Jagdeo and the PPP are not interested in national unity talks

Oct 31, 2016 Letters

Dear Editor;
President David Granger in his recent address to the National Assembly, redirected the nation‘s attention to the mismanagement of the country by the PPPC administration, pointing to the financial, economic and social problems his government inherited, as major reasons why the coalition government has been unable to deliver more benefits to the citizens of Guyana.
So effective was the President, that opposition leader Mr. Bharat Jagdeo was forced to state that the address was more in keeping with a new government making its first presentation after coming to office. In conceding that the President’s address was appropriate in a given context, the opposition leader was unwittingly admitting that the message was damaging to the PPPC at a time when that party’s propaganda against the government was beginning to resonate among sections of the masses.
The rage and anger displayed by the opposition leader in response to the President’s address, suggested that Jagdeo felt that he and the PPP have lost political ground. The PPP propaganda operatives and activists have since been singing from their leader’s song book. They have also resorted to their old tactic, which over the decades, has proven to be effective – that is to invoke the Burnham regime and the ‘negative effects’ on the nation of the PNCR’s 28years rule. This approach is the hallmark of the PPP’s party propaganda whether it is in opposition or, in government. For the PPP that approach is fair game. But when that party got a dose of its own medicine from President Granger, who invoked the negative effects on the nation as a result of the PPPC’s 23 years in office, which only ended 16 months ago, Jagdeo and the rest of the PPP leadership are now shouting foul.
Jagdeo‘s contention that President David Granger’s speech was a “desecration of the House” is not only ridiculous, it also does not concur with our parliamentary history. The President did not say anything that was not in keeping with Guyanese parliamentary culture. What seems to have caught the PPPC off guard was their failure to correctly read the mood of the President and to anticipate his response to their forewarned boycott of the parliamentary sitting. Jadgeo’s ‘desecration’ claim is a political reflex action to his and the PPPC’s tactical miscalculation. The defense of Carvil Duncan given his legal troubles, which forced the President to ask for his resignation from the constitutional boards/agencies he sat on, cannot justify the party’s decision to boycott the President’s address to the National Assembly. The opposition leader and his party would have been on stronger grounds if they had walked out in response to the President’s remarks. It is one thing for the opposition to walk out on the President in defense of what they perceived as unjustified attacks on the party’s reputation. But to attempt to defend a comrade who is embroiled in corruption charges of a criminal nature is politically difficult to sell, and opens the party to criticisms of abusing parliamentary privilege.
It is to his credit that President Granger, during his parliamentary address to the National Assembly and the nation once again took the opportunity to clarify his position as it regards to these issues and the need for ongoing dialogue with the parliamentary opposition. Not surprisingly, the opposition leader responded in his predictable way. In the course of his response to the President’s renewed initiative Jagdeo made it clear that the chances of Guyana being lifted out of the state of morass in which it finds it, will not be realized in the foreseeable future.
The President’s calculated political action which one newspaper described as his extension of the, “olive branch” to the opposition, caused me to ponder. He is on the right tract since constitutionally, as President of the country he has the responsibility to rise above partisan politics. While he has the constitutional responsibility as President and he is obliged to act within the parameters of those responsibilities, Mr. Granger also has the political duty to neutralize a hostile opposition. It could be argued that, after having dealt the opposition a serious blow by reminding the nation of the PPPC’s destruction of the country and of the birth of the criminal state under their watch, the President may have undone some of his excellent work by offering the “olive branch” to Jagdeo.
Since becoming Head of State he has made this offer to Jagdeo on many occasions, and this, in spite of the fact that Jagdeo’s response has always been to be dismissive. Given the reasons Jagdeo had advanced for the PPP’s boycott of the President’s address to the National Assembly and the nation Mr. Granger did not need to go down that road. By doing so, he provided Jagdeo with an opportunity to extricate himself from the embarrassing position he had created for himself. The Opposition Leader, shrewd politician that he is, seized the opportunity with both hands.
I am aware that the President has a difficult job of navigating his politics in a nonpartisan way, but he must be attuned to the fact that in the context of relentless and hostile opposition foes who are using their clout to save themselves and their allies from prosecution for wrong doings, very little room is left for normal politics – more so patriotism. The opposition given its criminal history cannot, objectively, be patriotic at this time. Their politics is now conditioned to save their skins at all cost. The political challenge in Guyana therefore, is how to reconcile politically and at the same time dismantle the criminal state and bring to justice wrong doers. The PPPC decision to boycott the President speech in defense of Carvil Duncan highlights this reality.
Tacuma Ogunseye