THIS past week the APNU and the AFC finally made it official—they have signed the revised Cummingsburg Accord, thus paving the way for the current coalition to contest the coming elections together.

Perhaps because the process was delayed by some points of disagreements along the way, the celebrations were muted. In fact, some detractors of the coalition may have even begun celebrating its demise. But to invoke that old saying, “All is well that ends well.” As the partners have repeatedly reminded us, they are better together.
This publication has editorialised in the past that the Coalition is good for Guyana’s political future. Our experience of one-party government has not yielded the best results for our country. For sure, it has not helped to stabilise the ethnic turmoil that was left in the wake of the disturbances of the 1960s. The entrenched ethnic voting patterns have made it difficult for the electorate to judge political contestants, on the basis of their programmes or records. For a long time one party enjoyed the electoral advantage because it was able to better manipulate those ethnic dynamics.

It took the coming into being of the APNU and the APNU+AFC coalition to halt that situation. The coming together of several parties of diverse orientations and with different levels of electoral appeals opened up new possibilities for voters who wanted to break out of the ethno-political stranglehold. If the coalition achieved nothing else, one can say for certainty that it has to some extent transformed the country’s political architecture. The coming election would be a contest between a coalition of parties bound together by a common commitment and a single-party outfit bound to the old winner-takes-all politics.
Of course, the coalition’s detractors have tried their utmost to downplay this truth. The constant reference to it as a mask for the PNC is testimony to the fact that there is growing realisation of the shift. No coalition anywhere in the world is made up of parties of the same degree of mass support. In the majority of cases, there is invariably one party that commands far more support than the others. But in the end a critical mass of voters’ rally to the sum total of the whole. Coalitions bring together a diverse tent of voters which include diehard partisans and independents, who may not be wedded to any single party. That is why the coalition represents a distinct alternative to the other electoral contestants.
There is bound to be speculation over the continued attractiveness of the coalition– whether the political and ethnic coalition that powered it to office in 2015 is still intact. The answer to that would ultimately be known when the election results are tabulated. But it is difficult to think that the country would revert to a one-party government without good reason to do so. The record of the coalition on political diversity and the quality of governance that flowed from that reality cannot be wished away or ignored. It is too powerful a narrative to hide from the electorate.

The opposition and others have made heavy weather of the sometimes open disagreements among the partners in the coalition during the course of its first term. But what is perceived by them as a weakness is ultimately the coalition’s strength. It speaks to checks and balances within the government, whereby partners serve to balance any attempted deviation towards over-reach. This publication strongly believes that the coalition’s unblemished record on Human Rights and Civil Liberties is largely a function of its plural nature.

As the country enters the exciting but challenging era of oil and gas, the quality of governance becomes even more pivotal. A plural government brings to bear on the situation diverse eyes and ears that are critical elements of political scrutiny and stability. The country would be assured that no clique of partisan zealots would capture the collective patrimony for itself under the guise of party solidarity. At least under a coalition government, the chances of that outcome are slimmer.

Finally, as we await the details of the revised accord, others have already begun to read conspiratorial intentions into the delay. We respectfully deviate from such an attitude. As the media, we love instant stories, but there are times when a delayed story is sweeter that instant ones. For now, we wish the coalition well.