That deal that went sour
Peeping Tom
Kaieteur News
December 9, 2006
If Guyanese think that President Bharrat Jagdeo is an obstacle to the emergence of a progressive political culture in this country, they should think again. His party is more of a problem.
The People's Progressive Party (PPP) has, by entering into an agreement with the People's National Congress Reform (PNCR) for the election of chairpersons and vice-chairpersons of the ten administrative regions in the country, established beyond doubt that it is by far more politically backward that the government itself.
I had, in previous columns, analysed the reasons for this marriage of convenience of the two main political parties in Guyana. And so I do not need to go over the reasons why the PPP behaved in such a manner despite the fact that the PNCR has, since 1997, tormented the PPP; brought this country to its knees with its political protests, and was responsible for untold damages and suffering in the country over the past nine years. Yet, the PPP, who has seen investors shy away from this country, endured the most terrible crime wave in this country -- a wave that began with the PNCR's loss of the 2001 elections -- still has the nerve to reach an agreement with the PNCR, that has now resulted in the PNCR retaining the Chairmanship of Region 4.
I hope that when the PPP leaders go overseas to speak to cuss out the PNCR, they will inform their supporters in the Diaspora, who attend PPP fundraisers with heavy pockets, about how the PPP sided with the PNCR in Region 4 instead of reaching an understanding with the Alliance for Change (AFC) that could have at least spared the population from having the PNCR retain the Chairmanship of the most populous region in the country.
The PNCR's response to this act of magnanimity on the part of the PPP was to demonstrate “good faith” by not supporting the PPP's candidate for the chairmanship of Region 7, a region where the PPP got the most votes. Neither did they side with the PPP in Region 8. In short, the PPP was shafted properly by the PNCR.
The PPP has disgraced itself by this agreement with the PNCR. I call on the membership of the Central Committee of the party-- a body that is elected at the highest decision making forum of the party congress -- to review this agreement; and if it was sanctioned by the executive committee of the party, to censure that body for the agreement that was reached.
The opportunity should also be taken by the members of the central executive of the party to review the role that the executive committee of the party plays. Rather than being subordinate to the central executive, it would seem as if the executive committee, not elected at congress, plays a more dominant role in the decision making of the party.
The PPP leadership has to give account as to why it chose to enter into an agreement with the PNCR, when it had a wonderful opportunity to break new ground and forge new alliances within Regions 4, 7, and 8. Questions need to be asked as to whether personal feelings of animosity with Khemraj Ramjattan in any way influenced what can only be described as a political opportunism of the worst order.
Why should PPP supporters in the Diaspora continue to pour money into the coffers of the PPP, when the party would act in such an opportunistic fashion, having emphatically won the elections? Why should the agreement that was reached between the PPP and the PNCR not be revisited, when the PPP itself has been forced to admit that the PNCR did not stick to its end of the bargain?
How often does the PPP have to be reminded that the PNCR should never, in matters political, be trusted? Has the PPP not learnt anything from its history?
I once accused Cheddi Jagan of betrayal when he approved of unity talks between the PPP and the PNC in 1980. I wish to take that back, and apologise to Cheddi; not only because of the present betrayal, but because I have had the benefit of examining some of the accounts of those arrangements. I can now state that the discussions were only preliminary and were not sufficiently advanced to have cemented a joint government between the PPP and the PNCR.
I do not believe that Burnham would ever have brought a unity government to realisation. Burnham set out, as he has done with Cheddi throughout his political career, to manipulate the PPP into discussions that would have, no doubt, engendered fear in the Americans. At the time, the US had some problems with Burnham, and Burnham knew that he had to play the “Jagan card” in order to reverse his loss of confidence by the US Administration. What better way to do that, and perhaps obtain an excuse to delay the 1985 elections, than by baiting the PPP into another one of his traps?
That was twenty-one years ago. This time, the PPP was in the driver's seat, and therefore was in a position to determine the direction of those regions where there was no outright winner. But, like the PNCR, the PPP is a leopard that never loses its stripes. The PPP is politically naïve, and the PNCR gave them just what they deserved.