Dear Editor,
It is almost 2 weeks into that 90-day period! The name Charrandas is a dead certain in the school history books of Guyana’s children of the future. The history books will have a settled judgement as to whether the MP’s vote was one of conscience or of greed and opportunism, or indeed reflective of an underlying simmering disenchantment amongst some Coalition partners’ members. It is widely perceived by members of the Guyanese public, that with the clear exception of our President and a mere handful of others, a general arrogance prevails in the public attitudes of those in the highest positions in public office today just as prior to 2015.
Whatever may be the true motivation of Mr Charrandas Persaud, the dramatic events of Friday 21st December 2018 should be seen as very instructive as to the desirability that Coalition partners treat each other with the basic mutual respect with which functioning family members treat each other. That approach would promote and facilitate more transparency and meaningful discussion within the Coalition membership and thus lessen or even eliminate the kind of simmering disenchantment that might have been the catalyst for the MP’s actions. Coalition government ought to be regarded as a practical step towards unity of national political purpose.
Coalition government is a good thing for Guyana as we hopefully transition to a system, enshrined in the Constitution, whereby there are guarantees that political power and financial benefits will be shared fairly by all Guyanese in accordance with transparent and straightforward criteria. I echo the cry of Sase (KN, 29/12/2018, p.6) to “Save Guyana Now” – although in so doing I lend no weight to Sase’s conclusion unaccompanied by any reasoning that: “any attempt to use any convoluted argument to claim that in this case of voting, 33 is not greater than 32….” This conclusion by Sase does not give any indication whatsoever that he understands or has even read the contrary legal argument. I also take the citing by Sase of an unfortunate utterance of the Minister of Public Health, implying thereby that the Minister’s expressed sentiments explain the government’s “[refusal] to employ the best talent from around the world”, as no more than a well-timed opportunistic dig at the Coalition. The Minister subsequently apologized publicly.
Sase is however spot-on for the remainder of his piece. We simply must find a way to work together. As a nation we have too many riches to protect for our generations to come – and for the world in relation to our role in the ecosystem – to allow ourselves to be distracted by internal squabbling. The political opportunity we have here and now to make purposive changes to the way we govern our country ought not to be missed. The Constitution that is bemoaned by parties in opposition but enjoyed by successive governments, should be the primary target for change and will itself be the instrument wherein will reside the provisions of the Supreme Law of Guyana.
The reality is that Guyana’s two numerically largest races comprise about 47% and 42% of the population, Indians and Africans respectively. A significant proportion of Guyanese are of mixed heritage between or with one of the two predominant races. This means that elections will always be close and results routinely disputed despite the presence of international observers, given customary racial voting. A new system could, for example, have as its aim the creation of a cadre of 5 persons whose main qualifications would be: intelligence, humility, articulate manner and patriotism. These persons would have applied to and been interviewed and vetted by a special Public Commission. They would then be monitored by those of their peers and functional superiors as may be authorized to do so by secret Parliamentary committee, and also by way of analysis of generally-worded but thoughtful questionnaires completed randomly and anonymously by subordinates in her/his place of normal work and/or sphere of influence. After an election result is declared, 1 of the 5 would be elected by Parliament, to serve as President of Guyana. The President would be under a duty to execute the policies of the winning party or coalition – but will have significant powers to amend or overrule policy proposals if he or she could justify such divergence to Parliament. Amongst the criteria for choosing the best candidate for President for a particular term of office, would be the candidate’s race, which if considered necessary could be constitutionally rotated either termly or every two terms.
Once upon a time when British Guiana was a colony of Great Britain, two young intelligent patriots named Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham, together campaigned passionately for our country’s independence from colonial rule. That goal was achieved, but the old divide and rule tactics that had worked so well during slavery and again post-abolition when indentured Indians arrived, were deployed yet again post-independence – and again worked! Venezuela amongst others may be the next to benefit from our disunity, if we do not make it a priority to present a genuinely united front to the world.
Once upon a time financial resources were scarce. Today we are on the very cusp of benefitting financially on a scale never before experienced or even envisaged in Guyana – indeed in most countries of the world period! There no longer exists in the Guyana context any rationale whatsoever for racial competition for scarce financial resources. Now is the time to do as Burnham and Jagan once did albeit too briefly; work together as one for the benefit of all Guyana.
Yours faithfully,
Ronald Bostwick
