QUESTION OF THE DAY
“It is strange that CA could issue a statement as a party before there was any signing of a coalition agreement,” says the Secretary General of PDOIS.
According to him, he was still waiting for a response to an invitation extended to CA and three other political parties for a discussion on coalition building for system change. He said CA had indicated that it was also involved in another coalition building.
“PDOIS was invited and had responded that it cannot participate in coalition talks which will only end in a shambles because of total lack of preparation and tactical consideration since that could only serve the interest of the incumbent. PDOIS had made it abundantly clear to CA and three other parties and an independent candidate that it is ready for alliance for system change not alliance for its sake,” he asserted.
He explained that it had gone far to send advice to the leaders who assembled in the coalition talks that CA was involved in that as new political parties they should declare that they not interested in putting up presidential candidates but will be interested in conditionalities for an agreement.
Sallah pointed out that, “PDOIS even suggested that they could establish criteria such as one term presidency, the creation of an inclusive government involving all their parties and the nullification of basis of exploiting incumbency to entrenching a presidential candidate in any subsequent presidential elections.”
“PDOIS is yet to receive any response on the proposals it had made through an intermediary. It is therefore strange that CA would issue a one-sided statement that could mislead public opinion and PDOIS’ mission for coalition in the 2021 presidential election,” the PDOIS presidential candidate pointed out.
He reminded the electorate of the selection of a standard bearer in 2016 where political leaders conspired to select the candidate of their choice irrespective of merit.
In conclusion, the PDOIS Secretary General said, “Many CA supporters are interested in a coalition between the PDOIS and CA with the PDOIS candidate as standard bearer. The CA leadership should tell their membership that PDOIS has expressed readiness for talks on a one term presidency, an inclusive government and the eradication of the advantages of incumbency in presidential elections.
The CA membership should uphold their leadership and tell them that PDOIS is ready for such meetings within 48 hours notice and has extended the same to two other political parties. If they are interested in building another type of coalition let them tell their membership the truth and leave PDOIS to continue building coalition for system change.
He expressed hope that CA will not pollute the political atmosphere that PDOIS is not amenable to coalition building. Its leadership know very well that they are the ones that are yet to respond to PDOIS’ invitation under the pretext that they are involved in other coalition talks.
“It is better for the CA leadership to tell the whole truth to their membership and the nation rather than pointing accusing fingers at PDOIS. There are possibilities of two coalition talks, one for regime change and the other for system change. PDOIS has invited three parties and two independent candidates for talks for system change. The consultations are still open and we will not blame anybody for not responding. CA should not blame anybody for not responding to coalition talks. This is how matters stand.”
