Let us not fool ourselves, all things remaining equal, and taking into account the outcome of the 2011 general elections, for the PPP/C to lose the executive at the next general elections, at the very least APNU cannot lose a significant number of votes to the AFC, and will have to take more than 15% more votes from the PPP/C. This is due to the constitutional contraptions under which we are governed, which give the executive to the party who gains the highest multiple of votes at a general election. Most people believe that it is the AFC that is best positioned to take these votes, but it also must be realised that this is a formidable challenge for a minority third party in an ethnically divided society. It is therefore imperative that APNU do all it can not only to hold on to the support it has but to present an attractive opposition vision to the population.
The development of a sensible policy is a dialectical relationship between what you believe is good for your constituency (not necessarily what they immediately want) and what is feasible in the short, medium and long terms. In my last column I suggested that an important element of such an APNU policy must be the demand for shared governance. Another would be the construction and propagation of a programme that seeks to institutionalise methodologies to immediately begin to remove the marginalisation that the party itself has repeatedly claimed to exist in Guyana, and is of particular relevance to its supporters. Of course, by any criteria, if any group in Guyana is marginalised it must be our Amerindian people, and the equitability that such a strategy must contain would suggest that they are likely to be the largest beneficiaries and as such possible supporters of such a strategy. A shared governance mechanism is also necessary for the sustained removal of marginalisation.
It is true that the PPP/C is unlikely to immediately buy into such a programme, and last week with reference to the AFC recently taking its list of demands to the PPP/C, knowing full well that it would be rejected, I argued against APNU leadership’s position that such an approach was a waste of time. Perhaps this is the mindset that prevents that party from immediately embracing a more radical long term perspective. I repeat: it makes no sense for APNU to be second-guessing the PPP/C. It should devise and consistently mobilise for appropriate policies that are in the interest of its supporters and let the PPP then refuse to act and so drive home to supporters and all Guyanese the kind of progressive future for which it stands. In any event, if APNU wishes to rise above the flotsam that many believe is presently suffocating it, it will have to recognise that its present drift does not give its supporters much room for hope and that without a sensible redirection a repeat of 2006 beckons.
Since its birth as an independent nation there have been calls in Guyana for policies to deal with issues of marginalisation. In colonial times, this call came mainly from Africans, Indians and Amerindians who refused to accept their exclusion from desirable employment and from social organisations in the public and private sectors. Independence has dealt with some of these issues, but as we speak, Indian interests are seeking changes to balance ethnicity in the security forces, and I know of few Guyanese who would argue against this demand. Although it is possible to argue that the PNC political elite only paid lip service to such requests, after twenty years of trying the PPP/C has still not had the success some expected in this area.
There is at present a belief among the vast majority of Africans that they have been and are being marginalised in a very holistic manner. Some have blamed history and racial propensities, and I have argued that deliberate policies that have led to marginalisation have been recently pursued to create a political management system that accords with the PPP/C view of majority rule. Be that as it may, as I have argued, our society was born in the midst of demands for the removal of marginalisation and no modern state can be laissez faire on these socially explosive matters: states must adopt policies to positively deal with these issues.
APNU, as a group that gains most of its support from the marginalised groups, needs, as scientifically as possible, to assess the nature and level of marginalization and then provide a practical pathway for the creation of an equitable society. It should also immediately pressure the PPP/C to put in place such policies as it thinks is necessary.
I have argued in this column (“Not too late to mitigate discrimination in employment:” 20/3/2013) that existing laws such as the Prevention of Discrimination Act can be upgraded with strong regulations and deployed to deal with discrimination in employment. But there is a tendency for us to frown upon calls for preferential policies and view them as essentially the demands of the weak, without stopping to understand that in many cases the marginalisation that exists is the result of inadequate state policies.
Preferential policies are usually instituted where there is a widespread belief that ethnic conflict is exacerbated by economic and other social disparities, and that deliberate, even if temporary, interventions are necessary for the removal or mitigation of such tensions. Such policies exist in India, Nigeria, Malaysia, Fiji, Sri Lanka and the Philippines to name a few, and as Donald Horowitz has stated, “Preferential policies are common in ethnically divided societies but they vary in scope, formality, and explicitness. Some are limited to public-sector opportunities, while others extend to the private sector as well. Some reach broadly into business and education, in addition to employment. Others are confined to particular spheres, such as higher education or civil service positions. Some policies are formally stated and openly pursued, whereas many others are adopted sub silentio.” (Ethnic Groups in Conflict, University of California Press, 2000)
The design and implementation of these kinds of intervention are fraught with difficulties, but I contend that at this historical juncture our society requires them and that APNU is uniquely placed to lead the charge to craft, propagate and to get them implemented and that this effort could only redound to the benefit of all of us.
