LOCAL Government Elections (LGE) are now mere weeks away. Many would argue that the very fact that these elections would take place represents a major achievement for the present Government, which had made LGE a major campaign issue. In fact, it was one of the damning charges against the previous Government, which seemed less interested in holding these elections. The sticking point was the kind of system under which the elections would be held, beside the balance of power between the local authorities and the Central Government. The then Opposition parties had favoured a system in which less power was concentrated in the hands of the subject Minister, while the then ruling party preferred maintenance of the status quo. The President of the day had used his veto powers to frustrate the enactment of legislation passed by the Parliament.

Upon coming to power last year, the present Government quickly pushed through the delayed legislation, and moved towards making good on its promise to hold the elections sooner rather than later. The Opposition had vigorously argued that the elections could not be held since the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) did not have the necessary infrastructure in place. GECOM, for its part, contended that it was ready. The Opposition was then forced to recant its earlier opposition to contesting any further election under the current leadership of GECOM.

So here we are. There was some debate over the participation of political parties in the elections. There was, and still is, a very strong view that the parties should not participate; that local governance is in essence and spirit a matter for people in their respective localities to be free from party control. There is a lot of merit in this contention; quite apart from the fact that the law does not prevent parties from contesting, our party-centred political system and culture are too overpowering. Even if parties were to excuse themselves, this would be only in name, as the parties would surely influence and direct the composition of the lists of candidates in the localities. We do, however, believe that, in the circumstances, a mixed system whereby the parties are confined to contesting a percentage of the seats may be an acceptable compromise.

It has been argued by some commentators that, in the end, these elections would be a straight contest between the two major political entities. Coming mere months after the transformative general elections of 2015, it is difficult to imagine any election not taking on that complexion. The Opposition PPP would be eager to demonstrate to both its supporters and the Government that, despite its loss of the Central Government, it remains a formidable electoral machinery. The extent to which it is able to prove that would tell us whether the defeat last year has done any major damage to the party’s standing among its core constituency.
The ruling Coalition, on the other hand, would have to face intense scrutiny of its tenure in office thus far. In a sense, it has both the advantage and disadvantage of using its record in Government. On the one hand, it can — and most likely will — frame its record in office as one of improved services to the citizenry, and argue that such a record would be transferred to local government. On the other hand, its missteps and mistakes could be exploited by the Opposition as a reason why the Coalition should not be entrusted with local governance. In the final analysis, being in Government is always an advantage, and the Coalition has the added advantage of being a group of parties. The latter reality is pivotal in terms of mobilization strength.

Despite the overpowering presence of the parties, there are so-called independent groups which are participating. These groups are all vying for votes, mostly among the core constituency of the Coalition. There are no independent groups challenging the PPP in its core constituency. This is an interesting development, which makes the contest in some areas very competitive.

Team Benschop, led by political activist Mark Benschop, is challenging strongly in Georgetown. Benschop has name recognition and a long record of engagement in the communities. He had run as an independent in the general elections, but was badly beaten in a contest in which the stakes were extremely high. Many in the African-Guyanese community had questioned his judgment in opposing the Coalition. The current issue is whether, in a relatively low-stake election, that question still holds.

Two new groups, Team Legacy and Youths for Local Government, have thrown their proverbial hats in the ring and are targeting the youth vote. Like Team Benschop, they are grounded in the Coalition’s core constituency. Can they convince young voters to vote for independence rather than party? The critical question here is that the same kind of dynamic does not obtain on the other side of the political divide, where the PPP is unchallenged by independents. Will this force the Coalition’s constituency to close ranks behind the party, thus shutting out the Independents?

One factor that could play in the Independents’ favour is what appears to be a healthy preference for those who were part of the previous local governments to give way to new blood. However, the Coalition has retained some of these “old-timers” on its lists. Whether this will push some of their voters to the Independents’ camps is left to be seen. We do believe that the infusion of new blood in governance is a plus for the country, but we feel that the crude dismissal of older and appropriately experienced candidates is a mistake. There is no magic in youthfulness when it comes to politics. In fact, in many instances, the rush towards wholesale transfer of power to youths has proven disastrous. Therefore, a mix across generation lines is preferred.

Finally, there is much concern over the level of enthusiasm among the electorate. Will people come out to vote in large numbers? There is a view that GECOM has not done a very good job in its public voter education drive. That may be so, but the fact of the matter is that, given the infrequency of LGEs over the decades, the population is simply not socialized to appreciate the importance of such elections. That makes it extremely difficult to do effective voter education.

Whatever happens in the next few weeks, one thing is certain: we are in election mode; that means that the country would be in a heightened state of anxiety. We hope that the campaign would be a moment of constructive engagement, whereby the various teams make their cases based on substantive proposals, and not on baseless political rhetoric. This, however, remains to be seen.