Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

Show-of-Hands, Secret Ballots and the making of an Elected Oligarchy

On February 9, 2011 @ 5:02 am In Daily,Features |

 

Introduction

 

Recently there have been open debates between senior members of the ruling PPP. Mr. Ramkarran, the respected House Speaker, is in support of a secret ballot to determine the next Presidential Candidate of the PPP. President Jagdeo, however, does not like the idea of a secret ballot, but would prefer that the members of the Central Executive Committee of the PPP show their hands when voting for the next candidate. This is a curious position to take by the President who was elected by secret ballot.

One might ask why is the President keen to have members show their hands when voting for the future Presidential Candidate. The answer to this lies somewhere in the series of Development Watch columns I wrote on elected oligarchy. If a leader is going to control the economic space in Guyana then he must maintain control over the executive members of the PPP party, which after winning the national election is able to govern under a Burnham Constitution.

 

This internal party control must be fortified before the leader accedes to the national stage to enjoy Forbes Burnham’s Constitution. The internal control takes the form of generous pay packages and privileges for the family members of the leadership of the PPP. Therefore, the show-of-hands is a control mechanism intended to allow the President to select his candidate. In essence, then, this control system is at the heart of the making of the Guyanese oligarchy. The prize is to win the election in order to enjoy the luxury of non-transparency that comes with the Burnham Constitution. Once the party leader is armed with the Burnham Constitution, he can now control the economic space by showering tax payers’ monies to chosen friends and families.

 

Key Features of the Oligarchy

The elected oligarchy comes into being by the following chain of events. First, Democratic Centralism allows the a few individuals in the PPP to select a Presidential Candidate who is then presented to the party mass supporters and the nation as a whole (this is the reason why the President wants the method of show- of-hands over that of secret ballots. Second, given the entrenched ethnic voting patterns, the Candidate is likely to win the national election and therefore enjoy the immunities of the mildly tinkered 1980 Burnham Constitution. Third, this Candidate then surrounds himself with chosen like-minded individuals. Fourth, generous State sponsored incentives (using the monies of the people) are then offered to chosen members of the business class. This allows the elected oligarchy to control the economic space in Guyana.  Some members of the oligarchy will eventually reach the point of buying out media assets to further dominate the society and public views.

Adverse Effects

As I have noted in previous columns, the oligarchy promotes its own subservient business class. However, in the aggregate the oligarchic government crowds out private investments – hence a crucial reason for the perpetuation of a backward production structure in Guyana. Economic transformation will require effective governance and large amounts of foreign private investments (from multinationals and from the Diaspora).

Until this period, the oligarchy does not seem too keen to lose control of the existing tiny economic space. Allowing large inflows of foreign private capital will increase the economic space and make for faster economic transformation. It is this transformation that will allow for better wages and salaries for public and private workers. The citizens of a nation are as rich as what they produce.

 

The oligarchy also retards rapid economic progress through the group-think syndrome. Once the voting members of the Executive and Central Committees are under the control of a Benefactor-in-Chief, they will not likely raise questions when wrong policies are about to be implemented. The first example would be the Skeldon sugar factory investment when it was known to analysts by the mid-1990s that sugar agreement could come under threat because of the new WTO rules. Second, the financing of the LCDS, enshrined in REDD schemes, is uncertain and cannot provide the level of funds for structural production transformation of the economy. In other words, the society does not do as well as it could with greater freedoms. This is shown by negative total factor productivity (TFP) growth in recent years as some studies have shown. As I mentioned, some time ago TFP measures how well a country is utilizing its resources. With negative growth, it means the country is doing a poor job in utilizing its human and other resources optimally.

Baseline Constitutional Reforms

 

The only way to break away from such a control mechanism exerted on the country by a few individuals is to have deep Constitutional reforms. One such reform could include abandoning the Executive Presidency. A second reform would be to ensure that a party leader never gets to select the Members of Parliament as the present list system allows.  The party list system allows the party leader – possibly under the control of a Benefactor-in-Chief – to select like-minded Parliamentarians who will not raise too many objections to misrule. However, the leader shoots himself in the feet because it is not possible to get alternative viewpoints on potential policy failures. The bigger problem is the country is taken down sub-optimal investment paths.

 

Therefore, Constitutional reform must allow the situation where Members of Parliament are elected directly by the people. Parliamentarians must be made accountable to a specific geographic location rather than a leader or political benefactor. One way to facilitate this would be to have an upper and lower house of Parliament.

 

In this arrangement, in my opinion, there is no need to jettison the system of proportional representation.  The Prime Minister could be elected via proportional representation while the Parliamentarians are elected on the same ballot but for a specific geographic location. There are other arrangements that have to be implemented to prevent oligarchies from emerging after free and fair elections. The crucial point is Guyana’s democracy is deeply flawed and it does not serve well the developmental needs of the country.

Replies sorted oldest to newest

"The crucial point is Guyana’s democracy is deeply flawed and it does not serve well the developmental needs of the country".

 

So tell us which "perfect" democracy would serve as a good benchmark reference.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:

"The crucial point is Guyana’s democracy is deeply flawed and it does not serve well the developmental needs of the country".

 

So tell us which "perfect" democracy would serve as a good benchmark reference.

Banna you still deh 'round? Like de hole in the ground got flooded?

Kari
Originally Posted by baseman:

"The crucial point is Guyana’s democracy is deeply flawed and it does not serve well the developmental needs of the country".

 

So tell us which "perfect" democracy would serve as a good benchmark reference.

Not rejecting LEAD project. 

FM

Mr Baseman this help?

