By Dr. Prem Misir

LET us cut the nonsense out of what is happening in politics in Guyana at this hour and say what the politicians want. And politicians in Guyana include not only those from the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), but also very much so those from the Combined Opposition benches of the Alliance For Change (AFC) and A Partnership for National Unity (APNU). Indeed, there are politicians who live for politics and those who live off politics.Access to political power and to sustain that power is what politics is all about and it is political power that politicians want. Therefore, ordinary people should not complicate their understanding of the political morass facing Guyana at this juncture of its history; for they should not believe that some no-confidence motion is what will change the configuration of politics because that will not produce the real change. How so? The story has already been told that politicians want political power which is their primary motivation for politicking; it is what politicians do with their power that matters.

“To prorogue or not to prorogue parliament, or to dissolve or not to dissolve parliament, constitutes the question requiring the most appropriate answer and decision: whether the Government’s public capital projects should continue to experience the Combined Opposition’s onslaught: Cheddi Jagan Airport Modernisation Project, Ogle Aerodrome assistance, Civil Aviation equipment and Hinterland/Coastal Airstrips, among others; and, indeed, the flagrant Combined Opposition against the Amaila Hydropower Project culminating in its termination. And consolidation of foreign investments also persistently experiences the Combined Opposition’s hostility.”

Ordinary people should know that the real test for politicians comes when they have to deliver on their promises to the poor and vulnerable. This line of thinking should be incontestable, as a government, while it has to open itself to all citizens, is set up principally to facilitate quality standards of living for the disadvantaged and the politically voiceless. But the disadvantaged and politically voiceless could lose out when politicians who live off politics predominate over those who live for politics. Ordinary people will know more about this come Monday, November 10, 2014.
And so the nation is affixed to Monday November 10, 2014 which is the date for the first parliamentary sitting after the recess. Reasons for this ‘Monday affixation’ have become the talk of the town. On this momentous day 11/10/2014, the minority Opposition Alliance For Change (AFC) expects to introduce its no-confidence motion to its parliamentary colleagues. Two other possibilities may add glamour to an otherwise dreary political season. There is the possibility that the President of Guyana could dissolve parliament; and the other likelihood is that the President of Guyana could prorogue parliament.
The Guyana Constitution entertains the three prospects. The first possibility is that once the no-confidence motion against the Government is introduced, then a debate on the PPP/C Government’s record becomes fair game, and if the Combined Opposition wins the motion, then the country is headed for General and Regional Elections in about three months’ time. Dissolving parliament, thereby circumventing a debate on the Government’s record, is an option available to the President who will then be constitutionally required to announce the dates for nomination day and General and Regional Elections to be held within three months. A further possibility is the President’s prerogative to prorogue parliament in which case parliament will not have any sitting until six months elapse.
Nevertheless, given that the Guyana parliamentary system still has residual roots with the Westminster system, the principle of responsible government becomes relevant, where a government has to have the support of the majority in parliament. However, when the Conservative Party Stephen Harper Government was faced with a no-confidence vote which it was sure to lose, Prime Minister Harper asked the Governor General Her Excellency Michaëlle Jean to prorogue parliament, and she granted the prorogation on December 4, 2008; and given that Canadians perceive elections to be won or lost by specific political parties, one of the arguments used in support of prorogation was: since the Conservatives claimed victory at the election in 2008, then any move to alter that electoral result would be unconstitutional and undemocratic (Desserud, 2009, p.41). This argument implies that parties not parliament win or lose elections; for this reason, elections not parliament determine the composition of parliament.
As 11/10/2014 approaches, the Guyana Opposition politicians are beginning to up the ante as the nation awaits the parliamentary sitting on that day. In this context, APNU’s leader, in preempting the possibility of the President proclaiming a prorogation where the no-confidence motion will become a pending historical artifact with no debate at least at this time, has now alluded to a conversation on the making of an angry population and intensified protests.
In this context, APNU leader recently pointed to the smothering of elected voices should a prorogation become the order of the day. But the APNU leader should know, too, that while the elected representatives have a constitutional right to have their conversations in parliament, the President also constitutionally has the prerogative to proclaim a prorogation.
To prorogue or not to prorogue parliament, or to dissolve or not to dissolve parliament, constitutes the question requiring the most appropriate answer and decision: whether the Government’s public capital projects should continue to experience the Combined Opposition’s onslaught: Cheddi Jagan Airport Modernisation Project, Ogle Aerodrome assistance, Civil Aviation equipment and Hinterland/Coastal Airstrips, among others; and, indeed, the flagrant Combined Opposition against the Amaila Hydropower Project culminating in its termination. And consolidation of foreign investments also persistently experiences the Combined Opposition’s hostility.
The PPP/C Government has had a few poor headlines in its development work, but the growing positive trends for a better Guyana are there for all to see. And so for these public capital projects and the ongoing consolidation of foreign investments to currently remain a viable developmental force, the PPP/C Government may have to study the possibility of remaining in office at this time.

Reference:
DESSERUD, D. A. 2009. The Governor General, the Prime Minister and the Request to Prorogue. Canadian Political Science Review, 3, 40-54.