PONDERING THE FUTURE

Feb 18, 2018 Editorial, Features / Columnists

More than a quarter of the world’s democracies have coalition governments that comprised two or more parties. One case is Israel. Guyana had its first two-party coalition government in 1964 when the PNC and the UF coalesced to defeat the PPP.
The reason for that arrangement was that individually, neither the PNC nor the UF could have defeated the PPP in a winner-take-all political system.
Coalition governments have their ups and downs. The good thing is that in a coalition government, everyone has to compromise and make sacrifices for the common good. The largest party cannot completely implement its own agenda, and if it does, it can disappoint and frustrate the voters who could lose faith in governance.
Coalition governments are more democratic and fair because they represent a much broader spectrum of public opinion than a government by one party. In most if not all coalition governments, the views and interests of the citizens are represented in political decision-making. It is a more honest and dynamic political system which allows voters a clearer choice at election time.
Coalition governments provide a more consensual style of politics and allow for a more gradual and constructive shift of policy between administrations. Having defeated the PPP the coalition is now working to correct the ills of the country. Rampant corruption is being tackled but at a frustratingly slow pace. None of the promised prosecutions has occurred.
Perhaps the focus on national development has caused this shift in focus. To compound the issue the coalition must withstand the criticisms for an oil contract that has left Guyana pretty much reeling from what it has not got.
Before the 2015 elections, the minuscule AFC loomed large because APNU needed only a few seats to win the election. However, once the elections were over, problems began to seep in the lustrous agreement in the 2015 Valentine Cummingsburg Accord.
Some say the problems resulted because the AFC did not fare as well as had been predicted. Surely that could not be the case because the larger section of the coalition allocated more seats to the AFC than previously agreed.
The out of proportion allocation of seats and offices to the AFC seems to be extravagant. The APNU has not decided to rectify what some feel to be an unfair distribution of offices.
Using the late Forbes Burnham’s 1964-68 gambit with his erstwhile coalition partner, the United Force, the APNU offered some AFC members side deals. It is clear to any objective observer that Raphael Trotman has returned home following his 2011 appointment as the Speaker of the House in the 10th Parliament by APNU. He has been further handsomely rewarded by a huge reservoir of power with the Ministry Natural Resources.
Of course, there are many angry observers, angry because the AFC really hurt the PPP. It was Bharrat Jagdeo who kept saying that his party could never lose an election in Guyana. He felt secure in the ethnic composition of the country, so comfortable that he was able to woo dyed in the wool members of the People’s National Congress.
The Alliance is once more working its constituencies because it knows that its strength lies with its people. Yet it has to justify to those of its supporters in the sugar belt that closing those estates was necessary.
It has two years to recover whatever ground it lost.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News