GOVERNANCE: THE CHALLENGE FOR 2010

Jan 10, 2010 APNU Column, Features / Columnists

---

In his New Year message for 2010, Mr. Robert Corbin, MP, Leader of the PNCR and of the Opposition, stated the following:
“The cycle of events over the past years should alert us to the fact that, unless the fundamental issues that affect our country are addressed, we will be doomed to continue on a downward spiral. The crisis that is afflicting our country cannot be wished away by colourful propaganda. Breaking of the cycle of division and ethnic polarization in our country is an important key for unlocking the potential of our people to ensure a prosperous future.
“I am convinced, however, that this will only occur if we are prepared to embrace fundamental change. Our system of Governance is pivotal. It is irrelevant whether we want, for convenience, to describe it as shared Governance or inclusive Governance. Let us take the opportunity, in 2010, to commence that journey, no matter how difficult it may seem.”
It has been evident to the PNCR, (which formally adopted the proposal for shared governance in 2002), and to all thinking Guyanese, for some time, that the so-called Westminster, “Winner-take-all”, system has become dysfunctional and is increasingly an obstacle to the development of a Guyanese society that is not ethnically polarised and where all segments of the society feel meaningfully involved for the development of the country.
It is increasingly felt that a suitable, constitutionally enshrined, system of Power Sharing or Inclusive Governance or shared Governance represents the way forward for Guyana.

MORE CONTENT THAN FORM NEEDED
It is, therefore, a matter of some interest that Mr. Donald Ramotar, the PPP General Secretary and Presidential Candidate, as reported in the Stabroek News of January 4, 2010, under the headline, “Ramotar: PPP open to talks with opposition”, responded to the observations of the PNCR Leader. Mr. Ramotar, however, seems to be placing emphasis on form and not content.
To resort to what he euphemistically calls, “the majoritarian’ mechanism, to ignore and override Opposition concerns in the National Assembly , such as has been the case with the Local Government Reform legislation, demonstrates the farcical nature of Mr. Ramotar’s arguments that emphasis be placed on the demonstration of democracy through the Committee system in the National Assembly.
The reality is that the PPP Administration has demonstrated unwillingness to, or its apparent congenital disposition not to, faithfully implement what has been agreed to in the ‘talks with the PNCR’. Accordingly, the issue is not the holding of talks but the “implementation” of what has been agreed in the Talks.
ANALYSIS OF TALKS
An analysis of the history of ‘Talks’ between the Parties is instructive. For example, in 1998, in the midst of civil unrest leading to the intervention of CARICOM, there was the Herdmanston Accord, the St Lucia Statement and the agreements for the implementation of the Menu of Measures. These were all intended to place Guyana on the road to stability and progress.
More than a decade later, however, many of the measures still await full implementation. The Political Dialogue, which was helped by the appointment of a Caricom Facilitator, was reduced to Talk about Talks since the PPP was not prepared to make any concessions on the critical issues such as the distribution of Land and House Lots.
The single success is the establishment of the Ethnic Relations Commission by way of a Constitutional amendment passed unanimously by the National Assembly in early 2000. This body, however, only became a functioning reality after another series of talks under the title of ‘Constructive Engagement’ that ended with a New Communiqué on May 5, 2003.
The performance of this body, particularly the partisan political role of its Chairman, since its establishment has clearly indicated to Guyanese that the PPP is very reluctant that this institution should independently implement its full mandate.
In addition, its present constitutionality is now a matter for judicial determination.

THE 2001 TASK FORCES
After the 2001 Election, the late Mr. Hugh Desmond Hoyte, SC, MP, magnanimously agreed with President Jagdeo to establish the following bi-Partisan Task Forces/ Committees: Local Government Reform; Border and National Security Issues, including Recapitalisation of the GDF; National Policy on Distribution of Land and House Lots; Bauxite Resuscitation; Marginalised/ Depressed Community Needs; and Radio Monopoly and Non Partisan Boards.
These Task Forces/Committees all produced very valuable Reports with clearly implementable recommendations. However, it is clear that the PPP Administration was reluctant to implement them unless they were politically expedient in the interest of the PPP or until they were pressured to do so.

LOCAL GOVERNMENT REFORM IN JEPOARDY
The Local Government Reform Task Force was subjected to every foot-dragging and delaying tactics that the PPP could muster. It was only allowed to continue its work after another series of talks and the new agreements made under the May 5, 2003 Communiqué. Regrettably, Guyanese were again deceived for as the Task Force work was almost complete, President Jagdeo arbitrarily and unilaterally aborted its work with the specious argument that he would rely on the National Assembly to complete the reform of the Local Government system.
The clear intention of the PPP is to use their simple majority in the Parliament to stymie those recommendations that would give life to the new reformed Local Government System especially, the removal of the extensive powers of the Minister of Local Government.
Their highhanded behaviour in the National Assembly led to the withdrawal of the Parliamentary Opposition Parties from the work of the Special Select Committee. Genuine Local Government Reform is now in jeopardy. Amidst the grandstanding over the early holding of local Government Elections, there is no educational programme, either by the GECOM or the Government, to inform citizens of the new proposed system including, the boundaries of the newly established constituencies in the sixty-five Neighbourhood Democratic Councils, NDC, and the six Towns.

IMPLEMENTATION NECESSARY
An examination of the issues agreed in the Communiqué of 5 May 2003 provides clear evidence that the work and recommendations of the 2001 Task Forces/Committees had not been implemented up to those negotiations.
Interestingly, the question of the removal of the Government’s Radio Monopoly and the establishment of a National Broadcast Authority still remain to be implemented.
The reality is that talks with the PPP have not resulted in the good-faith implementation of agreements. Instead, Guyanese have witnessed the emerging dictatorial tendencies, the growing arrogance of President Jagdeo, disrespect for the Constitution and the Rule of Law, and greater alienation from the decision making process in violation of Article 13 of the Constitution.
These circumstances are a result of the deficiencies of the existing system of “winner-take-all”. It is heartening that several stakeholders, organisations and interest groups, including a recent consultation held by ACDA, have concluded that the issue of Governance must assume top priority in 2010.
The real question, therefore, that Mr. Ramotar should answer is: “Is the PPP ready, not only to talk, but, to embrace the implementation of a system based on Power Sharing or Inclusive Governance or Shared Governance?

---

---