The PPP sees development in purely material terms. Progress is all about the physical things: the new highways, the bridges, the multi-story hotels, the futuristic town and so on. It is not that most of these are not needed, it is more that along with this physical transformation of our coastland there is no true vision of what the society should be evolving towards. It is true that the ruling party has certain social goals such as eliminating poverty and facilitating house ownership for as many people as possible, both of which are commendable, although it might be remarked that its efforts on the cost-of-living front to date have fallen far short of what is required. However, that is a practical issue, not one relating to a conceptualisation of the future.
The problem is that the new oil world into which we have been catapulted carries all kinds of longer-term consequences at a social level, and not just an economic one, and this is something to which the government does not appear to have put its mind. It gives the impression that its central dream will be for all Guyanese to have more money to spend in what it sees as a modern environment. Never mind that considering how it is shaping up, that environment bears a greater resemblance to the concrete outlines of an American Mid-West town, than the contours of our traditional architectural expression. Of course, the administration also wants advances such as better health for all and improved education, hardly objectives with which anyone would have a quarrel, but whether the lives of the mass of the population can be lifted and the society rebuilt if it continues on its current path is by no means certain.
If our economic situation, at least in terms of GDP and the amount of funding the government has at its disposal, has changed dramatically within a very short space of time, what has not changed is the political assumptions which inform the ruling party’s decisions. Freedom House operates with what might be described as a closed mindset, and has never been disposed to admit views which emanated from outside its charmed circle. Once in office, however small the majority, the PPP believes it is the only one entitled to make the decisions, and that without reference to anyone else or any other body. It is apparently inured to the mistakes it has made in its previous terms, some of which have been egregious; it has the arrogance of believing it is always right, and that its critics are anti-development.
It also is convinced, as has been observed before, that it has moral right on its side because it is the democratic party, and its ancient opponent, the PNC, is not. As such it considers itself justified in excluding that opponent in all its formulations from any participation in the business of the state, never mind what the Constitution says. It is not so unrealistic as not to recognise that APNU has many adherents, and given the race factor that was always an impediment in the past. Nowadays, however, it thinks it can throw money at the opposition base, and its members will then be persuaded to support the government; in the meantime it can bypass the political party which represents them. Even although the local government elections demonstrated that this approach had its limitations, there is no evidence that this has persuaded the PPP/C to amend its thinking and approach.
The problem with trying to exclude the opposition from every state endeavour is not just that it defies the requirement for inclusivity in the Constitution, but that in the process it also undermines existing institutions. A lead actor in bypassing bodies which are in opposition control or which it is perceived have an opposition connection is President Irfaan Ali himself. His most recent circumvention of an institution comes in relation to the Teachers’ Union, which has been at an impasse with the government for some time over a multi-year package.
According to what he said in his press conference last week, he intends to have extensive consultations with the teachers. “I love to meet people. I love people,” he said, going on to reveal, “I feel [lost] when people are not around me … that is why you would see me with the people all the time. That is my happiest moment.” He further told the media that he could be seen in every region “with our beautiful teachers … talking to our teachers. Hearing from them.” If so, then perhaps he has qualifications more suited for a constitutional head of state, than an executive one. After all, as observed in SN’s leader of Thursday, how these teacher consultations were to be accomplished was not disclosed, and unless he travelled to all the roughly 1,000 educational institutions, some teachers would not be reached.
At the bottom of it all, of course, is the question of why a union to which the teachers pay their union dues is to be ignored, and the President is to assume its role. One suspects that part of the government hostility to the union relates to the fact its General Secretary, Ms Coretta McDonald, is also an opposition MP. It has been said before in these columns that it is advisable in a country like this for unions to avoid political identities so they cannot be accused of representing a political party rather than their workers, and until recently the teachers’ union never had an overt political character.
That said, unfortunately unionism has always been contaminated by politics here, and the government is hardly in a position to point fingers at anyone considering Gawu was in the PPP pocket for decades. It may be too that the government believes a large number of teachers are of African origin, and therefore potentially opposition voters. As such, consultations with them directly if followed by concessions, would demonstrate the goodwill of the administration and highlight the incompetence of their union.
It is an approach which President Ali has adopted in relation to opposition local government bodies in particular. Long before local government elections he would swoop in without any prior contact with their authorities and listen to residents’ complaints and requests, promising to deal with them. After the elections he could be found in company with a minister and the winning PPP/C candidate in Georgetown’s Constituency Four listening to residents in Lamaha Gardens, Campbellville and Newtown Kitty promising to “make your lives better”. As matters were raised, the President issued orders; there was no indication he would be going through the City Council. He indicated he would be visiting all areas of Georgetown, as well as other parts of the country. So much for any hope citizens may have had that the government would be cooperating with the M&CC, or other opposition controlled bodies.
It is not just organisations and agencies which the ruling party believes is in the control of, or has been penetrated by the opposition which are being subverted; supposedly autonomous institutions have been weakened or undercut as well. The infamous case of the EPA is the outstanding example, leaving us with an agency that behaves like an arm of the government. And that is what the ruling party seeks: agencies which are not truly autonomous but are truly in sync with what the government wants. In the well documented case of the PAC which is responsible for reviewing the government accounts, meetings were cancelled regularly because an absence of government members ensured there was no quorum. Perhaps because of the publicity, at least that committee has been working recently. The functioning of the Public Procurement and Integrity Commissions, has also come under criticism in recent times.
There can be no proper accountability and transparency if institutions are not independent, but even when a new one is set up the PPP has fallen victim to its own astigmatism. The Natural Resource Fund Act is the classic example, although it must be said that the one passed by the coalition which it replaced was far worse. Nevertheless, with the opportunity to produce a model with input from the other side of which the country could be proud, the ruling party drafted a very flawed item of legislation. Natural Resource Fund expert Andrew Bauer called it “the most top-heavy bureaucracy” for any sovereign wealth fund he had ever seen. “Perhaps most concerning,” he said, “is that none of those elements of that bureaucracy are independent of the government.”
In the short term the government may get away with excluding the opposition at every level, controlling every institution it can and undermining those it can’t, and for good measure castigating its critics. But they can’t govern a country successfully like that in the longer term. Nations need effective institutions, and even if this country does not have one at the moment, it also needs an effective opposition.
