Dear Editor,
A conversation on shared governance or executive power sharing must be placed within its proper context. It is important therefore to trace the evolution of this idea within the PPP and the PNC to garner better insights into this subject. The PPP’s record on power sharing is aptly described by Dr Cheddi Jagan in his book, the “West on Trial,” as well as in Guyana media reports. The PNC’s historical record in this regard has not been encouraging.
It is from such a historical perspective that one could deduce contemporary approaches and perceptions towards power sharing. The PNC and other opposition parties do not like when an analysis of politics draws upon historical experience; they tend to debase or minimize such evidence. If they had a glorious governance regime in the past six decades they would have embraced history. Suffice to say that History 101 teaches us that we cannot separate ourselves from our history, no more than can we separate ourselves from our shadows.
We turn to some significant moments in history during the past six decades. The PPP won the 1961 general elections under the new constitution by securing 20 of the 35 legislative seats. Being painfully aware of the cultural diversity and ethnic cleavages that existed, including the potential for violence, Dr Jagan recognized the need then to share power with the opposition to allay fears of ethnic insecurity and social convulsions, among other things. Accordingly, Dr Jagan formally invited Mr. Forbes Burnham in December 1962 to form a coalition government.
There were several exchanges on a coalition arrangement between Dr Jagan and Mr. Burnham but those protracted talks did not yield any productive outcomes. On March 7, 1963, Mr. Burnham appeared before the sub-committee of the UN Committee of 24 (UNC24) at UN headquarters in New York. He attacked the first-past-the-post voting system claiming that it would create an “authoritarian regime through the legislative process.” He also insisted that the allocation of Council of Ministers be equal (5-5) between the PPP and the PNC, with the PNC party to be allocated the Ministries of Finance and Home Affairs.
In keeping with his commitment to a coalition arrangement, Dr Cheddi agreed that the two ministries be allocated to the PNC but insisted that the PPP must have the Ministry of Defense. After consultation with his party, Dr Jagan then offered 5 ministries to the PNC out of 11, but Mr. Burnham reneged on his support for a Commonwealth team to help solve the deadlock over coalition arrangement. Still hopeful for a breakthrough, the PPP had Mr. CV Nunes in April 1963 and then Mr. BH Benn appeared before the sub-committee of the UNC24 to plead the PPP’s case for the type of governance, including coalition but to no avail. Consequently, both Mr. Burnham and Dr Jagan were invited to appear before the UNC24 which was of “the view that coalition of the PPP and PNC was the best way forward.” But the impasse continued.
When Mr. Duncan Sandys visited Guyana in July 1963, the two sides met (July 18th). No progress was made. Mr. Sandys was asked to set a firm date for independence and the transfer of residual powers to Guyana. He proposed the setting up a “National Government” involving all the parties but that was rejected as the PPP and PNC had major ideological differences with the UF. When the two sides met subsequently, Mr. Burnham called for the revocation of the emergency order that was in place to preserve price controls, adequate supply of food stuff and fuel, but Dr Jagan could not accede to that request. Accordingly, Mr. Burnham used that refusal as an excuse to discontinue talks on any coalition arrangement.
At the Lancaster House Constitutional Conference on November 22, 1963, Dr Jagan put forward proposals like lowering the voting age to 18, establishing several inclusive measures, and establishing parity in the senate. Deadlock ensued. Dr Jagan agreed for Mr. Sandys to break the deadlock. Mr. Sandys rejected every proposal that Dr Jagan advanced, but he accepted and implemented Mr. Burnham’s call for Proportional Representation, and to set a date for fresh election in 1964. Election was set for December 7, 1964, and the PNC+UF coalition was declared the winner. The PPP became the opposition party.
Though frustrated with Mr. Burnham’s intransigence, Dr Jagan persevered. In 1977 he embraced a proposal for a National Patriotic Front government but that was thrown to the curb by the PNC who held the reins of power until 1992. Leading up to the 1992 election, Dr Jagan showed again his passion for national unity when the PPP became integral to a movement of Government of National Unity. That movement collapsed over the choice of a Presidential candidate. The PPP decided to run for office alone but with a “civic” component established in 1992.
The story of the PPP fighting for coalition governance (power sharing) has been filled with opposition resistance, lack of trust, duplicity, subterfuge, and foreign intrigues. Once the PNC won state power, they had lost whatever little passion they might have had for power sharing. Now that they are out of state power, they have revived Dr Jagan’s call for coalition or power sharing! Besides the crucial “trust” factor, differences in ideology and approaches to development between the PNCR and PPPC would make any coalition arrangement impracticable. Expanding Inclusivity seems to be a way forward.
Sincerely
Dr Tara Singh
