Dear Editor,
We still have a relatively large number of new political groups competing in this year’s elections. I have been reading the headlines of their various positions and priorities and felt it timely to share a few thoughts on the appeal and power of their presences in this most crucial of elections.
All are saying nice things, the right things and, when looked at as a mosaic of visions translated into ideas, there is some of the interesting and encouraging in the mix. One group emphasizes constitutional reform, with which no one should object. I don’t. Another has spoken to legalization of marijuana and scrapping a junior level (primary) school examination and reengineering from scratch; so far, so good, as the education system needs an overhaul. But from my perspective, these issues are lacking in the comprehensive sweep of the nationally stirring and the nationally piercing, which would bring the electorate to an abrupt stop; or, at least, make it pause and ponder.
Then, there was talk from one of the lesser known groups about medical malpractice and bringing accountability to that arena. Again, I agree that this area demands urgent scrutiny, honest and thorough scrutiny; it would be another positive to hear some of the lawyers in the new groups committing to bringing their cheating brethren to public book; that is, if they themselves are men of calibre. I have a problem: as solid as they are, these issues are neither nationally concerning nor nationally engaging. I understand that the newer people are focusing on niche voters and peripheral segments, if I may so describe. This is representative of tacit admission that the overwhelming bulk of the voting population is committed to the big dogs and, hence, are already as good as lost. Further, that there is no hope of any change occurring to that position between now and March 2nd . Reality reigns; but the sense of inevitability does not have to be so dominant.
I think so, because in the lack of depth and width to the planks of their programmes and campaigns, I sense that there is contentment in some of the new group to lag far behind in tabling and standing for the issues that matter; they languish with anything that may resemble, even faintly, the intriguing and inspiring. I did hear from the business-oriented group of some emphasis on darling (Jezebel) oil, through a specific indicator here and there, as to what it would target, and how it would go about that spectre and magical siren called oil. I have some loose agreement with their visions made public, for they offer some remote hope that the oil proceeds will be put fully before the people. Now I wish to spend a little more time on this oil of ours, and I must be unequivocal.
Any political party – old or new – that does not have oil front and centre, top and bottom, and all the way through, as part of political platform, plans, and promises has already given up the ghost, and condemned self to not merely the back of the line, but out of the picture altogether. It is the way it is for this election(s) moment, given the brawling and never-ending controversies surrounding that oil, first oil, and anticipated collection of first money. That is, oil money flowing and enriching, just like the light sweet Demerara Gold (Corentyne Crude? Guyana Glory?) bubbling into the hungry holds of the tankers.
It is, therefore, imperative that the new people make up for this fatal shortfall by saying something, something sensible, convincing, and self-respecting, about their visions and plans for the oil. The fact that they have, other than for one exception, failed to make this the centrepiece of their presences is very revealing. It conveys that the always murky and mysterious world of basic finance, high finance, and the ways of the international commercial and petro world, may very well be over their heads. Hence, there is some tentativeness to go anywhere near to matters pertaining to oil and the exotica that accompanies it. That recent bland platitude of “renegotiating” is too superficial, too lame, and too tidy; it is too much of an all-purpose one size fits all situations. Whether they know or know not, this is committing voter hara-kiri at this demanding, unforgiving hour. It just cannot be.
I take this position because my interpretation is that electoral Guyana has no use for anybody or any issue that is not preponderantly fixated on oil and oil money. Not constitution, not crime, not race relations and race reconciliation, as deplorable and unacceptable, as all of those are. Guyanese do not want to hear of those at present; and will largely ignore those who mention them. The national attention span is almost exclusively on oil. Just show me, the money, dammit! Bring it on down, bring it home to momma and poppa.
Now the fact that the new folks have essentially shrunk from making oil an intimate aspect of their intended deliverables, the core ingredient of their attractions, means that they have essentially cancelled themselves out of the equation. They do have some interesting issues that may generate a seat, in aggregate. Regrettably, I do not think that those are enough or that they are found relevant enough, with the result of no interest and no traction. At another time, this may have sufficed, just not at this time.
Yours faithfully,
GHK Lall
