Introduction: Stabroek News has invited the People’s Progressive Party/Civic, A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance For Change (AFC) to submit a weekly column on governance and related matters. Only APNU and the AFC have submitted columns this week.
President Donald Ramotar’s systematic suppression of the National Assembly through the non-assent to bills, the non-implementation of resolutions, the non-conduct of local government elections and the non-compliance with provisions of the Appropriations Act came to a grotesque climax on 10th November 2014 when he promulgated the obnoxious and notorious ‘Prorogation’ order.
Guyanese must recognise the damage which has been wrought to parliamentary democracy by the People’s Progressive Party, particularly during the short-lived 10th Parliament over the past three years. Members of the 11th Parliament must seek to prevent a recurrence of the executive lawlessness that has resulted in the present political crisis and seek also to protect the interests of their constituents and address issues of national importance.
Members must function in an increasingly complex and globalised world and must be aware of myriad issues which include poverty-reduction and sustainable development; international, hemispheric and regional foreign affairs and foreign trade and their impact on the nation; security, anti-terrorism, protection of the national patrimony, illicit trade in narcotics and psychotropic substances and in illegal arms and ammunition; graft and corruption and the introduction, expansion, use and abuse of information technologies.
These are concerns which require time, thoughtful consideration, painstaking research and adequate resources to facilitate careful examination in order to articulate responses which will be in the public interest. The National Assembly must be able to sit frequently enough in a given year to be able to deal decisively with these matters.
This is the case especially when it may take more than a day for the member to journey to and from the capital to be present for sittings of the National Assembly. The hinterland, poses huge transportation and communications challenges which must be met in the service of constituents. A member of the National Assembly from a hinterland region – such as Barima-Waini, Cuyuni-Mazaruni, Potaro-Siparuni or the Rupununi – also confronts the basic problem of getting around to meet his or her constituents to discuss issues of importance to them. He or she is obliged to face unavailability of telecommunications to contact the people or to be contacted when a crisis occurs.
The argument may be made that full-time members will lead to an Assembly which functions more efficiently and effectively and, consequently, the nation will benefit.
The implications are that there would be an increase in the number of sittings, with improved oversight and more timely reporting, given the presence of dedicated members on the committees.
More important than the number or adequacy of sittings of the Assembly, however, is the real and perceived impact of the work of the legislative branch on the lives of the citizens. The question is whether these sittings meaningfully improve the lives of ordinary people. The political situation in Guyana is not immune from the political ‘change’ that is characterised by chaos and rivalry. Mellissa Ifill, back in 2008, pointed out that:
…Guyana’s democratisation experience illustrates the myth of citizen rule in liberal democracy since, in reality, decision-making in principal issues is protected from mass participation and supervision. Moreover, with a considerable parliamentary advantage, the ruling administration has the power to disregard objections from parliamentary opposition parties or civic groups when passing controversial legislation.
This has [led] to frequent non-participation from the major opposition group in Guyana’s parliament over the last decade. Thirteen years after the return of liberal democracy, the Needs Assessment Report, composed by Sir Michael Davies, the Commonwealth Senior Staff Parliamentary Advisor to the National Assembly, noted that even though, constitutionally, the National Assembly of Guyana is identified as paramount, in practice, it fails to function appropriately in the governance of the country as ‘there are areas where the separation of powers of the state and the executive is not observed’ and there are instances ‘where decisions are entirely at the whim of the executive’ (Davies, 2005:3).
The results of the general and regional elections in Guyana in November 2011 changed the situation, but only slightly. The government side, for the first time in the country’s political history, ended up with a minority and the opposition side a majority in the National Assembly.
Citizens, in the forthcoming general and regional elections, will want to know that their vote will translate into democracy and good governance and that their representatives will truly represent their interests and will be accountable to them.
Poor governance, as Polius and Venner pointed out, can contribute to economic inefficiencies that are manifested in higher than required expenditure; misallocated and unproductive expenditures; lower tax revenues; higher taxes on certain sectors than required and poor quality service from the public sector.
The National Assembly, after the next elections, must be re-configured in favour of non-PPP parties in order to re-energise citizens through openness and access to their representatives; through a government which treats all citizens as equal under the law; through the sharing of information on matters of public interest and through subjugating partisan politics to the national interest.
The electorate must reject the PPP and its backward ‘winner-takes-all’ mindset and elect A Partnership for National Unity – the only combination which advocates inclusionary democracy. In this way, the people’s interest in participation in Guyana’s political life will be rekindled and parliamentary democracy restored.
