Dear Editor,
That we can have the discussion and debate with Ms Minette Bacchus is testimony to the fact that the PNCR is the ultimate winner because of its decision to choose its leaders democratically. The PPP chooses its leader using non-democracy and the AFC has a cumbersome rotation principle. Minette’s letter (I believe we were classmates at UG between 1992 to 1996 so I will use her first name) of July 25, 2014 has three substantial points to which I would respond.
Firstly, there is the issue of time which requires us to think in dynamic and evolutionary terms. Indeed Mr Desmond Hoyte did the most to reach out to East Indians pre-1992 and yet the PNC lost the election. In 1992 and even six years after almost all East Indians believed Dr Jagan and his party were cheated and as a result deserved a chance to govern. Even President Jimmy Carter fell for the game that the PPP will govern fairly and in the interest of the nation instead of PPP Inc. It takes a long time for people to realize the true nature of the PPP as it took years for Hoyte’s reforms to bear fruit. It took years for us to realize why Stabroek News kept on printing the Monica Reece murder each Good Friday after she was killed on Good Friday 1993. Therefore, not because Hoyte could not pull large amounts of East Indian votes in 1992 means it cannot be done between now and 2016. However, I agree with one aspect of Minette’s letter that it will take a conscious effort to win over the regions and groups she mentioned.
Secondly, Minette’s approach – stated in her penultimate paragraph – only allows for the two main political parties to focus on their traditional ethnic base.
They ought to teach their respective bases to respect the other side. Essentially, Minette’s strategy would see the PNCR – the largest representative of African Guyanese – stay in opposition permanently once the AFC sticks with its 10% and the PPP stays with its 44-45%, which it is likely to get in the next election between now to 2016. The current pernicious constitution does not allow post-election coalitions and the President has all the legal powers not to assent to the Bills of the opposition. Systemic and network discrimination against African Guyanese economic interests will continue indefinitely if we follow Minette’s advice which leaves no room for democratic turnover as there is in Trinidad and Tobago with a similar demographic composition to that of Guyana.
I do not know from where Minette derived the idea that I am against the PNCR solidifying its electoral base or ignoring the interests of its African supporters. If we look at elections since 1992 it appears like the PNCR’s long-term average is around 41% of the votes. That’s not going to make the PNCR win the election. All I’ve written in the past year shows that I support solidifying the base – the bedrock according to Minette – but also seek the independent votes, seek the business community, and seek the young professions also. That requires a balancing act that I see no one else other than David Granger achieving. GHK Lall said it best in his letter in today’s Stabroek News (July 25, 2014).
Thirdly, I mentioned for street protests to work against the PPP government they have to be multi-ethnic like Rodney’s. Minette responded that Rodney’s mobilization was urban, and therefore had to also be of one ethnic group – namely African Guyanese. I was not politically conscious when Rodney did his work. However, I have seen photographs of Rodney’s crowd assembly in which he drew crowds across the ethnic divide. History enthusiasts have noted Rodney was able to pull supporters across the ethnic divide. And by the way, large numbers of East Indians do live in Georgetown and Region 4.
I would like to close this letter by saying that APNU, if it survives after the PNCR congress, will have to do a better job outlining its policy preferences on economics, security, central governance, local governance, constitutional reform, foreign policy and more. Clarity is needed. Nevertheless, I’d like to thank the PNCR for taking the bold steps it has taken to elect its leadership that have stoked much public interest. That’s because PNCR’s internal business is everybody’s business. The policy choices the PNCR will take will influence the lives of supporters and non-supporters (ditto PPP). Therefore, those of us in civil society have a God-given right to take note and offer opinions on whom the PNCR elects as leader.
Yours faithfully,
Tarron Khemraj
