There is something to political mergers

Aug 14, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
During a reception at the Cuffy Ideological Institute in mid-1982, Dr. Ptolemy Reid, then Prime Minister of Guyana, sought to explain to me why he had developed an almost infinite faith in the political leadership of President Forbes Burnham.  He gave as one reason Burnham’s tenacious handling of the late 1950s coalition process between the newly formed People’s National Congress (PNC) and the United Democratic Party (UDP).
As he told it, even before the 1957 elections, Burnham saw the wisdom of working with other political forces to beat the PPP Jaganites and the 1957 PPP (Burnhamites) defeat steeled him in the view that coalition/co-operation with other groups and individuals was essential to his party’s future success.
There was, however, much opposition to his position and although he was defeated on the issue at party forums, he held out and at one point even threatened to leave the PNC and Guyana if the party did not follow his lead. The merger took place and although the PNC did not win the 1961 elections, it received some 41% of the votes to the PPP’s 42% and the United Force’s (UF) 17%, and thus clarified the strategy for gaining government. So far as Dr. Reid was concerned, it was Burnham’s clear-sightedness and steadfastness that won the day for the PNC.
I generally took these homilies of Dr. Reid on faith, but my own cursory research appears to bear him out. Even before the 1957 elections, the Burnhamites threw their weight behind the ex-Jaganite and then independent, Eusi Kwayana, who was standing for the Central Demerara seat, and around the same time there were claims and counter claims about a possible PNC coalition with Lionel Luckhoo’s National Labour Front (NLF) (Daily Chronicle, 01/08/57).
The 1957 loss behind it, by mid-1958, merger talks with the UDP were in full swing and the Chronicle reported that: “There is, however, a strong body of opinion in both parties totally against the idea of a merger.…The view is that since the PNC is an offshoot of the PPP, its members should consider merging with that party.
On the other hand, some people believe there should be a merger with the National Labour Front, which is an off-shoot of the UDP. This suggestion does not seem to find favour in the PNC or the UDP since the views on (West Indian) Federation of the PPP and the NLF are on the opposite side. Apart from Federation, it is also felt that if there is a merger between the PPP and the PNC and the UDP and the NLF, it will go far to build up a strong two-party system which would implement the suggestion of the members of the British Parliament who said here recently that the two-party system would make for healthier government in a British Guiana of the future (Daily Chronicle, 29/05/58).”
The above reminiscence resulted from my reading of the AFC rejection of alliance with the PNC and Mr. Raphael Trotman’s further explanation of that process (“AFC says no to alliance with PNCR,” SN: 26/07/2010; “AFC’s decision to exclude PNCR not unanimous:” KN 30/07/2010). And quite apart from some historical similarities, it is given here because I believe that it conveys a few lessons and allows me to make some relevant comments.
Firstly, it teaches that when facing this kind of
difficulty, leadership needs to be resolute, as people generally only adopt new positions grudgingly and gradually. A unitary opposition slate at the next general election is a critical component if government is to be captured and governance transformed. The AFC would be a valued member of any such partnership it is therefore incumbent on all those who are supportive of the venture to be constructive and encouraging.
This is by no means a request for quietism and already there has been much criticism and defensiveness.
What is most ironic is that the AFC is now viewed by some as being gripped by the kind of racial bickering it claims it wishes to nationally suppress. Of course, more than anything, this speaks volumes about the nature of our polarized society.
These issues aside, I believe that if it is to survive, the AFC must give sufficient weight to the fact that many, if not most, of those who voted for it in 2006 did so largely because they calculated that the party would have contributed to a change of governance in Guyana.
Secondly, the example indicates that if the intention is to come to government, hard electoral numbers and critical concrete conditions, not ideological and other peripheral issues, must drive the process.
In ideological terms, there was some merit in the position that the PNC was much closer to the PPP than it was to the Afro middleclass UDP.  However, though not said in the report above, the PPP would have already burnt its bridges with the West and this had to be adequately contextualized.
Some would go as far as to say that deals requiring PPP exclusion from government had already been made.
Ethnic voting has been with us for over half a century and nothing I have heard so far has yet convinced me that this pattern will not hold at the next elections. Indeed, I find a good degree of contradiction in the contention of many of the PPP/C’s critics that that party is massively favouring Indians but that significant numbers of Indians will vote against it!
Even in normal political situations holding this view would require an enormous imagination!
Thirdly, given their historical location, we can understand how in the 1950s persons could have had faith in the Westminster model, but after over half a century of bad experience and so much academic and other work in this area, only the most self-interested could still hold to this conviction.
The example also suggests that to be successful, any future partnership needs to exude a clear picture as to why it wishes to take government. In our time, this means that it must be transparent about its major objectives, and I want to suggest that a constitutional transformation of the nature of government, and not any airy-fairy notion of putting so-called “good” people to run the same old structures, is a minimum requirement if our wish is to break the cycle of poverty.
On a related issue, during the budget debate of 1958, the PPP government was accused of unscrupulous and discriminatory behaviour and the Hon. Balramsingh Rai was reported as saying that: “….members of the opposition should be more responsible and should not indulge in generalization without evidence to back what they said” (Daily Chronicle, 30/06/58). This mantra about the need for evidence has echoed throughout the decades: during the PNC regime and even today.
What those who make these requests fail to grasp is that racism, and particularly current racism, is only one of the causes of polarization. Maybe it is best to view our major political parties as ethnic defence arrangements which their members support even though they have grave concerns about their operations. Please note that a major criticism of Mr. Robert Corbin’s leadership of the PNC/R is that he has not been sufficiently vigorous in radically defending his constituency.
It follows that even at this simmering level of hostility one cannot achieve peace and thus development by asking one side to abandon or give over its defences to the other side! If the leaders cannot find a cooperative framework, hostility will continue regardless of how essentially peaceful one may think the people are.
It is this very feature that makes any attempt at a “citizens initiative” that marginalizes major political parties very problematical and perhaps, even adventuristic.
I believe that Mr. Trotman was correct in drawing to our attention some of the dynamics of the partnership discourse within the AFC. He and his supporters should take heart; history is certainly not against them.
Henry B. Jeffrey.

