Opposing blindly
Published:Tuesday | July 27, 2010 | 12:00 AM
The Editor, Sir:
The strategy of the Opposition to "oppose, oppose" has come back to haunt them, and their boisterous leader is not happy.
I find it hard to believe that not one member of the Opposition voted for the extension of the state of emergency (SOE). It becomes even more surprising because it was a member of the Opposition People's National Party (PNP) who called for the SOE to be extended to include her constituency. After her request was granted, she too did not vote for it to continue. Am I to assume that this member was genuinely opposed to the extension, or was she told how to vote?
"No government goes to Parliament without the votes it needs" is probably the most damning evidence that "political yes - men and women" have no intention of representing the people of their constituencies; they represent the party to which they belong.
Defeated by the PNP
Whether this was clever manoeuvring on the part of the elected party or not, the motion to extend the SOE was defeated by the PNP. Now the wrath of public opinion has forced them back to a letter written by Mr Golding in 2003. Suddenly we have been thrown back into history, which, if you listen to most comrades, going back in the past is a counter-productive exercise: but suddenly it's OK.
That said, I would like to point out that it is an apples-to-oranges comparison to compare Golding the private citizen to Golding the prime minister, which has resulted in his new name 'flip-flopper in chief'.
Are you a flip-flopper if you change your mind or take a different policy stance? In a changing world, I prefer a leader who realises that his past pronunciations may not necessarily be the best policy today, as opposed to a leader that is so stubborn and inflexible that no change in reality changes his mind.
So, since our reality has changed since last Friday, it is time to re-impose the SOE, Mr Golding, even though you did not agree with it in 2003.
I am, etc.,
AUDLEY GILPIN Jr