Local Government Elections: Less about communities and more about National Parties

Sep 30, 2018 Features / Columnists, Hinds' Sight with Dr. David Hinds

---

This past week, the country had to endure the back and forth among the parties contesting the upcoming local government election over the validity of their respective candidates’ list. The exchange between the PPP and the AFC was especially sharp. I had opined a few months ago that the PPP would not allow the AFC to campaign in Indian Guyanese communities. The apparent overt pressure on Indian Guyanese to steer clear of the AFC, including denying that party signatories and candidates, seems to be part of that scenario that I predicted. The campaign would be brutal.
In a sense, these elections are anything but local. They are driven by the national parties. Scores would be settled. Muscles would be flexed. Yes, local government elections in November would not be about people in their communities. There are fewer independent candidates this time around. Some independents of 2016 are now on the parties’ slates. The turnout could be as low or even lower than in 2016. Local democracy would not be enhanced.
In November, we would not be electing community representatives to govern their communities. Instead, we would be electing local party representatives whose allegiance would be to the party rather than to the people in the communities. So long as parties insist on dominating local government elections, such elections would not be democratic in the deep sense of the term. The outcome would be the will of the parties rather than the will of the people in their communities. In the past, we had no local government elections. Today, we have elections, but they are flawed.
But flawed as those elections in November would be, they would be important for national politics. I am arguing that these elections would tell us whether the AFC still has mass support, which in turn would tell us what an APNU+AFC Coalition could look like in 2020. The elections would also tell us the extent to which the Indian Guyanese community has returned to PPP orthodoxy. Finally, we would get a sense of African Guyanese political attitude to the government.
This rest of this column zeroes in on the AFC. I am contending that for the AFC, these elections are less about representing people and more about the party’s standing going into the 2020 elections. The PPP despises the AFC, because the AFC is seen as a group of Indian Guyanese, which joined with the PPP’s arch-enemy to throw the Indian Guyanese party out of office. In Guyana’s ethnically divided politics, such an offence is unpardonable. The PPP will never rest until it decimates the AFC. And this upcoming local government election presents the PPP with the perfect opportunity to begin to do so.
The AFC obviously anticipated this outcome. Hence, its concerted effort to cover itself by trying to contest the election as part of a coalition with the APNU. It is now open knowledge that the APNU had other ideas—a weakened AFC would decrease its bargaining power in 2020. And there are elements in the AFC who welcomed the APNU’s snub—for them it gives the party a chance to prove its independence. They reasoned that the AFC still has considerable electoral support and it needs to demonstrate this in clear terms.
It’s a big risk for the AFC. If it does well, all will be well for the party. First, it would demonstrate its viability in the face of extreme criticism of its uncritical attitude within the governing Coalition. Second, it would represent a sound defeat of the PPP on its own turf. Third, and most importantly, it would be a serious blow to the APNU’s tactic to expose the AFC’s electoral vulnerability. That would mean that the AFC would enter negotiations over the spirit and content of an updated Cummingsburg Accord with even more leverage than it had prior to the 2015 election.
But if the AFC falters, the opposite of the above scenario would be true. The party would survive, since it is in government. And in any case, parties don’t die because they lack electoral support. However, its role in the next APNU+AFC Coalition would be greatly diminished. The PNC would be guaranteed a larger chunk of the slate and the potential spoils of office. So, the AFC would be cut down to size and the PNC would be elevated to its right size.
But that would mean that the Coalition would become a farce. The PNC would become de facto and de jure “big brother.” Could such a Coalition be as attractive as the one of 2015? I doubt it. Ironically, a poor showing at the local government election could spell doom for the Coalition. The APNU’s tactic could well backfire—cut the AFC down to size but in the process diminish the notion of Coalition.
More of Dr. Hinds ‘writings and commentaries can be found on his YouTube Channel Hinds’ Sight: Dr. David Hinds’ Guyana-Caribbean Politics and on his website www.guyanacaribbeanpolitics.news. Send comments to [email protected]

---

---