What do we make of the confluence of political events in the country: mere fluidity in the off season or dangerous vacuum waiting to be filled by an opportunistic charlatan? Is there cause to worry: for ourselves, our children, our grandchildren? These troubling concerns intensify as July 29 draws near and we speculate about the likely impact on future political happenings. "Allegations" is variously defined as: assertions made with little or no proof; assertions made by a party in a legal proceeding, which the party then undertakes to prove; statements offered as pleas, excuses, or justifications.
In recent history, we adjudicated on allegations made against two former prime ministers. This we did, not awaiting the outcome of legal proceedings undertaken, intended or merely threatened. People felt sufficiently persuaded to take action; either because of inherent impatience or lack of trust in the "system." In the event, erstwhile powerful leaders were made to pay the ultimate political price for their alleged misdeeds.In this regard, the present Prime Minister is also being assessed.Fast forward to July 2013! A virtual avalanche of allegations embroils the political leader, and prime ministerial aspirant, of the newly formed ILP.Emboldened by an outpouring of support, he confidently plots a route to high office via the constituency of Chaguanas West. Hubris and self-delusion, instead of objective self-assessment, characterise the campaign: personal rebranding is grounded in messianic appeal.There is deafening silence about the attributes of character, competence, integrity, vision and morality as indispensable requirements for leadership and public office. Vaulting ambition drives single-minded pursuit of the desired end.
In the current context, the outcome of July 29 holds much more significance for the country than the constituency.
However, overarching issues about suitability and criteria for office must be of equal concern to constituents. In light of this and bearing in mind the choices on offer, how then do we interpret the results of polls purporting to predict an ILP victory? There is discomfiture that they evidence the ease with which we compromise on principles and values and are satisfied to "eat a food." There is also alarm that they portend creation of a platform for a possible bid by a seriously flawed candidate for the highest political office in the land. Neither prospect is reassuring.Given the unwillingness to compromise in our appraisal of past and present prime ministers, might we be accused of holding them to higher standards in this matter of allegations than apply to an aspirant?In matters of principles and values, we should be consistent. The convenience of "different strokes for different folks" is no more than moral turpitude.
Winston R Rudder
Petit Valley