The Federal Option

Aug 19, 2012 Features / Columnists, Ravi Dev

---

As the Linden protests escalated from a complaint over electricity rates into demands for equity in development, participation in decisions affecting the region; involvement in land allocation; diversity in local TV broadcasting etc., I was struck by the studied refusal of the leaders of the protestors and their political sponsors to consider the federal option of governance which would have made all the storm and fury – and the ill-fated killings of three locals – moot.
When it is boiled down to its bare essentials, the Linden upheaval is an object lesson in ethnic politics and the relevance of federalism to address demands when the ethnic populations are differentially distributed geographically. Linden has been an almost ethnically homogenous community (African-Guyanese) since the 1960’s when Indian-Guyanese were completely driven out.
Following the PPP’s return to office (as we pointed out then, not to ‘power”) in 1992, they made a concerted effort to woo the Linden community. In subsequent elections, they proudly pointed to their increasing, albeit still small, votes received from the township as proof of the withering away of ethnic voting. It ignored the labelling of its Linden supporters as ‘sell-outs’ or worse, by the majority of Lindeners. We had pointed out that those votes were more of a reflection of the disarray in the PNC than any change in voting orientation. The AFC also temporarily benefitted from this alienation in 2006.
The PPP was always in a no-win situation in Linden in view of the collapse of the bauxite industry under the PNC – especially when it decided to privatise the latter but retain ownership of the sugar industry. That the latter had ‘guaranteed’ markets, while the former had lost out to alternative suppliers was not going to cut any ice with most Lindeners. I remember pointing this out in Parliament when bauxite workers picketed the PM’s office and he was forced to reveal all the subsidies the government was providing to Linden. At the time ROAR was agitating for the sugar levy to be removed.
Looking ahead, I hope it is clear to everyone now that the relative majority of the Indian-Guyanese vote is a thing of the past – and a cohesive Opposition has as good a chance – if not better – of winning elections outright henceforth. The just initiated census will show that Indians are just around 35% versus the 48% of African/Mixed segment. The Mixed vote has always cleaved to the African-Guyanese voting pattern and nothing has fundamentally altered that orientation.
Now the African Security Dilemma has been resolved, I’d been harping on the theme for the past few years that the Opposition can win a free and fair elections. But I’ve also stressed the sub-theme for them to avoid street protests that can careen out of control and initiate interethnic violence. It appears that David Hinds and elements in the WPA, calling for Buxton to start digging up its roads are determined to derail our transition to what I call ‘normal’ ethnic politics – much less ‘normal’ non-ethnic politics.
After the 2006 elections, I’d challenged the AFC to retain their African-Guyanese votes in 2011 with Ramjattan as the presidential candidate. I’m offering the same challenge concerning the Indian vote with the next swing of their leadership pendulum – and their association with street protests.
But back to the original point I wish to make. If the Opposition (APNU, actually) wins the next election and assumes power (not only “office”, but ‘power’ since they’ll have the full support of the Civil Service and Disciplined Forces) the same scenario that played out in Linden will replicate itself in Indian dominated areas such as Berbice and Essequibo. This will also be true for Amerindian-dominated Regions 1, 7, 8 and 9. We’ve already seen miners, mostly traditional supporters of APNU/PNC, adamantly opposed the expansion and titling of Amerindian lands.
So we’ll have protests in these regions against the APNU government, not withstanding  the ‘power sharing” talk that will remain talk. The Skeldon Factory fiasco and the demise of the sugar industry will now be the responsibility of APNU. If the Demerara Plantations have to be privatised, throwing thousands out of work, APNU will face the heat. Agreements such as the one finally hammered out with Linden Representatives, after billions in dollars went up in smoke and the three lives snuffed out, will be reached. But once we have a centralised system of governance, they will all come to naught. This is the nature of centralised power: the central government will try every which way to retain the initiative, which means retaining decision-making power.
The constitutionally enforced demarcation between central and state competencies – the federal principle – is the only device which can ameliorate this inherent conflict between geographic communities and a central government that they cannot identify with. A peaceful and prosperous Guyana will only come with Federalism.

---

---