Some suggestions to solve the garbage problem

Dear Editor,
Much has been said about the uncollected garbage around the city and the unbearable smell that emanates from the rotting waste material ill-advisedly stored or buried in the Le Repentir, or dumped in several alleyways around Georgetown.
Families living in contiguous areas to the Le Repentir dumpsite and persons passing by the Presidential Complex are greeted with an unbearable smell that is unhealthy for all persons and especially for little children. Furthermore, a land breeze, blowing from south to north in that vicinity, makes an early morning walk most uncomfortable. Similarly, the eastern side of Bourda Green/Bourda Market, where piles of waste are haphazardly dumped is already a major disaster, given that fresh and processed food are stored and sold in close proximity to the garbage dump.
Blocked drains and uncut alleyways, Styrofoam boxes, plastic bottles, newspapers, cardboard boxes, discarded clothing, aluminum cans and plastic wrapping, among other waste material, have clogged many drains where an assortment of garbage is seen floating in our rivers. The closure of the incinerator in the Le Repentir some years ago without an alternative furnace and a fleet of reliable trucks and skilled workers have left the city with a garbage disposal system that is capacity constrained as well as poorly managed and under financed.
Besides, the capacity to store rainwater in Georgetown after a shower has been diminished and this leads to frequent flooding in and around Georgetown. The parapets close to the seawall and lands beyond the seawall are covered with all sorts of waste material. Visits to the seawall are no longer memorable, but painful experiences, especially on Monday mornings. Visits out of Georgetown to many villages show the same pattern of this manufactured disaster; and the question is not if there will be a health crisis as spoken of by a Government Minister, but when will it become full blown, given the garbage build up. Furthermore, this problem is no longer about which political party in Central, Regional or Local Government is to be blamed for the environmental disaster we have; rather, it is about the survival of the city and every day that passes the problem grows exponentially. In fact, sending our garbage to future generations is an irresponsible act that must not happen.
So what is the solution to fixing Georgetown? There is no one answer and concerned Guyanese need to put their heads together and solve this problem. Here are some suggestions, many of which have been advanced before:
1. Ban Styrofoam containers immediately, for they are not biodegradable. Styrofoam will damage the environment for several decades. Cardboard boxes should be used.
2. The city council must have a source of funds that is reliable and continuous overtime. Properties should be reassessed to take into account inflation, while differential rates and taxes should be applied to private homes and business places. Many private homes in Georgetown have been converted to business places and they should pay higher rates and taxes to reflect the cost of the services these receive.
3. No less than 75 percent of the rate and taxes and revenue collected from other city projects must be used directly for cleaning and maintaining the city. The total cost paid for all elected city councilors and the Mayor must be no more than 5 percent of the total collected.
4. There should be a programme to de-silt all canals and outfalls to the Demerara River at least once per year. All gutters and drains in and around Georgetown must be cleaned; parapets must be weeded and roads patched before the wet season begins. The city cleaning records of the 1960s and 1970s should be examined for patterns and understanding and a similar programme built for 2011.
5. Mosquito control and sanitary inspectors should be reintroduced to check on yards and homes and the environment. Less stagnant water in yards will reduce the mosquito infestation problem. Inspectors can monitor this programme with authority to impose fines.
6. Severe fines must be imposed on persons for placing garbage in the wrong place. More garbage disposal bins should be placed on the streets, while special efforts should be mounted to enforce the law on the seawall, especially on Sunday nights.
7. Schoolchildren must be taught and tested in school about maintaining the environment in a clean and healthy state.
8. Garbage must be sorted and disposed of in different ways. Some kinds could be buried, if they are biodegradable. Some kinds of hospital waste should be
incinerated. Plastic bottles and containers should be shredded. Shredded plastic bottles have been added to road building materials and this should be explored in Guyana. Part of the tax collected on plastic bottles should be used for paying persons to collect the bottles and another part used to establish a project to shred plastic bottle and containers.
9. Stop dumping garbage in the Le Repentir. The Le Repentir must be restored and maintained in its appropriate state, for the final resting place of our loved ones must not be a garbage dump. Guyanese need to take a stand against this atrocity.
C. Kenrick Hunte

