Skip to main content

Guyana must revert back to the constituency system in voting.

August 19,2017 Source

Dear Editor,
There is broad national consensus that the existing mode of adversarial party politics had, over the decades, been largely responsible for the failure to realize our true developmental potential. Race and ethnicity or what some described as ‘tribal’ politics have over the years resulted in a deformed body-politic in which policies and programmes are often subordinated to perceptions of which from the two main political parties, namely the PPP or the PNC can best represent the interests and hopes of entrenched ethnic blocs.
Situations like these are not peculiar to Guyana but manifest itself in several other parts of the world where there exist significant minorities such as Trinidad and Tobago, Suriname and further afield in Fiji. In countries such as these, there is a tendency to see race as major determinants of political outcomes. The intensity of the struggles intensifies in proportion to the perceived racial configuration of the competing parties particularly in the context of a “winner takes it all” governance model as is currently the case in Guyana.
What is needed in Guyana is a governance mechanism in which there is greater accountability by the elected representatives to their constituencies and not, as currently the case, to those whom they owe party allegiance. What I am suggesting is a return to constituency politics in which elected members of the legislative body are directly accountable to their respective constituencies and can be recalled if they fail to deliver on their manifesto promises.
The Carter Centre has come up with some interesting suggestions in terms of greater accountability in governance including the identification of presidential candidates and campaign financing. These are mere proposals and should be treated as such. But at the same time, they ought not to be dismissed as they provide some useful food for thought on the way forward.
This is why it is so important for the constitutional reform process to be given new and fresh stimulus as we approach the 2020 elections. I am in support of the recent call by the British High Commissioner for the constitutional reform process to be expedited and for it to be internally driven with inputs from all stakeholders.
It is time for a new type of governance calculus in order to deepen our democracy and render it more responsive to the needs and aspirations of the Guyanese people. The existing model is dysfunctional and fails to address the core issues of ethnic insecurity and political alienation which had characterized our politics over the past decades.
Hydar Ally

Replies sorted oldest to newest

What is needed in Guyana is a governance mechanism in which there is greater accountability by the elected representatives to their constituencies and not, as currently the case, to those whom they owe party allegiance. What I am suggesting is a return to constituency politics in which elected members of the legislative body are directly accountable to their respective constituencies and can be recalled if they fail to deliver on their manifesto promises. 

Mitwah

The PPP is bridging the racial divide.

Source Nov 18, 2011

Dear Editor,
General elections are just around the corner and political parties are trying their best to convince the electorate why they should give them an opportunity to form the next government.
This democratic right to choose a government of one’s choice which we take for granted today, did not come about without a long and hard struggle by progressive forces led by the PPP in the early 1950’s. Before 1950 only the rich were allowed to vote.
It was the PPP that successfully petitioned the British Government for constitutional changes which eventually resulted in the introduction of universal adult suffrage and the ministerial system of government in the elections of 1953 which was won by the PPP by a landslide.
However the PPP was overthrown after a mere six months in office out of fear by the imperialist powers that the PPP was too much labour-oriented and was likely to implement measures detrimental to the planter class and big business.
Fresh elections held in 1957 were again won by the PPP despite attempts by the colonial powers to emasculate the PPP. In 1955 the PPP was split into two factions, a sad blow to the working class unity which resulted primarily from Burnham’s unsuccessful bid to take over the leadership of the PPP from Jagan.
The genesis of race-based politics could therefore be linked to Burnham who allowed himself to be manipulated by foreign vested interests to forestall the rising tide of popular support for independence and national liberation ignited by the PPP. The aim was to break the emergent class and racial unity which sadly manifested itself in ethnic tensions during the 1960’s which overshadowed the economic and class interests which was evident in the 1950’s.
The subsequent removal of the PPP in the elections of 1964 by way of constitutional engineering and the catapulting of the PNC-UF coalition government only served to exacerbate ethnic tensions. The blatant rigging of elections by the PNC after kicking out its junior coalition partner in 1967 led to greater polarization even though all ethnic groups suffered from declining incomes as a result of a shrinking economy.
It is my submission that we are begining to once again see a re- kindling of the spirit of the 1950’s when economic and social issues take precedence over ethnic loyalties. Already there are strong indications of shift in voting behaviour among Amerindians and Afro-Guyanese in favour of the PPP/C. The fact that the PPP/C was successful in winning a handsome majority in all democratic elections since 1992 speaks to a changing political dispensation in which voting behaviour is much more responsive to economic and social deliverables rather than appeals to blind loyalty as was the case during the 1960’s.
My own assessment of current trends in voting behaviour is that the PPP/C has been largely successful in breaking the back of race-based politics by way of embracing a politics of inclusion and the even-handed manner in which an increasingly larger national pie is being distributed.
At the political level, the PPP/C has demolished the myth of it being an Indian party by bringing on board people from all ethnic groups into its leadership structures at the various levels.
The PPP/C deserves full credit for not only keeping alive but realizing the dreams and aspirations of our foreparents for a peaceful, progressive and prosperous Guyana. This is why come November 28 the PPP/C will win with an even greater margin of victory than it did in previous elections.
Hydar Ally


 

Re-cap of Hydar in 2011.

Django
Mitwah posted:

What is needed in Guyana is a governance mechanism in which there is greater accountability by the elected representatives to their constituencies and not, as currently the case, to those whom they owe party allegiance. What I am suggesting is a return to constituency politics in which elected members of the legislative body are directly accountable to their respective constituencies and can be recalled if they fail to deliver on their manifesto promises. 

Looks like Hydar waking up from his slumber,wondering why the change of mind.Is there a writing on the wall ???

Why did he not propose such during the 23 yrs of PPP rule ??

Let us see if so called bright boy Yugi22 and the Piss Pot Porters can answer the question.

Django
Last edited by Django

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×