It's the dawn of a new decade and the race is on

It’s the dawn of a new decade and the race is on

Jan 05, 2020 Eye on Guyana with Lincoln Lewis, Features / Columnists

We have entered a new decade, full of expectations – the hope for good things to come. However, a clear-eyed view of what currently exists indicates that the full involvement of citizens (the electorate) is required in determining what are the facts, the truths, and more so, what is in their interest.
We’re living in the era where politicians, in various parts of the world, are being elected to government riding high on theatrics, deceptions and lies; fooling the masses and getting them to vote against their own interest.
At home, it is said General and Regional Elections will be held in March. Last Friday, the APNU+AFC launched its election campaign. The PPP is launching theirs today. At the same time, what is being observed is the participation of a multiplicity of new parties in this election. Various interpretations have been applied to this phenomenon. The one that engages much interest is the big tent politics the PNC, as a political party, has embraced.
It is instructive to note that there exists no scientific method to gauge the smaller parties’ support base in a coalition to determine how seats in the National Assembly and the Regional Democratic Councils and/or ministerial positions will be allotted at the conclusion of the elections. This deficiency does not augur well for assessing the will of the respective constituents in such an alliance.
Further, this shortcoming contributes to the formation of smaller parties, given the perception that they stand a chance of being co-opted, whether they have enough support to garner at least a seat. Then there is the other view that such facilitation/arrangement does not incentivise some parties to do the needed grassroots work of recruiting membership and sustaining a viable party beyond a name.
This runs the risk of imposing another’s will on the electorate via manufactured participation and presence at the table with no concomitant responsibility to respect and deliver through conceptualising, developing and shaping of programmes to benefit the people.
There’s more than enough evidence to show where some having entered politics, riding on the backs of the populace, are not prepared to protect and advance the interest of those who vote they benefitted from. It is for this reason, the time has come for us to hold everyone’s feet to the fire by not only listening to what they say, but examining their track record as to what they stood for over time.
We are bearing witness to many today imploring and enticing us to exercise our constitutional right to vote and associate with a party/group of choice, though from time to time they have acted in a manner that lends to the impression other rights are not equally sacrosanct or valued.
Foremost amongst these is the right to life, freedom from want, freedom to join a trade union of choice, and right to equal treatment. When the trade union movement began the struggle in 1926 for one man one vote (universal adult suffrage), which was joined later and given a much-needed fillip by the political parties, it was never the intent that workers’ other interests would be sidelined or they would have to sacrifice other rights to enjoy this right.
It has become a practice within recent years to ignore the input of others on decision-making that impact their wellbeing. This is in spite of the fact that ours is a political system where it is clearly stated, the principal objective of the state is to establish an inclusionary democracy.
For almost two decades, Article 13 of the Constitution has remained but a declaration. No legislation, in this regard, has been passed to forge a more inclusive and cohesive society. Politicians continue to fall short at this most basic level.
Instead, energies are being expended on promoting the sexy topic of constitutional reform. It has become the centrepiece of campaign promises. It plays well to the political gallery to blame the constitution for the beginning and end of all our problems, absolving elected and appointed officials – who are being chosen by us to serve us – from responsibility and accountability.
And should you ask many of them, if they have read and/or understand the very constitution they are promising to reform, you’d either get a blank stare or customary dishonest response. We must, therefore, ask ourselves, how could we credibly reform what is not known, has never been truly tested, or given a chance to work?
As this nation gets prepared for election, it has not escaped attention that the reliance to gauge modern development is not being measured by the Human Development Index (HDI) but the Gross Domestic Product, that has been discredited as an accurate model. The HDI attends to issues such as respect for basic rights and freedoms, and citizens’ involvement in governance and other matters impacting their wellbeing.
No matter how many schools, bridges etc., are being built or promised; or how much revenue could be sourced from oil and gas, if people’s welfare is not placed front and centre, development isn’t happening. If we are serious about our development in this decade, we must hold those who are asking for our votes to account. In this season, the vote is our most powerful tool, and it must be used judiciously.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper)