THE National Assembly will next convene on Friday, May 11. Does this date ring a bell?
Yes. It does. It will mark the third May 11 since national and regional elections were held in Guyana. Those elections were won by the APNU+AFC coalition, a six-party, multi-ethnic “rainbow” combination. The coalition was led by David Arthur Granger who, a few days after those elections, was sworn in as Executive President.

SILENT REVOLUTION
The former PPP/C government was democratically removed from office in what was a silent revolution. It held office for an unbroken 23 years, during which it was re-elected four times. At the last of those elections, the PPP/C lost its majority in Parliament, and became a minority government. It later succumbed to total defeat at the May 11, 2015 elections.
As a competitive party, the PPP/C was paralysed from disbelief over its electoral defeat and demise as government. It protested and picketed against the results on the pretext that they were rigged. It even petitioned the court to reverse the results.

BASK IN SATISFACTION
May 11 will also be the 88th sitting of the 11th Parliament, even though the coalition is just midway in its first term in office. This will bring sittings under the coalition on par with the number of sittings under the PPP/C for the entire duration of the 10th Parliament.
While the National Assembly needs to meet more often in order to maintain its robust legislative agenda, there is no reason why the coalition cannot bask in satisfaction that it has not done as badly as some critics have tried to make out on the issue of frequency of sittings of the House.

The opposition cannot make any credible criticisms on this issue, as it has earned itself a place on the shame-bench of parliamentary malpractice, for scuttling the 10th Parliament. It was the most unprecedented assault on parliamentary democracy since the British invasion in 1953, and the suspension of the colony’s constitution.

PRESIDENTIAL DICTATORSHIP
In 2014, the PPP/C government aborted sittings of the duly elected National Assembly for a full year. It then prorogued the House ouseHouin a cowardly response to an opposition no-confidence motion. On May 11, 2015, the Guyanese voters passed judgment against what had become a presidential dictatorship!

The loss of its electoral majority and then, government office, by what was once a popular nationalist party, didn’t happen suddenly. It was preceded by an unrelenting, vulgar campaign in the post-Jagan period by an ambitious clique to seize control of the party and to hijack the presidency. Internal democratic procedures and practices were railroaded, and internal processes to elect the presidential candidate were crudely rigged.
Decent and dignified leaders who were cheated of a fair chance for selection are still around, and could have shared juicy insights about our local “king of discord and disunion” to the American bestselling author, Michael Wolff, before he had penned his controversial book, “Fire and Fury”.

But there would be other victims and more opportunities to share the stories about the sad saga of recycled rigging inside the PPP/C, hopefully before the 2020 polls. Some loyalists, still stunned by and baffled over how Jagan’s party has been hijacked, see only a repeat of the sordid past. But they would surrender in silent resignation.

PUBLIC PROCUREMENT
While the sabotage of the internal process resulted in its reduction to minority government status in 2011, its stubborn refusal to establish the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) was one of the main reasons for the motion of no-confidence that resulted in the 2015 defeat.

Provisions for the establishment and composition of the PPC were made in the Guyana Constitution, and the Procurement Act provides for regulation of the procurement of goods, services and for the execution of public works. While provisions are made for sole-sourcing, it was not intended that this could be done at the expense of competition, procedural fairness or transparency.

But the PPP/C did not want the commission and was determined to hold on to Cabinet’s role in approving state contracts through a deceptive mechanism of offering “no-objection”. Tens of billions of dollars in such contracts were handed out this way to their political cronies, mostly through single or sole-sourcing, in acts of nepotism that compromised standards and sidelined competition.

It is amusing therefore that the very PPP/C, now in opposition, is championing a new, dubious cause that Cabinet should not approve contracts or be required to indicate no objection!

The fact of the matter is that the APNU+AFC coalition Cabinet plays no such role in the award of contracts! It does not approve contracts or exercise no-objections.
However, as guardian of the people’s purse, the Cabinet has a vested interest and, like all procuring entities, it has to be satisfied that procedural fairness is observed in the award of government contracts. Private contractors also enjoy the right to reviews and they could appeal against an award to a Bid Protest Committee, or to the PPC.

BETTER PLACE
The Third May is worthy of observance, as it has found our country in a better place than she was on the eve of May 11, 2015. Through hard and dedicated work, for which President Granger and Vice-President Greenidge deserve commendation, we have placed our national sovereignty concerns before the International Court of Justice and regained our respect as a democratic nation in the world. We have strengthened the national security architecture to combat piracy, drug trafficking and smuggling, and to make our people safe. We have moved upwards in freedom of the press ratings, and earned a cleaner image on the corruption perception ladder.

Since May 2015, the conversation about Guyana has changed and for the first time we are talking about and disagreeing over the size and pace of development projects, such as the modern international airport or the classy Roundabout; a Sovereign Wealth Fund and the earnings from oil and gas for the future; borrowing ceilings and the servicing of our national debt, and the place Guyana holds in the exciting world of technology and the information and telecommunication revolution.

The conversation has changed so much so that we could continue the debate on the proposed Cyber Security Law beyond the scrutiny of a special select committee of the National Assembly. Guyanese must insist on protecting the content of our freedom from state encroachment or infringement. This is their right.
It is apparent that the proposed law didn’t get everything right, which was the reason the attorney general did not move its second reading in the House last Thursday. So, we must keep talking and criticising and suggesting, in an honest effort to get what we are doing right.

The Third May has found us in a changed, free and expanded political space, and our people ought to be proud that they are eventually the vanguard of this revolution for change and inclusion.