By Mark DaCosta- Charrandass Persaud’s recent return to the political stage has left many scratching their heads. Evvel a key figure in the Alliance For Change (AFC), Persaud is perhaps best remembered for his controversial vote in 2018 that led to the downfall of the APNU+AFC government. But now, in 2024, he is reappearing with a series of puzzling, contradictory statements and actions that have only added to the mystery surrounding his re-emergence. His actions raise the question: what exactly does Persaud want, and can he be trusted, given his history of political flip-flopping?
Persaud’s announcement that he plans to return to active politics, yet again without fully committing to any party, has garnered much interest. Since he was expelled from the AFC after his infamous vote in favour of the no-confidence motion that toppled his own government, Persaud has largely stayed out of the limelight.
However, his recent statements reveal a man seemingly at odds with himself — criticising the very system he is, or was, part of. In interviews with the press, he has made it clear that he will not rejoin the AFC but has yet to confirm if he will form his own political party, though he remains confident that such a move could garner significant support. These declarations alone paint a picture of a man apparently uncertain about his future — both in politics and otherwise.
This uncertainty is further compounded by the contradictions in his statements and actions relative to the People’s Progressive Party (PPP). Although Persaud is now vocal in his criticism of the current administration, which awarded him a substantial road contract worth GY$50 million, he himself benefited from the very processes he now decries. While now claiming to be dissatisfied with the government’s handling of infrastructure projects, he was awarded a substantial contract to rehabilitate a stretch of road in Cummings Lodge, Georgetown — a project he said that he completed two months ahead of schedule. His criticism of the system seems rather contradictory when viewed against his own involvement in securing such a lucrative contract without prior experience in road construction.
Persaud himself admitted that he had to hire external technical experts to manage and execute the project, underscoring the fact that his qualifications were far from suited for such an undertaking. Despite his claims of dissatisfaction, the former AFC parliamentarian did not hesitate to take advantage of the very system he now condemns. Worse yet, he is now claiming that the Central Housing and Planning Authority (CH&PA) is withholding the balance of his payment, despite completing the project to their satisfaction.
He contends that the ministry is unjustly holding onto his funds, despite presenting a retention bond as part of the contract — a security measure in case any issues arise with the work. Yet, Persaud’s public outcry over these delayed payments is made all the more perplexing when one considers that the PPP government did award him the contract in the first place.
In his recent interviews, Persaud repeatedly criticises the awarding of road contracts to individuals with supposed political loyalties to the PPP, including those who are allegedly former members of the People’s National Congress (PNC) who switched allegiances. These contractors, he argues, are receiving GY$15 million projects, but some of them are not even being held accountable for failing to deliver on time.
What’s even more contradictory is his stance on the broader governance issues surrounding contract issuance. He now claims that the PPP government’s mishandling of the process — specifically the delay in payments and the failure to hold contractors accountable — represents “stupidity.” Yet, in doing so, Persaud fails to acknowledge that he is, or was, also part of this very system. His dissatisfaction with the government, particularly with its inability to act swiftly on delinquent contractors and its failure to follow through on promises of accountability, seems like an exercise in pointing fingers while benefiting from the very system he critiques.
Adding to the contradictions, Persaud also took issue with the government’s handling of debt obligations inherited from the previous administration. He argued that the PPP should not honour any agreements made by the APNU+AFC after the no-confidence vote in 2018.
While this stance may seem like a moral position, it overlooks his own role in triggering the collapse of that government. Having been the man whose vote set the stage for the change of power, his insistence on nullifying all actions of the previous administration is both hypocritical and puzzling.
Despite all these contradictions, Persaud, amazingly, maintains an appearance of self-assurance, even going as far as to suggest that, if he were to create his own party, it could secure a significant portion of the vote. This confidence seems at odds with his uncertain position within the political landscape.
He insists that he is not seeking affiliation with any political party — though it remains unclear why a man so eager to re-enter politics would refuse to attach himself to a clear cause or movement. His repeated references to “contentious” issues in the current political climate — such as the awarding of contracts and the lack of accountability for underperforming contractors — are difficult to take at face value when viewed through the lens of his own controversial career.
Social media reactions to Persaud’s re-emergence have ranged from disbelief to outright amusement. Many commentators questioned who, after all the back-and-forth and his past political betrayals, would trust a figure like Persaud again. His sudden shift in rhetoric has raised more eyebrows than it has earned support, as many are sceptical about his true intentions. Is his return to politics motivated by genuine concern for governance, or is it simply an attempt to settle personal scores and capitalise on his former position?
In the end, Charrandass Persaud’s re-emergence seems to be a classic case of political self-interest wrapped in contradictions. Whether he will truly make a difference or simply add to the political noise remains to be seen. However, one thing is certain: his return will not go unnoticed, even if many remain uncertain about the motives behind it.