OVER the past two weeks, the idea of a ‘Presidential Debate’was floated around more prominently. The more I see people supporting this, and lobbying for this, the more I am assured that it is through avenues such as these that we will be able to elect the right set of politicians to serve in the best interest of Guyana.

During the months gone by, leading up to the Regional and General Elections that will be held on March 2, it was common to see Facebook and WhatsApp statuses about having a debate among the presidential candidates contesting these elections. Over the past week or so, the call for a Presidential Debate has made a more formal and structured appearance with an online petition appearing and with few well-known youth advocates and leaders making it known that they were actively pursuing efforts to facilitate such an event.

The 2020 Regional and General Elections really is the mother of all elections Guyana would have so far. And I know this has been the rhetoric that has surrounded the elections, but it is not without reason. Guyana is now an oil-producing nation, and despite having always being blessed with an abundance of resources, this is a different scenario for this country. For decades, oil has been the most valuable resource. The Economist makes the case that oil is now the second most valuable resource, with data becoming more important. But even so, oil is something that still draws international attention. This means that Guyana, with all eyes on her, has the opportunity to be a nation that makes good use of this resource, or a nation added to the list of failed oil-producing states.

The politicians elected at the upcoming elections have the responsibility to ensure that the best alternative is obtained. Frankly speaking, however, we have politicians who resort to race-baiting, slander and fear-mongering. The Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) has its code of conduct for political leaders, but in January alone, it was reported that one political leader encouraged supporters to act in contravention of the Representation of the People Act, while another thought it fitting to degrade another political party by likening it to female genitalia. This is what happens at ‘elections time’ in this country I call my home. It is nauseating and so, yes, when I think about the calibre of politicians in this country, for many of them, ethical and professional are not words I would use to describe them.

Not painting them all with the same broad brush, but these negative attributes have characterised them for so long. And, for the newer ones who have not shown any of these negative attributes, I cannot ascertain if they can be better leaders than the ones we have or have had.

For me, this is why it becomes important to have at least one public, open forum where all of the candidates will be in the same place, speaking about the same topics. Say, for example, the topic is the creation of jobs or the management of the oil sector. Each candidate has the opportunity to present their plans and show how they intend implementing these, practically and feasibly. At the same time, they will be speaking amidst other candidates who have the leeway to express why they think those strategies would not be as suitable for Guyana. It is the kind of intellectual conversation I have never heard of in Guyana, but I think it could be a way of gradually moving away from the party and ethnic loyalty that has attracted voters for ages.

I will concede, however, while I have been a fervent advocate for a presidential debate, I have come to understand that a “debate” is currently not the best engagement forum for Guyanese and more importantly, Guyanese politicians.

In this context, while a debate seems practical and well-meaning, it may very well just result in a ‘buse out’ or a ‘session.’. And as such, when a friend reasoned with me, I didn’t need much convincing as to why a debate may be problematic. A discussion, or just a public forum such as a town hall meeting, perhaps, seems to be a good alternative, with the same agenda. These fora, just like a debate, would, however, provide an avenue for candidates to engage with the populace by answering questions and defending their solutions and positions on certain matters, instead of the generic campaign rallies.

I still want a debate among the candidates. I still want them to articulate their policies and reasoning why the policies they intend to implement are better for the country. But, perhaps, this needs to be something that is gradually introduced. For the time being, with elections just about one month away, I would be satisfied if my politicians took the time to engage us, particularly young people like myself who have no intentions of even considering to vote on the basis of race or party loyalty, with scant disregard for what the party plans to do.

So yes, let’s have a discussion with our political leaders.