The Guyanese people are smart and they are signaling how they want the country to be governed

May 26, 2015 Letters

---

DEAR EDITOR,
The Guyanese electorate has made another important decision about how they want to be governed, following the recent 2015 general and regional elections.
As you may recall, the people of Guyana said quite unequivocally in the 2011 elections that they voted for a new dispensation. Specifically, they said, “They did not trust the PPP/C, the APNU, or AFC with all the political power and wanted instead a system in which they could hold each other accountable for the way in which the country is organized and managed.
Hence, the Guyanese people deviated from the old path of doing business and made a new dispensation of dividing the authority between the parties, but allowing shared responsibility of governance between them. This resulted in the PPP/C being in charge of the executive for everyday governance and the opposition being in charge of Parliament, where changes to existing law or making new law, and deciding on the use of scarce national resources are to be made following rigorous debate, compromise and agreement.
The Guyanese people (are) smart and they (are) signaling how they (want) the country to be governed.” (SN 6.14.2014,” We must give the people what they voted for”). So what has transpired since the 2011 elections?
The evidence shows that the results were not encouraging, for cooperation and compromise between the executive and legislative branches were poor and therefore unsuccessful. More disappointing was the fact that the path pursued through the courts initiated by the executive to resolve budget concerns, produced results that were less than optimal.
This along with other difficulties culminated in the President of Guyana proroguing the Parliament and calling elections before the end of his term in an effort to forestall the no-confidence motion advanced by the opposition. The only benefit of all these political and legal steps was that it brought the voice of the people back into the game, and they changed direction again with the recently held 2015 elections.
Table 1, accompanying this letter, shows the political dynamics during the period 1992 to 2015. Specifically, the people of Guyana during the period 1992-1997 gave the PPP/C complete authority in the legislature and the executive and they shut out the opposition from any control in either of these two constitutional offices.

 

In 2011, the people of Guyana generated a new dispensation; they took away the power of the PPP/C in Parliament and gave it to the opposition (APNU and AFC), but left the PPP/C with executive power. This was a clear signal that the people wanted the political parties to work together for the good of the country.
This message was heard loud and clear by APNU and the AFC, but not by the PPP/C who could have chosen to join with either APNU or the AFC in some sort of shared governance, and that would have given the PPP/C control in the Parliament, along with executive authority which they already won in the 2011 elections.
Regrettably, the PPP/C shunned this idea and forgot to be generous in its ‘marginal victory’, having won only a plurality; that is, coming first in the election but not winning with at least 51 percent of the vote in 2011.
In other words, the PPP/C became a minority government for the first time in its history, having no knowledge on how to ‘build a bridge over troubled waters’ and therefore invoking the adage of the old people,’ Moon ah run till daylight ketch am.’ This outcome saw the downward spiral in the PPP/C, with key members leaving the PPP/C and the Civic component disappearing, Mr. Sam Hinds, the former Prime Minister, being a major retiree.
Meanwhile, cooperation grew between the AFC and APNU, culminating in the Cummingsburg Accord and the coalition to contest the 2015 general and regional elections against the PPP/C. This was the first genuine coalition party in Guyana and the people rewarded them with full authority and control of the Executive and Parliament, taking the Executive away from the PPP/C and making them the opposition in the same category as the 1992 PNC in Parliament.
‘Being generous in victory in the 2015 elections’, the APNU+AFC has offered or is expected to offer the PPP/C an opportunity at a unity government (SN article (5-25-2015),’ Ramotar invited to Independence Celebrations). To the time of writing, this does not seem to be going anywhere, as the PPP/C wishes to challenge the last election results, forgetting the adage which says, ‘to be gracious in defeat’ and work towards a cooperating framework to engage the government and people of Guyana on constitutional reform and development ( SN, 5-25-2015, Ralph Ramkarran,’ Working with the gov’t best course for PPP’).
Meanwhile, the people of Guyana will hold this new government accountable and will take action, if the promises made about improving the people’s welfare, being transparent, enhancing good governance and upgrading the constitution are not carried out.
The first one hundred days is the first critical benchmark in this new dispensation; and preliminary actions taken so far suggest that movement is in the right direction. More encouraging is the involvement of the people who have been volunteering their time, talent and treasure in cleaning the environment. Expectations are high and we eagerly await the new dynamics and tangible changes that the new government has promised.
C Kenrick Hunte

 

 

 

---

---