EDITOR, The Tribune.

It has been said that in the realm of politics, a party is only as strong as its weakest link. And in the case of the Progressive Liberal Party (PLP), that link, to the astonishment of many, seems to be its very own national chairman, Fred Mitchell. The deeper one dives into Mr Mitchell’s tenure, the clearer it becomes that his leadership, or rather the glaring lack of it, in my opinion, represents an impending crisis for the PLP.

A comprehensive analysis of Mr Mitchell’s role raises red flags at every juncture. A national chairman’s duty extends far beyond basic administrative tasks; it’s about steering the ship, rallying the troops, and ensuring a cohesive, united front. Instead, under Mitchell’s watch, we see a party rife with internal dissent, an evident inability to attract fresh, youthful voters, and a near-absence of invigorating energy that is so desperately needed in today’s fast-paced political arena.

One would think that a leader who serves with efficiency as the Minister of Foreign Affairs would carry forth the same competence to his role as National Chairman. But there seems to be a chasm between these two roles in Mr. Mitchell’s case. The very essence of leadership involves collaboration and strategic alliances. Yet, what we witness is a chairman picking quarrels with senior members of his own party in the public eye. Such behaviour is not mere lapses in judgment; they hint at deeper-rooted ineptitude.

Furthermore, Mitchell’s era seems to be a relic from a bygone time. Today’s political atmosphere demands adaptability, innovation, and a finger on the pulse of the people’s sentiments. Mitchell, in contrast, appears trapped in a time warp, leaning on dated methods and out-of-touch strategies. His part-time commitment to the chairmanship does more than just raise eyebrows; it raises concerns about his genuine dedication to the party’s advancement.

And if we were to discuss loyalty, yes, it is of paramount importance. But blind loyalty, to the extent of neglecting overarching responsibilities, is to me a liability. Protecting the leader’s throne might be a commendable trait in feudal times, but in a modern, democratic setup, it is the broader vision and welfare of the party that should be paramount.

It’s disheartening to think that the PLP’s strategic foothold could be jeopardized by the apparent lackluster approach of its national chairman, particularly when the stakes are as high as an upcoming general election. Mitchell’s modus operandi of relying on mere WhatsApp voice notes as a primary communication tool is a stark testament to his detachment from contemporary communication needs.

The PLP stands at a crossroads. The party can either continue with a figurehead who seems more an impediment than an asset, or it can pivot, recognising the need for a rejuvenated, dynamic, and fully engaged National Chairman. Mr Mitchell, with all due respect, has had his time. It’s high time the PLP looks to the future.

THE GATEKEEPER

October 19, 2023.