Prioritizing an agenda

Jan 26, 2012 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

---

The whole of Guyana knows that the opposition in Parliament has shaped an agenda for what they hope will be a freer Guyana. I say freer instead of better because no matter what laws the opposition passes in Parliament, if they involve huge multi-billion-dollar expenditures, the money will not be immediately available. What one can easily anticipate is that Parliament will amend and pass laws that make Guyana a more democratic country.
The average citizen in the next two years may not endure a phenomenal visit from the Treasury, but certainly from Mr. Democracy. Expected are changes that will see a freer communication climate with the amending of the Access to Information Bill. There will be a credible Ethnic Relations Commission, Ombudsman and the Public Service Appellate Tribunal- the absence of which civil servants will crucify the opposition, Auditor General Office, University Council etc.
But what really will be the priority items on the opposition’s agenda before the budget is passed? There are three immediate obsessions that the APNU and AFC have to negotiate with unlimited zest and unconditional demands. The first is a budget for Parliament that will result in a historic change in the political culture of Guyana. A budget for Parliament allows it to become independent of the executive.
The other structures are in place that provide for the autonomy of the House, for example, the Sectoral Committee.
If the National Assembly has a financial receptacle that prevents it from begging the Ministry of Finance, then the opposition is literally empowering itself. It won control of the House; the logical step forward is to shape the working of the House to insulate it from the tentacles of the Executive. The key to strengthening Parliament is its own budget. It needs no explanation that once it has its own resources it can act as a counter-weight to an autocratic government.
The process of investigation is a substantial armour in that counter-weight.
In the US and UK, and elsewhere a similar political tradition exists. The legislature acts immediately when a national crisis erupts. The different committees of the British Parliament, the House of Representatives and the Senate in the US get into action right away. If there is a medical outbreak caused by error on the part of the Executive, the legislature starts its sub-committee investigations right away, independent of the Government.
The most recent example is the hacking scandal in the UK by Rupert Murdock’s News of the World. The parliamentary sub-committee got into its enquiry mode right away.
What is priceless about these committees is that they have the power to summon important state officials. Take the case of the UG matter and my termination of contract. Who acted right and who acted wrongly?  A parliamentary sub-committee investigating UG itself could summon officials of the University to answer question on lecturers’ work and how they are appraised. In the end the nation will know who has the power to do what, when and how at UG.
APNU and AFC officials are keenly aware that it is in these committees that their power lies but no money, no committee work, no public inquiries. It is for this reason that it is only logical to assume that there are going to be onerous and tempestuous confrontations in the passing of the budget.
The President said that it is the Government’s right to craft the budget. That is as pure a legal statement as one can get. In politics, though, legality and morality have to compete with a concept known as realpolitik. The nearest meaning of that term is a hard, practical, pragmatic approach to reality.
Why build a house and sell it to your neighbour when the neighbour is allergic to cement and would prefer a wooden structure. You would have lost your money. Build what the buyer wants.
Is the PPP Government going to spend three months on crafting a budget only to see it rejected by the legislature? In realpolitik terms, you have to offer concessions. The first concession the opposition will demand is their survival in the house. That preservation can only be sustained through one type of medicine – money. If Parliament has its own funds, it doesn’t have to depend on the executive for its biology and physiology.
The other two priorities for the opposition will be GECOM seeing that there will be local government elections late in 2012. The story is the same with the legislature. If GECOM has its own budget then it determines its own pace and cannot be stymied waiting for funds from the Finance Ministry.
Finally, before the budget is passed campaign financing has to be overhauled by Parliament. Tough times are ahead.

---

---