Dear Editor,
The Alliance for Change (AFC) plans to present the much touted no confidence motion to the National Assembly on October 16. It is expected that a debate may precede the actual vote. The pros and cons of the motion have been argued cogently and extensively in the media and on the streets. Members on both sides of the aisle will add little to the public debate that still rages.
National elections will have to be held within ninety days if the motion is passed, and the present administration stays in place until the declaration of the results of new elections.
If indeed the PPP/C government calls a national election as is constitutionally required, the only certainty is that there will be a new parliament with a different configuration. Nothing else.
It is thought that none of the parties will win an outright majority, notwithstanding the PPP/C ‘s vow to regain its parliamentary majority. APNU may emerge with a plurality of the votes given popular discontent with the government, changed demographics and its energetic election campaign.
But Guyana will still face some fundamental problems. These include a president with too much power, a weak parliament, an ineffective governance system and a bitter political culture.
The success of the pending no confidence vote will not have any sweeping effects on the country. The only palatable consequence is a signal to future governments that gross violations of the constitution may result in the loss of power through this drastic measure.
No doubt the PPP/C should not be allowed to continue its incessant violations of the constitution and more particularly, its refusal to recognize the legislative branch as a part of government, regardless of how many seats the ruling party has in the National Assembly. Hence the necessity of the no confidence vote.
But Guyana needs more. There must be constitutional reform which must include a more vibrant and effective system of committees vetting bills. These bodies must be supported by experts and must be committed to country, and much less to party.
The president must be answerable to parliament. Therefore, his unfettered power must be curbed. If this position is retained, then the holder must be subordinate to parliament which is the seat of the people’s power.
Judges and magistrates must be insulated from the political system as much as is feasible. Appointing judges should depend more on bar associations and civic organizations.
The regional system must be strengthened. Though fraught with some difficulties, regional authorities should be allowed to enter into contracts with local and foreign companies for the development of their regions. Such an innovation will see regions developing faster, and better utilizing their natural resources within their boundaries.
And of course, coalitions of parties should be permitted after election results to form majority governments. That is the least of Guyana’s problems. The PPP/C should have sought a partner in government after the November 28, 2011, election results. Governing a multi-racial and fractured political system requires no less. Instead its obsession with absolute power prevailed.
What Guyana needs is a caretaker government that fixes the major organs of its body politic. A no confidence vote only stays the hand of corruption and malfeasance.
The patient, Guyana, requires sustained, attentive and non-partisan care for a few years before it is well again.
Yours faithfully,
Derrick Arjune