This was the PNC’s message to the nation on the occasion of Easter. No one can deny the profundity of the sentiments expressed, the exquisite timing of the message, and hopefully, the salutary effects of such a message, coming as it does from the PNC at this most unhappy juncture of our nation’s history. The cynic might however be excused, as would every right thinking Guyanese, for asking the PNC to speak to itself. The wise man once said that charity begins at home so would it be remiss of us if, given what we know of the current role of the party, we returned the message to the sender.

If there were one honest statement to be made of the PNC since their 1992 electoral defeat, it would be that they are still to become reconciled to their removal from office. For years, the party has pretended that it is the government out of office and when it did not get its way it has consistently and persistently conducted itself in a manner inconsistent with the development of the country. It has rejected its own constitutional forms and has sought to foist upon the nation amended constitutional forms, which unduly enlarged and extended the role of the opposition. Three electoral defeats down the road have only served to harden its reformist mission. The party has withdrawn itself from the legislature and it might be argued with some justification, that in an effort to justify both the expansion of its role and inclusion in the government, the PNC has on occasion made the country virtually ungovernable.

Having said this, it is apposite to note that much of this occurred during the dispensation of Desmond Hoyte, who departed the scene in December, just weeks after his party had issued its blueprint for shared governance. In keeping with its belief that it is the government out of office, its notion of shared governance is premised on a Cabinet, which includes all the major parties. This thesis abolishes the opposition and the current indications are that the PNC will not return to parliament as an opposition. With the passing of Hoyte, the leadership mantle fell to Mr Robert Corbin, who immediately announced that there would be no change in the reformist mission of the party.

Optimistic as is his custom, President Jagdeo, in February, invited Mr Corbin to political talks on the way forward, and in so doing ushered in a unique Guyanese charade. Emissaries from the two parties have begun a series of meetings to prepare the agenda for the meeting between the President of the nation and the leader of the opposition. Having said this, it is important to note that Mr Corbin has refused to be sworn in as the leader of the opposition. Pressed on his reluctance to be sworn in, Mr Corbin has made it quite public that he will only do so when there is work for him to do and one must certainly assume that he is referring to work in the proposed reformed Cabinet. What is important is the fact that three months later, the nation is without an opposition leader, the PNC continues to boycott parliament and emissaries of the two parties are still to decide on the agenda for the meeting of the President with Mr Corbin.

Almost anything is possible in the politics of the third world but it is nevertheless incomprehensible that this is happening in Guyana. Two elected politicians, representing some 90 per cent of the total population of the nation, cannot meet to discuss the affairs of state. We have seen Caribbean leaders meeting at the twinkling of the eye to discuss issues not half as grave. We have seen President Bush and Prime Minister Blair meet on several occasions to discuss world affairs but here in Guyana, after three months, Mr Corbin is still to meet with Mr Jagdeo to discuss this nation’s affairs. One must however, not forget that here in Guyana Mr Hoyte once refused to meet with Mrs Janet Jagan as President and that within the very recent past it was necessary to secure overseas intervention and expert consultancy to facilitate and moderate meetings between the government and opposition.