THE POLL THAT THE PPP WILL NEVER CONDUCT

Jul 11, 2013 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

 

It is amazing how an adjustment to one’s status within a party can change one’s perspective on things. Very few within the leadership of the PPPC would have predicted anything but a comfortable majority in the run-up to the 2011 elections.
These were not elections to be lost by the PPPC. They were elections which would vindicate the greatness of the PPP and the Jagdeo administration.
Just before the elections, the friends of Jagdeo had a spectacular farewell for him, an event which could have been mistaken for the coronation of a King.
Against this background, the possibility of the PPPC losing the 2011 elections was unthinkable. The possibility of the party not gaining a majority was remote.
The PPPC did not lose the elections, but it failed to gain a majority of the votes cast, because of the manner in which seats are allocated. It fell behind by one seat to gain a majority.
After the shock of the results had evaporated, then came the analyses for the party’s showing. The first one of note was that the party suffered from the syndrome known as incumbency fatigue.
The people, in other words, were tired of the same old government and therefore there was some amount of vote-shifting. Well, as it turned out it was a major shift and a great percentage of that shift took place in Berbice where the PPPC has always been considered impregnable.
But there followed other explanations. An in-house analysis by the PPP itself found that APNU had engaged in vote -rigging. It was said that the turnout in stations where the PPPC did not have polling agents was larger than the mean turnout at other stations where there were poling agents of the ruling party. Other related excuses were given including open hostility against the ruling party’s supporters at some stations.
No one within the leadership wanted to come out and concede publicly that the opposition did their homework. The opposition knew from the Maths’ that though they would never attract the popular vote, once the turnout of opposition supporters was substantially higher than those of the PPPC, there could be a possibility of denying the PPPC a majority.
The opposition felt therefore, that if they drew the PPPC into a state of complacency, they could spring a surprise and deny the PPP a majority in the National Assembly. And this is exactly what they did. They ran a low keyed campaign, lulled the PPPC into believing that victory was assured and then sprung a surprise by effective mobilization on election’s day.
The opposition parties did not have the resources to be effective on the ground within the communities before elections day. Where they stood out was their mobilization on election’s day.
On the other hand, the PPPC still seemed to be riding on the cloud of their farewell ceremony for their retired president and as a consequence did not mobilize on election’s day. They paid the price.
It is a positive sign that the PPPC’s leadership has come down from its high horses. They have discarded the unproven theories of incumbency fatigue and vote-rigging by APNU and have now accepted that they lost touch with their supporters.
That type of honesty is commendable. It is a good place to begin to regain lost ground. Accepting that the necessary groundwork was absent does not answer the question as to why, despite not having the same groundwork, the opposition supporters were highly motivated to kick the PPPC out of office. It also does not explain why the PPPC supporters voted by their absence from the polling stations.
The PPPC needs to commission a poll to determine why its once loyal supporters stayed away in their numbers. What were the reasons why the formally loyal supporters of a party which rescued Guyana from destitution to which it had descended under the PNC refuse to come out and vote or voted instead for the AFC?
Does the PPP really want the answer to that question or is the party’s leadership afraid of the consequences?
Will the party launch a poll by a credible pollster to answer the questions as to why there was complacency and a switch in large numbers to the AFC? Are they willing to also determine why without much resources, APNU enjoyed a higher voter turnout through effective mobilization on election’s day and a highly motivated support bases keen to kick the PPP out of office?
This column will hazard a speculation that the PPPC will never undertake a poll to answer these questions because the answers will frighten the leadership. It will demonstrate what the PPP leadership does not wish to accept: that its supporters were outraged at the lifestyles of some of their leaders. .Appalled by their arrogance and detested the fact that little attention was being paid to the problems faced by ordinary citizens.
By not facing those issues, the PPP is avoiding a purge at the existing Congress. But by failing to act it may also be courting defeat come 2016.
The problem therefore is not that there are forces trying to sully the leadership with charges of corruption so as to influence the outcome of the Congress. The problem is that there is a leadership which refuses to accept that these concerns are responsible in the first place for the PPPC being a minority in parliament.

 

 

---

---