From all indications we will soon have national and regional elections, and all those who wish to see Guyana actually fulfilling its potential rather than its resources being drained away to far off places (the Bai Shan Lin affair) for the benefit of others, must now concentrate all their efforts on developing a strategy that would relieve the PPP/C of government at the next elections. It is a crying shame that given our human and natural resources, large numbers of our people continue to seek refuge elsewhere, many a time to live as second class citizens to simply eke out a basic living.
Had the PPP/C any intention of alleviating our condition, it would have already established a political framework compatible with sensible growth and development. Indeed, rather than taking the more progressive path, some in its ranks seek to camouflage its determination to hold on to absolute power at all costs with the contention that matters
not how the country fares, politicians do not willingly give up or share power. This is a dangerous fallacy, which has on occasion led to massive and wasteful loss of life and resources, and ignores the fact that ultimately a political solution is the only way forward.
The strategy will need to be comprehensive; covering all elements that are crucial to the electoral process. But in my opinion, and many observers agree, persistent ethnic political allegiances and the plurality principle contained in our constitution make the outright defeat of the PPP/C at the next election highly improbable unless there is a pre-election agreement between the AFC and APNU to present a single list of electors.
In July 2010, the AFC congress decided that although the party is committed to forming alliances with likeminded groups and individuals, it would not be doing so with the PPP/C or APNU for the 2011 elections. Ostensibly this “was in recognition that these two parties are wholly incompatible with the AFC, which is the Party of the future; and, that the AFC ultimately will not be able to maintain its identity and core principles if it were to ally with either one of them” (“AFC says no to alliance with PNCR:” SN: 07/26/2010).
The truer reason then and now (since the position of the party does not appear to have changed) is that the party is focused upon wrenching votes from the PPP/C and believes that any association with APNU will bring with it the historical baggage of the PNCR.
At the time, although I recognised the possibilities that would open up if the AFC was able win sufficient traditional PPP/C support, I was one of those who chided the party for not risking the more progressive path of forming a coalition with APNU. (“A unitary opposition slate is a critical component if government is to be captured and governance transformed” SN: 13/08/2010. “If AFC succeeds in taking PPP votes it could open mammoth possibility for national renewal:” SN: 16/08/2011)
The AFC did not join with APNU and was able to take a sufficiently significant number of traditional PPP/C votes, particularly in Regions 5 and 6. Coupled with this, APNU was able to improve upon the 2006 performance of the PNCR in its traditional areas and thus we now have the one seat majority that has become the bane of the PPP/C.
What would have happened if the AFC had had a pre-election agreement with APNU is anyone’s guess. We cannot also rule out the possibility that perhaps the chance was lost to remove the PPP from office, but similarly, a pre-election agreement with APNU might also have led to the ruin of the AFC.
As noted above, it appears that the AFC’s position on a pre-election coalition with APNU has not changed and the generally lacklustre performance of the leadership of the latter and the recent events surrounding the PNC congress may well make APNU an even less attractive coalition partner to the AFC. Yet, largely because of ethnic political allegiances, these defects will not prove fatal and APNU remains a credible political force.
What ails Guyana results from our having a constitutional arrangement that does not properly fit the ethnic configurations of our country. Much of the concern about transparency, corruption, inefficiencies, etc, is the result of an unaccountability founded in regime longevity. For me, what Guyana needs more at this stage is constitutional change to establish mechanisms that will, inter alia, provide for the establishment of a government of national unity, for a stronger separation of powers and give greater independence to constituencies.
But I do not believe that any single party in the opposition could do sufficiently well to deprive the PPP/C of the greater multiple. Therefore, I agree with those who hold that if we are to avoid another stalemate after the next elections, some kind of pre-election agreement is necessary.
In this regard, perhaps APNU and the AFC should lead a movement aimed at making significant constitutional changes within a specified timeframe of, say, three years, if it wins the elections. Both in terms of personnel and operations, the approach should be constructed in a broad-based manner with a strong civil society presence. Each political party may then participate independently in the post-reform elections.
I believe that if approached sensibly, such an arrangement has tremendous possibilities. It could severely limit the fallout the AFC fears from an association with APNU. It is also more likely to catch the public imagination and create a tipping point in terms of voter turnout to support the reforms.
Most people, even many PPP/C supporters, are sufficiently sophisticated to know that the present government does not have the capacity to effectively run Guyana by itself and that our persistent poor condition and insecurities are largely a result of this incapacity. Far from losing the AFC support, a movement with the major goal of reform is likely to win significant support.
We pride ourselves on being a clever people, and political ambition aside, we should not go to another election knowing that the result will most likely be another stalemate. Leaders have to be willing to take the political risks that have the possibility of changing the governance dynamic and opening the way to a better life for all our people.
henryjeffrey@yahoo.com
