog about people who need to decide ASAP if they are gonna jump headlong into active Vincy politics or continue to dip their big toe in the water. (Yes Jomo, Louise, Sehorn, Kenton, Camilo, Grant, Adonal, Ellsworth, Rochelle, Ronnie, Marlon, Hans, Fitz, Allan, Nichola et al – I’m talking to you!)

The blog was so damn long and boring that it began to bore me. Now, If I’m boring myself – and I’m my biggest fan – what’s it gonna do to you, my two faithful readers?

Of course, having more or less written it, I’m still gonna inflict it upon you. And no, I’m not gonna edit it. That’s what journalists do, not bloggers. SVG Epiphany told me to blog to my heart’s content.

However, I won’t test your patience just yet. Consider this the heavy appetizer before the heaping serving of overcooked meat & potatoes:)

Not a Good week for the NDP

Whenever a political party loses an election, it naturally goes through some soul searching, some upheaval, and some general unpleasantness. That unpleasantness increases exponentially if the political party truly believes that it should have won the election, as is the case with the NDP.

So in that sense, the fact that the NDP hasn’t had the best week is completely expected and understandable. And no one is gonna remember this bad week years from now when the next elections are called. In fact, if you’re gonna have bad weeks, its probably better to get them out of the way ASAP, rather than having them two weeks before election day (as was also the case with the NDP).

That being said, no amount of caveats or rationalisations can disguise one cold hard fact: This was an awful week for the NDP. Just how awful can be summed up in three words: Linton, Leacock and Arnhim.

Let’s take a look at the newspapers, shall we?



LINTON

I’ve discussed this before. Linton has taken to the news media to decry the fact that he was not consulted on the NDP’s choice of senators. He has told us that he, Linton, indicated his own willingness to serve as a senator.

Let’s see his quotes from the 30th December Vincentian, shall we?:

He explained that there is a Central Committee and an Executive within the NDP and that he was of the view that both Committees “really ought to have been consulted” because the NDP was a party in the House of Parliament.

Dr Lewis lamented, “In my capacity as Chairman, I am very disappointed that I have never had the privilege of knowing who those senators are until they have been announced in the public… so I know when the public knows.”

An irate Lewis blasted, “There was never any consultation of the discussion or anything of that nature. That I don’t consider a very good thing because you speak about meritocracy and democracy, but it must be practised. Charity begins at home and very often we refuse to make statements because we want to keep unity in the party, but sometimes it reaches to a stage where we need to speak out against certain things.”

“There is an eerie silence and some discussions on the issue in and around Kingstown. I was told that a letter was written to the Leader of Opposition, so people are totally disgruntled. If not about the persons selected as senators, by the decision on the matter. By the fact that there hasn’t been any collective agreement or discussion on the matter. That doesn’t all go well for democracy in our country.”

OK, OK. I know that 75% of this grumbling is because Arnhim didn’t make Linton a senator. If that had happened, Linton’s would have been happy and silent, even if no one was consulted. But when the “irate” Chairman of the NDP is blasting the President of the NDP as autocratic, non-democratic and non-transparent, its not gonna be a good week for your party.



LEACOCK

The 4th January issue of the Searchlight carried an article inexplicably headlined “’I remain faithful’: Leacock says his loyalty lies with Eustace as leader.” I’ve gotta think that that was a sarcastic headline, because lets take a look at what “the major” actually had to say (I’ve added some helpful emphasis to make my obvious point more so):

“AS WE SPEAK AT THIS TIME, I still remain faithful to Mr. Eustace’s leadership and I still hold firm to the view THAT HE WHO MUST LEAD MUST DEMONSTRATE AN ABILITY TO FOLLOW”

“IF THE OCCASION ARISES WHERE I MUST LEAD THE NEW DEMOCRATIC PARTY, I would ideally want that to be done with the blessings of not just the constitution of the New Democratic Party, but the support of Mr. Eustace.”

“I HEAR THE CALLS FROM THE PUBLIC, I hear the calls from the institutions, and I hear the calls regionally and internationally. But I still hold the view AT THE MOMENT, that we don’t need to be fratricidal or suicidal for that matter and the best thing is to continue to work in union with Mr. Eustace AT THIS TIME and politics will take its course.”

