by Adrian Gibson
First appeared in The Tribune under the byline, Young Man's View here…
If both the FNM and the DNA are in existence by the next general election, both of those parties will be hurt by a three-way race. As it stands, there appears to be quite a bit of dissent within the Free National Movement, with persons expressing concerns ranging from the leadership to the party’s noncohesiveness to grumblings about an impending convention and when that will be held to issues relating to funding and so on. No doubt, it appears that the governing party—though many have expressed disapproval of their governance thus far—must feel comfortable to continue to slovenly govern in an environment where the Opposition forces are disjointed, fighting and at each other’s throats. Indeed, the governing party must view the FNM as an entity that must resolve its issues and get its house in order whilst seeing the DNA as merely an entrenched spoiler. In the national interest—much like was done in Trinidad and Tobago years ago—the Opposition forces have to resolve whatever challenges prevent them from speaking in a more united voice. I watched a video featuring DNA leader Branville McCartney and he emphatically rejected whomever it was in the FNM that reached out to him. Certainly, the leadership of the FNM and the DNA must find amicable grounds where all are comfortable and can negotiate from a point of reason and respect if either of those parties hope to merge with the other or form a coalition force to defeat the PLP in 2017.
Relative to the senatorial appointment of Michael Pintard, I felt that the FNM could have made a better choice. I have nothing at all against Michael. I think he has a reasonably sound educational background and I appreciate his skills as a playwright and his accomplishments on the political front back in his COB days. However, I am not particularly impressed by his political acumen on the national stage.
Over the last two years or so, one could ask where has Michael Pintard been since I have not seen him in the trenches fighting the FNM’s causes and I have only seen his blip on the political radar when he has a politically-themed show to promote (and don’t get me wrong, those shows are good and he knows what I think of his shows). But, I’m just honest……and as I’ve stated to senior members of that party, he would not have been my first choice to replace John Bostwick.
I understand that the FNM intends to change its senators at the two-and-a-half year mark and, frankly, I think that it would be a travesty if persons such as Dr Duane Sands and Pakeisha Parker-Edgecombe—two of the brightest sparks in the party—are not appointed to the senate at that time. I think it is a noble plan of the FNM’s leader to give as many people as much exposure as he possibly could as it would build cohesion and bridge the gap between rivals and demonstrate that he truly believes in a new generation of leaders as opposed to those other fellas who say that they believe in this new generation of leaders but are really only giving lip service.
