Dear Editor,
Lots of pundits are today calling for shared governance, but the raison d’être for this concept of government no longer exists.
What was the basis for its advocacy in the first place? There had been a perception that the PPP – given that the Indian share of the population was over 51% and given the culture of voting race – would win every election. The notion of a perceived Indian party occupying the seat of power for long periods of time, in and of itself is not a tenable one for a largely bi-racial society (forgive the simplification). The out-of-power racial group would be seething – and this situation would naturally set off racial and political tensions in the society. Genuine democracy will not evolve in such a society.
For the advocates of regular turnovers of power, something interesting has happened. Demographic changes have taken place bringing the Indian share of the population well below 51%, and it is no longer a guarantee that the PPP will win every election. In fact, the proof was demonstrated in 2015 when the Coalition (PNC/AFC) won and took power.
Once the Coalition won once, they can win twice and regularly – only if they govern fairly and incorruptly. This is the definition of democracy. Only in rare cases around the world has the same party won all elections for long periods of time. (Singapore is a rare exception – and perhaps that is due to the gift of leadership of Lee Kuan Lew).
In Guyana, Mr. Granger ran a government that was extremely racist (poster board statistics showed that of 125 appointments to top State jobs, 95 went to Africans; 16 out 17 permanent secretary appointments went to Africans) and also very corrupt (drug bond scandal), and very unfair (50% salary increases for Cabinet Minister, 5% for Civil Servants). Mr. Granger knew nothing about the art of governance and how to win and broaden new constituencies of support. All he did was to ingratiate himself with one race group. This was the craziest thing any politician can do in a multiracial society in an emerging environment of international support for Free and Fair Elections. To say nothing of Mr. Granger’s shredding of the Constitution (negating the No Confidence Motion), disregarding the CCJ’s ruling (elections should have been held no later than Sept. 18, 2019) – and going all out to undermine the independence of the Electoral Commission and ignore the rigging of the 2020 election.
I conclude with two points based on fact and sound reasoning. (1) The justification for shared governance no longer exists. Perception of the PPP and PNC as ethnic parties remains and must be dealt with. These parties must of necessity transform themselves into genuine multi-racial parties, if they want to help Guyana evolve into a State of genuine multi-racial democracy. (2) Mr. Granger is a lousy politician. He literally blew away his Indian base of support.
PNC should re-organize itself in a manner befitting a multi-racial society and learn how to win elections in a democratic society. I don’t think the PPP won the 2020 elections because of a superior campaign strategy or platform policies – but because of Mr. Granger’s personal and collective failures.
Yours faithfully,
Mike Persaud
