Dear Editor,
Now that the main parliamentary opposition People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) has finally decided to identify with three groups – the WPA, GAP and NFA – to form a broad partnership that will contest the 2011 elections, (`Joint opposition to pursue broad partnership,’ SN, July 29), it should help shift the public’s focus to the PNCR alliance’s views/positions on issues that are germane to the public’s interests and away from the unproductive discussions of whether the AFC should align itself with the PNCR as part of the broad-based alliance.
I am convinced that given the PNCR’s abysmal performance as the main opposition in the last 18 years, it has its work cut out showing why anything it says or supports in an alliance should be readily believed. It went from ‘slow fire, more fire’ street protests and demonstrations that inspired physical harm and property damage, to being virtually missing in political action after Desmond Hoyte died, thus allowing President Bharrat Jagdeo to go on a political rampage doing whatever he wants.
PNCR Leader, Mr. Robert Corbin, who continued where Hoyte left off by holding direct talks with the President, never revealed the details of what he and the President discussed in some of their private talks, even though they say their talks were about ‘parliamentary matters’. But how can the two of them hold talks on ‘parliamentary matters’ without representatives from other parliamentary parties being present? See what I am talking about?
The PNCR and the government also sought to lock out the AFC over money for the ‘scrutineering’ or registration exercise and actually shut out the AFC in the appointments of executives in regional administrations. And look at how the PNCR treated with its own ‘Reform’ arm! If there were one or two major negatives against the fifty-something-year old PNCR, I could live with these, but the PNCR’s overall track record seriously does not recommend it as a party for alliance members to blindly trust, which means that members allied with the PNCR should make strong demands for clearly spelled out policy positions, operating frameworks, methods and strategies, accountability and transparency.
Also, the fact that the WPA and GAP are smaller political parties with no known negative track record, no known major voting block or support bases and, therefore, seemingly inconsequential in the entire political process, are all the more reasons why the WPA and GAP have to take a strong stance in dealing with the PNCR and not become overwhelmed to the point of being rendered irrelevant.
As for the NFA, I have no idea what its history looks like, so I will leave this one alone, and stress only that though I believe in second and third chances, I also believe wisdom is the principal thing, so everyone should focus on whether the PNCR is genuinely committed to making a clean political comeback via the alliances route.
The AFC, for its part, has already staked out its position against alliances with the PPP/C and or the PNCR, and this is because the AFC sees the ethnic-based pandering of these two parties as inimical to the interests of racial unity and national development. Traditionally, Indians and Blacks constituted the majority of the votes received by the PPP/C and PNCR, respectively, but practically, neither party represented the true bread and butter issues and other general interests of their so-called constituencies.
In fact, reality shows that officials, associates and relatives of the party in government have benefited immensely from government favours, while ordinary Indians and Blacks have been in the same boat paddling and bailing downstream just to stay afloat until either the genuine local rescuers arrive or the hapless majority hits land (foreign land), whichever comes first.
With the AFC’s position clearly stated, therefore, and the party studying a citizens’ group document that contains a commonality of interests and issues and on which it will make a public decision shortly, it is now up to other parties, civic groups and individuals in society to decide whether they will support the AFC’s alliance building efforts or the PNCR’s alliance building efforts. Even in this situation, democracy is at work.
That said, I do resonate with my brother, Mr. Lincoln Lewis’ concerns about a divided opposition not being what the country needs if it is to democratically unseat the corrupt and inept PPP government led by President Jagdeo. However, I am also mindful of the need in our emerging democracy for place to be given even 18 months before elections for whatever opposition divisions to surface so we can get a clear-cut picture of what we are dealing with going forward.
Once we know what we are dealing with, in terms of the divisions and other negatives, we can apply the process of elimination method in shaping the kind of united opposition we will have in 2011. So, let the ‘wheat and the tares grow together’ for now, lest by ripping up the tares too early, we also destroy the young and tender wheat.
In closing, let me restate my original position as a commentator that I am backing the AFC, but while I will give the AFC wiggle room to grow by learning even from mistakes, I won’t hesitate to call out the AFC when I see it is not being flexible enough to accommodate the greater good.
So, to those who believe the AFC is making a politically fatal mistake by refusing to align with the PPP/C and or PNCR, simply because those two parties consistently pull in the majority of votes from Indians and Blacks, and that no other party can beat the PPP/C or PNCR without snatching ethnic votes, the truth is, the AFC sees itself as the party of the future. This outlook can also mean that one day all parties in Guyana will be like the AFC, operating on issues instead of race.
Yours faithfully,
Emile Mervin,
Queens, New York