The PR system is effective

Dear Editor,
Guyana’s proportional representation electoral system is effective.
Is our electoral system, a fundamental component of any democratic state, now under attack? Did Mr. Gerhard Ramsaroop in his August 11, 2010 letter actually criticise the proportional representation system as a tool of racial division? Yes, our democracy is frail, but is this attack on our electoral system justifiable, or is this just another display of shameless desperation in light of the upcoming election year?
Our system of proportional representation, as modeled after the Westminster System of the United Kingdom allows voters to determine the number of seats a party will have. And while we are still ethnically diverse, it is a gross insult to the people of Guyana to insinuate that where we have come from is where we still are! Guyanese are intelligent people capable of making informed, educated decisions, especially where these affect their future, and the future of their children.
The proportional representation electoral system was not established to ensure that the PNC remains the chief opposition, while preserving PPP dominance. Neither are the people of Guyana bound by traditional norms of voting where majority Indian or African votes belong to the PPP or the PNC, respectively.
As a citizen of Guyana, my vote is based on the issues that affect me, my community and my country.
I am confident of and comforted in the fact that I am not alone in this, and that our electoral system is effective for promoting and protecting democracy in Guyana.
Too much has been accomplished since early independence for our people to be dragged through the mud because of another person’s political ambition.
Nigel Green

Are prescribed drugs really free?

Dear Editor,
There is a book universally called a Pharmacopeia. In it is listed all known drugs or medications approved by Government, for use in Guyana.
It not only names the items but it describes in detail what medical purposes they serve, their dosage, side-effects and other details. All pharmacists and medical practitioners are required to study and pass rigid examinations on this book before they may practice their respective professions.
A Formulary on the other hand is a book which lists the drugs and medications all public healthcare institutions (especially hospitals) stock, store and provide free of charge, to the Guyanese people. So what? You may ask at this point. Well, the public is not at all satisfied with the unavailability of free drugs and medications at any or all of our facilities, and I am prepared to shrilly object on their behalf to what I perceive to be a gross injustice and a serious dilemma we daily encounter when we present our authorised prescriptions to public pharmacies. A prescription is often not worth the paper on which it is written if invariably the item(s) are not in stock and must be purchased elsewhere. The end result is that most patients ignore the treatment regime, purchase less than what was prescribed, become acutely sick, become a serious burden on our health budget and ultimately die.
Editor, I need not amplify’ the contributing factors such as negligence in Government stock-taking, reordering schedules, pensioners inability to purchase, prohibitive charges by pharmaceutical companies, the public’s negligence and inattention to primary, secondary and tertiary care, the appeals by our overworked and embattled pharmacists to fix the appalling system which is not their fault and the general response by all who would listen, that is, I don’t know!
It can’t be done! We have always done it this way! We don’t have! What about a voucher for reimbursement?
Fellow Guyanese I am saying this now – if the drug or medication is listed in the Formulary, it must at all times be available to whomever it is legally prescribed in every public healthcare institution in Guyana, period.
George L. Munroe

---

---