Dear Editor,
Opposition Leader, David Granger’s claim that his office is severely underfunded, (SN, July 16), should not be taken lightly, given that this is a constitutional office, regardless of which party leader is chosen in national elections to occupy it, and should require court action by the Opposition Leader to get what this office deserves to function as effectively as it should.
Back on April 9, 2010, SN carried a seemingly upbeat news story, ‘House passes Opposition Leader benefits bill,’ piloted through the House by the Finance Minister. The bill’s benefits are supposed to be on par with parliamentary benefits equivalent to those of a cabinet minister, except that no minister ever complained of his or her office being underfunded.
Prime Minister, Mr Samuel Hinds, even intoned at the bill’s passing, that it was timely and also a requirement of the constitution that recognition be made of the post of leader of the opposition. “I’d like our people to see that things are maturing in Guyana step-by-step. This should be seen as a step in the maturing of our governance and parliamentary arrangements in Guyana.”
While many today are nonplussed by government’s claim of ‘maturing of our governance and parliamentary arrangements,’ even in other areas, it turns out that the Mr Granger’s allegation is not new. On November 18, 2012, Kaieteur News reported, ‘Office of Opposition Leader starved of state funding.’ It detailed a list of grievances over lack of funding for constitutionally mandated benefits and responsibilities, and ended with an APNU official lamentably asking, “How can the opposition fulfil those obligations with little or no resources?”
To me, the problem is that after almost 32 months as Opposition Leader, it is not clear if a fully funded opposition leader’s office would have made a difference in terms of delivering on the expectations of the majority of voters who took the parliamentary majority from the PPP and handed it to the APNU and AFC, so they can use the House as a forum to help curb excesses associated with regime corruption, waste and downright violation of the laws with impunity.
Mr Granger, as well as some of his supporters, is of the view that the last 31 months saw satisfactory achievements by the opposition. “I do not agree with anyone that our work has not been adequate over the last 30 months. We have achieved a lot more than has been achieved in the last 20 years,” he reportedly said.
While his 20-year comparative performance analysis may be acceptable, the sticking point for many Guyanese, including some of his own APNU and PNC supporters, seems to be this: although APNU could not achieve anything in the House without the AFC, APNU was the senior of the two parliamentary opposition parties but did not do a more effective job providing requisite opposition leadership in and out of the House to really stop the PPP where it really matters most: public finances and constitutional violations.
Take spending, for example. The opposition voted down certain line items in the 2014 Budget, yet the regime illegally raided the Contingencies Fund between January and June to fill the gaps created by the voting down. And the fact that this is not the first time the Contingencies Fund was illegally raided – the Auditor-General revealed these illegal acts in previous annual reports – the parliamentary opposition not only failed to take the government to court for the repeated illegalities, but there was a recent mindboggling bickering between the Chairman of the Public Accounts Committee and the Auditor-General over whose office should be pursuing punitive court actions against the government.
Besides red flags over public finances engaging the combined opposition’s attention, other areas of concern continue to be public safety, police brutality, questionable awarding of government contracts and others. But if the Opposition Leader will not go to court and fight for his own constitutional office, why should we expect him to provide the leadership required to actually stop the PPP from continuing its excesses?
Editor, there is a quiet but growing cry for restrictive and punitive measures to stop the government via the courts, because the government has not shied away from running to court when it wants to have its way. Sadly, the combined opposition seems court-shy, even though it has the law on its side. What more does the combined opposition really want when even the Auditor-General says the Finance Minister broke the law repeatedly even after being exposed? He would make an explosive witness!
Then there is the front burner issue of local government elections (LGE), a constitutionally mandated exercise. Has the combined opposition ever thought of mounting a citizens’ signature campaign to petition the court for redress on this constitutional violation? The President swore to uphold the constitution and the constitution says LGE must be held every three years. The President is in violation of the same constitution he swore to uphold.
Nevertheless, the President and PPP continue to look strong, in charge and normal all because the Opposition Leader and his opposition colleagues are doing nothing to stop them where it really matters. At this rate, if the President and Opposition Leader’s performance over the last 31 months is any indication of what to expect of both over the remainder of their term, the PPP clearly is under no real pressure to change or call elections despite all the public chatter of growing political pressure and possible polls.
Still, something has to give to save Guyanese from lapsing into a state of apathy, where voting with the feet is the only vote that matters.
Yours faithfully,
Emile Mervin
