THE People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) administration has completed one year since its re-election to office in general and regional elections held on November 28, 2011.

This is the first time in its political history that the PPP was elected to office without a majority of the seats in Parliament, a situation that has been exploited by the combined opposition to make life difficult for the PPP/C administration.
The PPP/C for the first time since the return of democracy on October 5, 1995 failed to obtain a majority in parliament by virtue of having polled less than 50% of the votes cast.

This, however, is not the first time that the PPP has failed to obtain a majority of votes in national elections. In both the 1961 and 1964 elections, the PPP polled less than 50% of the votes but was able to gain political office by virtue of the electoral model of first-pass-the-post or the constituency model which in the elections of 1961 gave the PPP a parliamentary majority of 57% of the seats even though it only polled 47% of the votes cast.
It was that calculation that prompted the British Government to change the electoral system from the constituency model to that of proportional representation which saw the PPP manipulated out of power in what former British Prime Minister Harold Wilson dubbed a “fiddled constitutional arrangement”.
The opposition has been attempting to create the impression that the PPP/C administration is a “minority” government by virtue of not having a majority of the seats in Parliament even though the combined opposition only has a mere one seat majority in Parliament. They conveniently ignored the fact that the PPP has won a plurality, that is, it has obtained the single largest bloc of votes and therefore is legally and constitutionally the duly elected government of Guyana.

 This practice of the party that won the plurality being required to form the government is by no means unique to Guyana. In the United Kingdom, the Labour Party under the leadership of Gordon Browne voluntarily conceded office to the Conservatives which won the plurality in the last election even though by convention as the incumbent party it could have sought to form some kind of accommodation with the smaller parties in parliament. The Conservatives eventually formed a coalition government with the Liberals.
In the United States the Obama administration, despite having won the Presidency and consequently the Executive in the recent elections still have to contend with a Congress that is dominated by Republicans even though the Democrats are still in control of the Senate.
Such political configurations as in the case of both Britain and the United States have made governance somewhat problematic but one fails to detect the level of acrimony and bitterness that have characterized our body politic since the elections of November 28, 2011.
One of the first indication that the combined opposition parties were unwilling to engage the PPP/C in any meaningful consultation on the way forward was its refusal to even entertain the thought of the PPP’s nomination of former Speaker Ralph Ramkarran as Speaker of the National Assembly even though Mr. Ramkarran had been recognised by all parties in the House as being fair and unbiased in the manner in which he managed the affairs of Parliament.
Instead, the combined opposition, using their one-seat majority proceeded to take both the Speaker and the Deputy Speaker of the House. Out of sheer political vindictiveness, it unilaterally slashed billions of dollars from the 2012 Budget Estimates and then went on to move a no-confidence motion against the Minister of Home Affairs over his alleged handling of the Linden protest action even though a Commission set up with opposition support preliminarily felt that the minister was not directly responsible for the deaths of the two protesters. The final report is expected early in the New Year.
This is hardly the basis for any serious approach to consensus politics. The current dispensation requires political maturity and a capacity to rise above partisan politics in order to promote the overall good of the Guyanese society.
Be that as it may, the year was quite eventful without any slowing down of the developmental momentum which the country has experienced over the years. The economy is expected to show positive growth thanks to enhanced performance of sugar and rice with the latter experiencing a record level of production this year.
The mining sector is also doing well, in particular gold, which has shown significant improvements in production levels. The social sectors in particular education, health, housing and water continue to see substantial progress, not to mention the government’s massive infrastructure programme which cumulatively is having a transformative effect on the quality of life of the Guyanese people.
President Donald Ramotar and his Cabinet must be commended for continuing the growth and development trajectory of the economy despite a harsh international environment and a less than supportive opposition.
As we approach the New Year one can only hope that better sense will prevail and that the two opposition parties in parliament would have some serious introspection on the harm, both actual and potential, that could be inflicted on this nation should such reckless behaviour continue in the period ahead.