Dear Editor,
I read with great interest the statement issued by a few members of the Central Executive Committee CEC of the People’s National Congress Reform PNCR, expressing “heartfelt appreciation” for the leadership of Mr. Aubrey C. Norton. While every leader deserves recognition for years of service, such praise must be grounded in measurable achievements rather than political loyalty or carefully crafted rhetoric.
Leadership is not measured by longevity or eloquent tributes. It is measured by performance, vision, unity, organisational strength, respect for the Party’s Constitution, and electoral success. By these standards, Mr. Norton’s leadership has fallen significantly short.
The statement speaks glowingly of resilience, sacrifice and commitment, yet conveniently ignores the stark realities confronting the Party today. Rather than strengthening the PNCR, many of its organisational structures have steadily disintegrated under Mr. Norton’s leadership. Across Guyana, the Party’s machinery has weakened considerably, leaving many members questioning whether the organisation still possesses the capacity to effectively mobilise its supporters and function as a credible national political movement.
Perhaps the greatest failure has been Mr. Norton’s inability to unite the Party. Instead of bringing together the diverse talents and experience within the PNCR, the Party has become increasingly fragmented. Long-serving members have been marginalised, respected party officials have resigned, and confidence in the leadership has steadily eroded. A divided party cannot inspire confidence among the electorate.
The membership also deserves honest answers regarding the state of the Party’s regional structures. Which Regional Executive Committees are currently functional? Following the resignations of Mr. Prince Holder, Mr. Jermaine Figueira and Mr. Glifford Marshall, all of whom served as Chairpersons of Regional Committees and have since joined the People’s Progressive Party/Civic PPP/C, what measures have been taken to restore effective leadership within those regions? Silence on these issues only deepens concerns about the Party’s organisational health.
Equally troubling is the apparent failure to convene Regional Conferences over the past four years. If this is indeed the case, it represents a clear departure from the requirements of the Party’s Constitution. Internal democracy cannot flourish when constitutional provisions are ignored. A Party that seeks to defend constitutional governance nationally must first demonstrate respect for its own governing rules.
Similarly, the failure to convene General Council meetings, long regarded as a constitutional requirement and an essential mechanism for consultation, accountability and policy direction, has further weakened the Party’s internal democracy. General Council meetings provide an opportunity for representatives across the country to engage the leadership, assess the Party’s progress, and contribute meaningfully to its direction. Their absence has deprived members of an important forum through which the leadership can be held accountable and the Party kept united.
Another significant concern is the breakdown in communication between the Central Executive Committee and the Party’s groups and membership throughout the country. Effective leadership requires consistent engagement, timely dissemination of information, and meaningful consultation. Instead, many groups have been left disconnected from the affairs of the Party, receiving little communication regarding decisions, organisational developments, policy positions or strategic direction. Such prolonged disengagement inevitably weakens morale, reduces activism, and erodes confidence in the leadership.
Strong political organisations are built on communication, transparency and active participation. Members must feel informed, valued and connected to the Party they serve. Unfortunately, many dedicated members have been left uncertain about the Party’s direction and excluded from meaningful participation in its affairs.
The only arm still standing is that of the Women’s Arm under the leadership of Ms. Volda Lawrence. The most important arm, the one meant to birth future leaders, the GYSM, is completely dead under Norton, who promised to reenergise the once vibrant body. Instead of renewal, it appears the PNCR has now become a cultist organisation, where some are propping up a weak and failed leader, trying to repackage him and sell him to the people of Guyana. These people’s ears are not to the ground. The APNU under Norton’s leadership was rejected, and it will be rejected further if Norton remains at the helm of the Party.
It is time the membership calls on him to GO. Where is Ms. Volda Lawrence, Christopher Jones, Joseph Harmon, Roysdale Forde, Winston Felix, Annette Ferguson, and others? They must lead the way!
Moreover, despite repeated promises of renewal, the PNCR has failed to broaden its appeal or present itself as a credible alternative government. Strong leadership should inspire hope, attract new supporters, strengthen party institutions, and build national confidence. Instead, supporters have witnessed organisational decline, internal conflict, weakened structures, and poor strategic direction.
Perhaps the most painful reality is that, under Mr. Norton’s leadership, the PNCR now faces the humiliating prospect of becoming the third-largest party in the National Assembly. Such an outcome would be unprecedented in post-Independence Guyana and would represent one of the most significant electoral declines in the Party’s history. This is not merely an unfortunate political statistic; it is a reflection of failed leadership, ineffective organisation, and an inability to unite the Party or expand its national support.
The statement issued by a handful of CEC members reaffirms confidence in Mr. Norton’s leadership. However, confidence cannot be manufactured through public declarations. It must be earned through tangible achievements, constitutional compliance, organisational effectiveness and electoral success. The membership deserves transparency regarding the condition of the Party, the status of its regional structures, the functionality of its constitutional organs, its financial health, and the strategic plan for rebuilding.
Accountability remains an essential principle of democratic leadership. When leadership consistently fails to unite the Party, neglects constitutional obligations, presides over deteriorating organisational structures, weakens communication with its membership, and leads the Party into unprecedented political decline, it becomes necessary to accept responsibility.
Accordingly, it is my respectful view that Mr. Aubrey C. Norton, together with those members of the Central Executive Committee who have presided over this period of decline, should do the honourable thing and resign, thereby allowing the Party to prepare for a transparent, credible and genuinely competitive Congress.
The PNCR deserves leadership capable of restoring constitutional governance within the Party, revitalising its organisational structures, rebuilding confidence among its members, reconnecting with its grassroots support, and presenting a compelling vision for Guyana’s future.
Congress must not become another exercise in preserving the status quo. It should represent a genuine opportunity for renewal, reconciliation, accountability and democratic reform. The future of one of Guyana’s oldest political institutions depends upon honest introspection and courageous leadership.
The membership deserves transparency, accountability and renewal, not carefully scripted praise that ignores the realities confronting the Party.
Yours truly,
Dennis Hodge
Region 8
