It is not unusual for new political parties to emerge during the election season only to wither away after the election is over. So, it is not surprising that we have witnessed the birth of quite a few over the last few weeks. The question is whether these parties are serious contenders, or they are just a reflection of bruised egos or are fronts for the plotters of a return to discredited eras.
The truth is that in the seven decades since self-rule not many parties have survived for more than a decade. Of course, in our almost rigid two-party system , Third Parties have found it difficult to maintain any consistent appeal to the electorate.
Indeed, since Independence only the WPA and the AFC in different ways have managed to make any significant impact on the national psyche. The WPA, which emerged during the 1970s as a pressure group has maintained a national voice but has never done well electorally. The AFC on the other hand fared much better electorally to the point that it was a pivotal actor in the change of administration in 2015. It is instructive to note that both parties are part of the governing Coalition. The lesson seems to be that coalition is the more effective route to power for smaller electoral parties.
It is, therefore, baffling to hear some of the new parties declaring their intention to avoid partnership with the two larger parties. One is prompted to ask—what then is your intention? What are the motives of these parties? It is no secret that some of the leaders were once cozy with parties within the Coalition. If these parties are serious, what is their route to power? At least the leadership of the Liberty and Justice Party (LJP) seems to be grappling with this question. One senses that that party’s engagement with the Coalition is a commonsense move that is grounded in real politics.
Some commentators have posited that the new parties, which are mostly hostile to the governing Coalition, could either separately or together muster enough votes to prevent the bigger entities—PPP and the Coalition—from gaining a majority. The question that must be asked is this– to what end? It is naïve to think that a new party with one or two parliamentary seats could force the two titans into a National Government. It is then not out of place to conclude that these new parties may be fronting for interests that are rooting for the return of the opposition PPP.
This then is the mystery of these new parties. None of them has taken a stand against the existential threat of the PPP in its current manifestation. They seem to care less about what a PPP government in the current circumstances would mean for the stability of the country. None of them points to the wanton destruction that that party heaped on the country in the not too distant past. Guyanese who want to maintain the stability that the Coalition has managed to return to our country, must be wary of these new formations.
It must be asked what alternative visions these parties are putting before the nation. To date, we have not seen anything that separates them from the established parties. Insofar as they have spoken about economic development, it has been a revisiting of standard ideas which the country has heard for the last seven decades. One leader has said he does not want to put his economic ideas in the open because he fears they would be stolen. With all due respect to the gentleman, we believe that Guyanese deserve much more credit—they are far more politically intelligent than that person assumes.
Some parties have put the question of constitutional reform as an important electoral issue. While constitutional reform and governance are legitimate national concerns, they can hardly be categorized as defining issues at this juncture. With the imminent Oil and Gas economy, these parties must say where they stand on the issues that flow from that reality.
Let the country hear of your creative ideas.; do not hide behind masks.
This publication respects the right of citizens to compete for political office—the right of association is a sacred one. But we ask citizens not to be fooled by shiny promises and bitter rhetoric. Beware of those posing as deliverers. The vote is equally sacred. It can determine the difference between gloom and happiness. As one commentator argues, this is not the time to experiment with unknown and undefined actors. To those who are rooting for a minority government, we say gridlock is never an effective form of governance. The Coalition, despite its challenges, has planted good seeds. It is the closest the country has come to the desired national unity. The last five years represent a rebirth of democratic practice in governance that ought to be continued.
