The hand that holds the key to unlock the door to a new Guyana

Mar 06, 2015 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
Peeping Tom’s “A case of survival,” (KN, March 5), which analyzes implications of the AFC’s decision to break its 2005 promise of never allying with the PPP or PNC to doing just that with APNU/PNC, indeed, is a case of literal political survival, except that I see the mitigating circumstances through different lenses.
First,  let me clear the air by stating without fear of contradiction that the APNU/PNC of today is not the same PNC of the Burnham or Hoyte eras, just as the PPP of today is not the same PPP of the Cheddi Jagan era. All this baloney about the PNC’s past being used as a reason to repudiate the APNU/PNC of today is just that: baloney. Yes, the PNC made egregious mistakes, but this PPP took egregious to a whole new low level.
Second, some folks, who are averse to the alliance, are too pre-occupied with the AFC’s 2005 promise as some sort of immutable principle, hence their failure or refusal to see that the promise was made under political circumstances that were totally different from what obtains a decade later.
In 2005, the promise was to allow the AFC to be a third alternative to the PPP and PNC, both of which traditionally relied on ethnic voting (Indians for PPP and Blacks for PNC) for relevance and even elected office. In 2015, the AFC found itself in an odd position of being thrown by the PPP, via a prorogation proclamation, into the same boat with APNU/PNC, making them ‘strange boat fellows’, nullifying the will of the majority of Guyanese and rendering  the combined opposition as voiceless and powerless elected representatives of the majority in Parliament.
Prorogation, which was brought forward from the pre-Independence era of British control, was supposed to be a constitutional escape clause for the authoritarian Forbes Burnham who, in event his handpicked parliamentary majority turned against him with a no-confidence motion, could then easily pre-empt that move, like Donald Ramotar did, and prorogue Parliament.
As an aside, editor, prorogation does not always have to lead to dissolution and fresh elections, as the PPP proved during prorogation by begging the opposition to engage in extra-parliamentary talks before reconvening Parliament. This was also demonstrated during the parliamentary dispute in Canada (2008-2009) where an opposition-inspired NCV triggered legislative prorogation, during which period, one of the parties supporting NCV underwent a leadership change and after prorogation, the new leaders supported the incumbent government. No elections were held!
As it has turned out in Guyana, however, although prorogation is a constitutional option, it can be used as a political weapon to thwart the democratic process, literally rendering all elected parliamentary parties voiceless and powerless as representatives of the electorate. The only voice and power left standing are those from the party that won the plurality of votes to form the executive branch.
Moreover, since it is now known that the President can use prorogation randomly during a five year-term to create a virtual one-party dictatorship by a minority regime over a majority of Guyanese and their majority elected representatives in Parliament, and which dictatorship can spend public monies at will and operate unchecked by Parliament, the AFC was faced with a choice of, on the one hand, continuing to focus on a 2005 promise never to ally with either the PPP or PNC to, on the other hand, allying with APNU/PNC in 2015 to survive and help save Guyana from the PPP.
In fact, just as the AFC could not pass the NCV without APNU/PNC’s support, it needed APNU/PNC to survive while sharing the same boat, then working together to stop the PPP and save Guyana. It was a stark choice for the AFC that required placing what is in the best interest of the nation over and ahead of what is in the best interest of the party, and since the PPP made both AFC and APNU/PNC ‘strange boatfellows’ with the aim of destroying their chances of stopping the PPP, then the two opposition parties had to look at the harsh facts and make some hard choices that obviously drew mixed reactions at home and abroad.
Most seem supportive of the alliance as a symbolic and substantive step towards bridging the racial chasm created by decades of ethnic voting patterns, while others are obsessing over the AFC breaking its 2005 anti-alliance promise.
The pro-PPP supporting cast, true to its role, is spreading the seeds of racial hatred and division by claiming the AFC’s alliance means it is trying to help hand the reins of power to the supposedly hated PNC, with whom the PPP, more than once, tried to form a unity government. I sometimes wonder what would have been the response if the AFC had decided during prorogation to ally with the PPP, instead!
Race, as I said in a recent letter in Stabroek News, appears to be what will again determine the outcome of the 2015 elections, except that in this year’s elections race, which appears to be tighter than the 2011 race, it could come down to cross-over racial voting to decide which team wins. But while the issue of race continues to be a factor within the elections race, there are two other races taking place: a rat race among the thieves in the government to see who can get the most public cheese, and a race among ordinary Guyanese to survive more than 60 years of divisive race politics and economic struggles.
If the fate of Guyanese rests with their faith in politicians, then Guyanese have to first have faith in themselves to believe they hold the vote that determines their fate! To me, APNU-AFC, which have demonstrated a willingness to break the cycle of politically-inspired racial division is the hand that holds the key to unlock the door to a new Guyana!
Emile Mervin

---

---