Dear Editor,
A friend encouraged me to read Mr Ralph Ramkarran’s article from last Sunday’s edition of SN, which was titled, ‘Repairing Guyana’s broken system of government.’ I resurface for a moment from my self-imposed retreat into the realm of political and social parody to offer these thoughts.
Mr Ramkarran is a decent man, a solid patriot. But above all he is a PPP creature. Meaning that he sees party reform and rehabilitation as strong possibilities. I disagree. In his heart he believes his beloved PPP to be salvageable; in my mind I think it is too far gone, and too booby trapped to reverse course.
Thus, the two points about constitutional reform and power-sharing struck me as a subtle angling that tests the political winds; a positioning for the near future, given the current impasse. Further, I interpret Mr Ramkarran’s words and thinking as that of messenger cum analyst cum prophet to be less than any of these, and more of calculated party considerations.
Think about this: the votes lost by the PPP from its base in the 2011 elections can most likely be traced to the more educated, the thinking, and the conscientious in that group. With Mr Ramkarran’s resurrected presence, those votes can return in support of rediscovery and building. What better face and body is there than Mr Ramkarran’s? He is near perfect: refined, astute, and untainted. Everybody wins, including the opposition. Still, I see endless problems. Specifically accountability for the bottomless rivers of dollars dredged and rechannelled to private pockets, and the mutual bloodletting that killed a lot of people. Perhaps, there might be reciprocal political indemnification, as part of any potential power-sharing agreement.
Having said this, I believe that the time for power-sharing is past. I once thought − and publicly advocated − that this was the answer, but not any more. There is too much baggage and too much acute distrust for any such sharing to endure. On the other hand, while looking at the state of parliamentary business, and changes implemented after a year of this so-called ‘New Dispensation’ I say that a form of power-sharing already exists, given opposition ineptitude and indolence; it is something akin to negative consent.
In summary, I think Mr Ramkarran means well, but are these postures solely his own? Or are they signals and cagey opening gambits, which have deeper sources? Last, is it more party subterfuge using a well-regarded channel, his return to the fold, and a possible second coming?
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
