Having been a founding member of the UNC and its General Secretary for two of its formative years, I believe I should express my views on the current contestants for the post of political leader of the party.
Let me state at the outset, there is no such thing as an ideal candidate and never will be. A judgment will therefore have to be made taking into account the positives and negatives, strengths and weaknesses, historical contribution to and commitment to party and future prospects and potential of each candidate.
In light of the above considerations, I have come to the conclusion that, in the circumstances, Dr Roodal Moonilal is the best choice for political leader.
Dr Moonilal is a young man who has a long future in the politics and therefore has much time to engage in the revitalisation of the party. He has been associated with the party since its inception. He was elected Youth Affairs Officer in 1991 and served in various capacities thereafter including deputy political leader. He thus has extensive experience of the operations of the party and is well grounded in mobilisation exercises.
He also has varied knowledge of government having worked as Director, Policy Monitoring Unit, under PM Panday's tenure and recently as a minister of Government. He has been a parliamentary representative since 2001, has delivered significantly to his constituents and has been an outstanding debater and defender of the party. He is thus well qualified to hold the post of political leader.
There is a perception among some that he comes across as aggressive, boisterous and crass and does not have appeal beyond the ranks of the party. The same was said of Dr Rowley in his contest with Penelope Beckles-Robinson. People, however, can take note and address flawed images and perceptions.
Dr Rowley convincingly won the PNM party leadership because, regardless of national image, it is the membership of the party who vote and decide. Similarly, Dr Moonilal has the opportunity to overcome these unflattering perceptions and smoothen some rough edges. He is, as I said, a young man.
Of his opponents, Kamla Persad-Bissessar should not have contested the leadership elections in the light of her abysmal failure as leader of party and government. She was given a glorious opportunity but carelessly squandered the considerable political capital that accrued to the People's Partnership. Her style of governance was grossly deficient and some of her personal attributes were inimical to the demands of leadership. In a column as long ago as July 28, 2013, I assessed her stewardship and concluded that she was not fit to lead.
Slick-talking, media favourite Vasant Bharath carefully cultivated the public relations image of professionalism and competence but he is not a politician with grassroots appeal. He fought the St Joseph seat with all the trappings of a Minister of Government and lost it. He is thus a loser, is not in the House of Representatives, but has the temerity to aspire to leadership.
It is well to recall that the UNC then in Opposition in the elections of 1995 won the seat from the PNM with Mervyn Assam as the candidate. The party had little money and less media coverage but the candidate fought the battle in the trenches and there was no need for rebranding. Bharath is forever committing himself to rebranding the party. It appears to me that he might be more useful as a consultant in an advertising firm.
Trevor Sudama,
San Fernando.