======

 

Media houses radio licences…Unthinkable applications ignored for decades – US Ambassador

MAY 4, 2014 | BY  | FILED UNDER NEWS 

By Latoya Giles 
United States Ambassador, D. Brent Hardt has chided the Government of Guyana over what he calls the “censorship of the media”. The ambassador at a reception on Friday evening to celebrate World Press Freedom Day criticized how Government has failed to properly address several pressing media problems.

US Ambassador D. Brent Hardt

US Ambassador
D. Brent Hardt

According to Ambassador Hardt, back in 2012 he had expressed his surprise at knowing that Guyana alone had complete state monopoly of the radio. He said that in other countries with their ubiquitous “call in shows” was a vital public forum, but in Guyana there is no such counterpart.
“Two years later it’s certainly disappointing that radio in Guyana still falls short of offering an open public square for debate and discussion” Hardt told invitees.
He stressed that the International Press Institute (IPI) report made it clear when they said that “attempts to diversify the sector have been consistently stonewalled…a number of independent media outlets…have had their broadcast applications denied or ignored in some cases for more than 20 years”.
According to the Ambassador “it’s unthinkable that the license applications for certain media have been delayed or ignored for nearly two decades”. Ambassador Hardt made a further call for the newly constituted Broadcast Authority to immediately undertake a speedy and fair review of any outstanding license applications and to ensure that all applicants are subjected to independent review.
Hardt said that IPI also raised an issue he has long found perplexing, which is the use of the term “opposition media” to describe any media institution that is not controlled by the government.
“This is indeed a demeaning term that fails to do justice to the vital role that an independent media must play in a modern, democratic society” the Ambassador posited.
He noted that the use of the appellation was also inaccurate. “Anyone who reads or watches independent media in Guyana will see that there are letters to the editor supportive of the government, columns that advocate government positions, and generally balanced reporting on actions of government” Hardt noted.
By contrast, he said that in the state-owned and state-run media, which should hold itself up to an even higher standard of balance by virtue of being funded by taxpayers, one hardly ever sees a letter to the editor or a column supportive of the opposition or critical of the government.
“In fact, the public reads about instructions being passed by the government to state-run television criticizing staff for airing statements by an opposition party directly after the government’s position was presented, and indicating that such presentations were only to be aired late at night when viewership was lowest” the ambassador posited.

The journalists who received awards on Friday evening.

The journalists who received awards on Friday evening.

Further the ambassador said that such censorship is not only wrong, but completely unnecessary for a government that is more than capable of defending and articulating its views on a fair playing field of public opinion.
“As the distinguished U.S. Supreme Court Justice Potter Stewart once observed…Censorship reflects a society’s lack of confidence in itself” the ambassador said. The ambassador in delivering his speech urged local journalists to pry out information from people who may not want the information out.
“You have a job to sift through information put forward quite eagerly but whose primary purpose may be to distract or divert your focus” Ambassador Hardt noted.
Meanwhile, Attorney General Anil Nandlall however had a different view of things. The Attorney General said that there must be a comparison between what happens now and what occurred before 1992.
The AG said that there was no attempt by the administration to influence what those media houses publish.
Also on Friday evening the US Embassy here in Georgetown gave out several awards to local journalists who have done exceptional work throughout the years.
The awardees included Kaieteur News Editor in Chief Adam Harris and reporters Latoya Giles, Zena Henry along with Veteran Journalist Enrico Woolford (Capital News), Dennis Chabrol (Demerara Waves), Royston Drakes (Capital News), Gordon Moseley (News source), Mark Murray (Capital News), Nazima Raghubir (Insight Guyana Magazine), Vanessa Narine (The Guyana Chronicle) , Oluatoyin Alleyne (Stabroek News), Gaulbert Sutherland (Stabroek News) and Anand Persaud, the Editor in Chief of Stabroek News.

 

 

 

FM
Therefore, Constitutional reform must allow the situation where Members of Parliament are elected directly by the people

 

On February 9, 2011 @ 5:02 am In Daily,Features |

It is know that these changes to the constitution indeed can be made with the approval of, at least, sixty six percent of the MPs.

 

Has the PNC and AFC made any public initiatives to provide the support to make the amendments?

FM
Originally Posted by Demerara_Guy:
Therefore, Constitutional reform must allow the situation where Members of Parliament are elected directly by the people

 

On February 9, 2011 @ 5:02 am In Daily,Features |

It is know that these changes to the constitution indeed can be made with the approval of, at least, sixty six percent of the MPs.

 

Has the PNC and AFC made any public initiatives to provide the support to make the amendments?

 

And your point is? 

FM
Originally Posted by JB:
Originally Posted by baseman:

"The crucial point is Guyana’s democracy is deeply flawed and it does not serve well the developmental needs of the country".

 

So tell us which "perfect" democracy would serve as a good benchmark reference.

Not rejecting LEAD project. 

LEAD has become a "back-door" to power for the PNC.

FM
Originally Posted by baseman:
Originally Posted by JB:
Originally Posted by baseman:

"The crucial point is Guyana’s democracy is deeply flawed and it does not serve well the developmental needs of the country".

 

So tell us which "perfect" democracy would serve as a good benchmark reference.

Not rejecting LEAD project. 

LEAD has become a "back-door" to power for the PNC.

Bannah....you ain't crawl back to your hole yet?

Kari
Originally Posted by baseman:
LEAD has become a "back-door" to power for the PNC.

baseman, suh u admit that educating the people about democracy will cause Freedom House to lose power

 

you obviously not as stupid as i thought

 

explains a lot about your antiman fears . . . "back door" eh?

FM

Add Reply

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