Dear Editor,
The ongoing developments regarding a possible no confidence vote against the PPP/C regime have resulted in many analyses. So far though, I have not heard any analyst consider the possibility that the controllers of the PPP/C may actually want early elections, and goading the opposition into a no-confidence vote may be their best way to get it.
Let us look at the facts: there are new revelations of government wrongdoings almost daily. This likely translates into a loss of popular support. Therefore, two more years of PPP/C rule, may reveal even more issues, and bigger losses. So those in charge of the PPP/C – and I don’t mean President Ramotar – may prefer elections now, before more damaging facts come to light.
President Ramotar clearly does not want a no-confidence motion; he would like to serve out his term in peace. On June 28, the President, in a conciliatory tone, tried to justify the act by his government that precipitated the situation: the legislatively unapproved spending of $4.5 billion of taxpayers’ money. He further suggested that the opposition parties take the matter to court, in an apparent attempt to head off the threatened no-confidence motion.
Contrast this with the words of General Secretary Rohee: “The People’s Progressive Party challenges the opposition parties to demonstrate their testicular capacity by giving effect to their stated desire for a no-confidence motion in parliament, failing which they should shut up and forever hold their peace.” The PPP/C General Secretary seems here, to be goading the opposition, and giving them no way to back out. Could it be that Mr Rohee in fact, wants to force early elections? And I wonder if former president Jagdeo also wants the same thing.
Some may ask, if the PPP/C desires early elections, why not call a snap poll? Well, the person who would have to set a date is President Ramotar who obviously does not wish to have his presidency cut short. So, those who want to have elections now would have to find another way to get it. And what better way than to provoke a no-confidence vote, where the PPP/C can present itself as the victim of opposition bullyism.
And what of the results of early elections? Most analysts say that the PPP/C cannot hope for a better result than that obtained in 2011. In fact, the party may do worse. But, to some, this may not matter, because they are only interested in the PPP/C retaining the presidency, no matter how slim the margin, since losing executive power would result in investigations and audits.
The opposition entities must consider all possibilities and angles before making a decision; Guyana’s future depends on such. Guyanese cannot afford to fall into any more PPP/C traps. Let good sense prevail; the opposition must be reasonably sure that when elections are called and the people vote, the PPP/C will be removed from office.
Yours faithfully,
Mark DaCosta