OhhhKayyy then. Over the course of a mere four sentences, “the major” needed two “at this times” and one “at the moment” to qualify his support of Eustace! Followed by his acknowledgement of calls from the public and institutions around the world for Eustace to go. Followed by him entertaining the thought of leading the party, WITH EUSTACE’S SUPPORT. Preceded by him and citing his own ‘faithfulness’ as one of his qualifications for leadership.

(Lets not forget Leacock’s own churlish and childish display of self promotion during the ceremonial opening of Parliament. That didn’t improve the NDP’s week any)

Wow. So the Chairman of the party and its First Vice President, who’s also an MP, are  publicly out for your head, Brother Arnhim. What do you have to say for yourself?



ARNHIM

Lets take a trip down memory lane. All the way back to… three weeks ago. The election has just ended, and the ULP has squeaked home with a narrow 8-7 victory.

Or has it?

Arnhim Eustace takes to the airwaves with a terse but crystal-clear message: The ULP cheated, we can prove it, and we will prove it in court.

“NDP CRIES FOUL: Eustace: We will not accept this election result” screamed the 17th December Searchlight

“EUSTACE: ‘2010 ELECTIONS NOT FAIR’” blared the Vincentian of the same week

“UNFAIR ELECTIONS ROB VINCENTIANS OF A BRIGHTER FUTURE, SAYS EUSTACE” chimed in The News.

Eustace had “picked up the scent of cheating,” he said. “We will not accept these election results.”

Specifically, Arnhim pledged: “We will, in addition to the proposed criminal proceedings, file elections petitions challenging the return of identified members of the Parliament on the grounds of fraud, breach of the Representation of the People Act and the Election Laws of this country.”

OK. Election petitions. Good move. Nobody likes cheating.

Imagine my surprise, then, to open this week’s Searchlight to see this headline: “No challenge to December 13 Election results.” Imagine my shock to see  Allan Cruickshank, General Secretary of the NDP, confirming that there would be no election petitions. In fact, said Cruickshank, “any matters that will be dealt with now are CIVIL matters.” What?? No election petitions, and no criminal proceedings either?? Just civil matters?? Shock!! Horror!!

According to this week’s Searchlight, the deadline for filing election petitions has already elapsed. According the Organisation of American States, which sent an observer mission to SVG “the election was conducted with minimal incidents and complied with international standards for inclusiveness and transparency.”

Sir James, who trusts not even God in electoral matters, has been deafeningly silent.

So… OK… wait… hold on: After swearing blind that the ULP teef the election, and that he would bring election petitions and legal hellfire to challenge ULP parliamentarians, Arnhim just show up in Parliament like nothing happen and settle down quietly for another slog on the opposition benches? WTF?!? I wanna see the petitions!!

If no petitions, can we get an apology? To the nation? To the electorate? To the ULP? To me, personally, for the 12 minutes of my life that I wasted listening to your sore loser sour grapes?

See, everyone is talking about how Gonsalves needs to be a statesman, and his own Trumanesque views on that matter. But what about Arnhim?

Newsflash: Arnhim Eustace has yet to concede the election to the ULP.

No, not THIS election. The 2005 Election!! Seriously. He made the same claims of cheating, promised election petitions, and they never materialised. From 2005-2010, Eustace NEVER formally conceded the election.

Now, 2010, same khaki pants.

Two successive elections. Both declared clean by international observers. Both with no election petitions filed in accordance with the law. Yet both not conceded by the defeated opposition leader. What adjective do you use to describe that behaviour? Statesmanlike? Kinder and Gentler? Defender of Democracy? Or just plain dumb?

When your blood is in the water, your own angry/ambitious party apparatchiks are turning on you, and you’re struggling to hang on; you need to wrap yourself in the warm, protective bosom of the man on the street. You do this by appearing to be a man of your word. Honourable. Beyond reproach. Above pettiness.

If you don’t do this, the man on the street keeps his bosoms to himself, and leaves you to your fate at the hands of the aforementioned apparatchiks.

Way to go, Arnhim. Literally.

It’s beyond, Arnhim, though. Bitter is not a good look for the NDP at this point in time. Plus, if they (1) haven’t learned from their empty 2005 bombast and (2) can’t keep their promise to “defend our democracy” with the appropriate legal action, how can the electorate take them seriously to deliver on any other promises?

Cocoa, anyone?