IT IS now official. Both the Minister of Communities and the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) have indicated that the frequently delayed Local Government Elections (LGE) would be held sometime around March next year. The last time we held such elections was in 1994, a full two decades and more ago. The previous one was held in 1970; therefore, when the electorate goes to the polls in 2016, it would be doing so for only the second LGE in 46 years. That is not a record we should be proud of.

Like the previous government, this coalition government has kept its word on this matter by holding the elections early in its tenure. But we hope this government does not emulate the record of its predecessor when it comes to holding such elections regularly. Any functioning democracy deserves frequent elections at every level. Our inability to honour this practice in the past represents a serious democratic blunder that must be corrected once and for all.

We now have new local government legislation which, among other things, seeks to correct the imbalance in the relationship between the central government and the local authorities. This has been a sore point in the past. It is worth noting here that the previous governing party and the present ones have had fundamental differences on what that relationship should be. The PPP preferred one in which the central government, through the subject minister, maintains what is in effect an absolute veto over local governments, particularly on financial matters. The parties in the current governing coalition have opted for a more democratic relationship, whereby the power of the minister in this regard is greatly reduced.

President Ramotar had, during the last parliament, stubbornly refused to sign into law that aspect of the legislation that sought to operationalise the latter relationship. He had claimed that it was unconstitutional. That was one of several actions that eventually forced the then combined opposition to table the no-confidence motion against the government, which eventually led to fresh elections and the downfall of the PPP government.

It is worth noting that that Local Government Bill, which was in effect vetoed by President Ramotar, was one of the first pieces of legislation passed by the new parliament and assented to by President Granger. The opposition PPP absented itself during consideration and passage of the bill as part of its boycott of parliament, following its defeat at the last general election.

The long delay in holding LGE has meant that a vast number of the current councils have been unelected; many of the original councillors have either resigned, died, or migrated. Those who remained or succeeded them have become unaccountable — a sure route to nepotism and corruption.

In some communities, the PPP had installed Interim Management Committees (IMCs) which were dominated by persons loyal to that party. We hope that those who have used those councils as a medium for corruption would be weeded out of the system by the vote of the communities.

This would mean that the electorate should be properly mobilised to participate in the upcoming elections. We have editorialised in the past that this is not an easy task. People all over the world do not generally vote at local elections at the same rate as they do in general elections. There is a feeling that not much is at stake in such elections. We argue differently. Local governments are the ones that are closest to the people, and therefore lend themselves to greater day-to-day scrutiny by the communities. These governments often determine what services are distributed in the communities, and how these are allocated. In other words, part of the government function of distributing common resources is devolved to the local councils.

Most importantly, local governments should be the nursery for new leadership. Often leaders arrive in parliament or in Cabinet without any experience in Local Government.

For all of the above reasons, people should be urged to vote heavily at the LGE next year. The mobilisation should start now, and it should include a popular education initiative aimed at sensitising the public to the importance of the elections. Such education should be done preferably by GECOM and other NGOs, but the political parties should also help in this regard.

We would prefer these elections to be driven by citizens’ involvement with less partisan dominance; but in our current environment, that is hardly possible. No doubt, the PPP would use these elections to test and consolidate its support among its traditional base. The more local councils and municipalities it controls, the more it secures a hold on the governance of the country. The party already controls seven of the 10 Regional Councils. One can expect a very robust PPP campaign, replete with the customary demonisation of the PNC and AFC and calls for closing of the ranks.

The governing coalition, on the other hand, faces some challenges. Will the APNU and the AFC contest separately or as a coalition? Will they be able to mobilise their constituencies to vote with the same enthusiasm as they did at the general election? Governing parties are always judged on their record in government, and that record is always subject to distortion by the opposition.

The next five months would be defining ones.