Dear Editor,
I have noted the continued commentaries coming from self-styled defenders of good governance over the past few weeks, who have, not only been vocal, but undeniably opportunistic, I believe, in their calls for executive power sharing.
As an Executive member of the People’s Progressive Party, especially after the experience of the May 2015 General and Regional Elections, I must ask whether these same persons would be calling for executive power sharing had the APNU+AFC Coalition won these elections?
In 2011, when APNU and AFC, as opposition parties together, held a one seat majority and therefore controlled the legislature, Guyanese were witness to their approach of ‘total control’ and the flexing of their proverbial muscles, regardless of consequences to our national development agenda. Cuts of $90B to the national budgets in 2012, 2013 and 2014, slowed down the economy and scuttled transformational projects and denied citizens of infrastructural development and necessary social programmes. With the smell of power they also recklessly removed necessary funds for interior and Amerindian communities.
In the post-2015 elections, with less votes together than in 2011, and a margin of less than 1%, the APNU+AFC Coalition took office. I do not recall persons clamouring then for executive power sharing and a national unity government. Instead the slogan was ‘a majority is a majority’ and ‘it is awe time’.
So power drunk were the APNU+AFC Coalition government that they bragged in the Legislature that they had the majority. There was no modicum of concessions based on parliamentary norms and conventions to the Parliamentary Opposition. Instead they amended the Standing Orders and reversed their own amendments in the 2011- 2015 National Assembly to give them control as an opposition of the Parliamentary Committees; they rammed through large and complex bills with no scrutiny and the most commonsensical amendments to the Bills were thrown out, not one motion brought by the Parliamentary Opposition was supported, all were defeated, even one on prevention of suicide, after all they had the majority. They reduced the budgets of the constitutional bodies in violation of the constitution and the laws.
State Boards and public corporation boards were also cleansed with APNU+AFC activists and supporters overwhelmingly dominating. In this regard, the only area of national concern where the Parliamentary Opposition was included officially with one representative was the Ministerial Advisory Committee on the Guyana-Venezuela Border Controversy.
In the first eight months in office, the APNU+AFC government introduced 200 draconian tariff measures, which increased hardships on all Guyanese, especially the poor and vulnerable. Many of these persons who continue to suffer under the escalating cost of living, taxes and 30,000 job losses are supporters of the APNU+AFC.
To show their supporters that they were cleaning the ‘Augean Stables’ of the PPP, they terminated 1,972 Amerindian community service officers and thousands of public servants based on their ethnicity and/or political affiliation. After all it was “awe time”. None of today’s champions for executive power sharing were offended that these actions increased ethnic insecurities in a fragile multi-ethnic society.
What is the basis of these calls for executive power sharing? At best, these seem to be premised on their view of ethnic insecurity (translated to mean a concern for the insecurity of Afro-Guyanese under a PPP/C government). This is a mantra that the PNC now PNC/APNU+AFC has milked for years to hold their supporters in line.
It has been statistically established that Afro-Guyanese have seen more progress – including being able to own land, other assets and jobs – under successive PPP/C governments, than they have under any other administration, including the APNU+AFC government.
For the period 2012-2020, we have seen no interest, indication, action or policy that the Granger-led APNU+AFC has any interest in power sharing. Rather those vocal on the issue of executive power sharing are essentially attempting to preserve their personal interests and power; and, not the interests of the Afro-Guyanese working man and woman. It is all about preserving the power, status and benefits of an elite in the PNC/APNU+AFC cabal.
Of course there is another objective to this call and that is to shift the focus from the critically important issue at hand – a transition of government that is based on free, fair, transparent and credible declaration of results from the March 2, 2020 General and Regional Elections.
As Guyanese, we cannot afford to shift our attention from this the most critical issue at hand –the maintained focus on protecting and preserving our democracy. The alternative is an illegal undemocratic government facing international condemnation as a “pariah” state and consequent sanctions.
Guyana is not alone this time; the PPP/C is not alone this time. Rather It is the Granger-led PNC/APNU+AFC cabal and their spin doctors who are standing alone going against a pro-democracy tide, a mass defense of our democracy, comprised of young and not so young, of farmers, workers, and business men and women, of religious leaders, and women and all ethnic groups.
There can be no discussion of a new governance model and constitutional reform unless democracy is intact.
The history of the People’s Progressive Party, both in and out of government, has been one that has never closed the door to inclusive governance and constitutional reform. Compare the 1997 –2006 period where the PPP – although it won the internationally observed 1997 elections which were declared free and fair- was made to sign the Herdmanston Accord and the St. Lucia Statement with a reduction of its term in office by two and a half years, in order to return the country to some level of normalcy and stability after 2 years of violence, boycotts and destabilization orchestrated by the PNC.
Unlike the champions for executive power sharing, we in the PPP have worked at the grassroots level to broaden our support base in an effort to ensure greater inclusivity. We are the only party that campaigned on a platform of national progress, with a multi-ethnic List of Candidates of women, youth, religious, geographic and ethnic diversity. Further, our 2020-2025 manifesto clearly states that the Party is “aware that issues concerning constitutional reform, particularly in relation to a national, inclusive governance model” have been raised and discussed in the public domain and is “committed” to a national participatory process to addressing a new governance model. The PPP remains committed to this.
Guyana needs stakeholders in the electoral process, civil society representatives and ordinary Guyanese citizens, among others, to be a part of the process of addressing a new governance model for sustained progress and development of our country; not the divvying up of the spoils to a few who feel they have been born with some personal entitlement.
But first we must ensure that there is a transparent and democratic transition of government.
Yours faithfully,
Gail Teixeira
