If it’s a new year – which it certainly is – we shouldn’t be surprised that calls for a “new politics” have started to be sounded. After all, if the sun rises every morning in the east, we shouldn’t be surprised when it does the same tomorrow!! Excepting that, in our case, the calls aren’t really new. It’s the same old demand – yes, demand or else!! – for “executive shared governance”! The claimed rationale is that “the winner takes all system” = where the party or coalition of parties winning elections form the Executive, hasn’t worked.
Now, one of the things your Eyewitness has learnt over the years is you gotta look at these sorta claims in context: like where are these calls coming from? After all, in almost every democracy, where the people get the opportunity to choose their government, the executive is formed by the winning party – and we don’t hear no complaints!! Each party has a chance to go to the electorate; show them their programme and credibility, and hope they get enough votes to garner a majority!! Simple, innit?
Save that, in our case, we had a “loser takes all” government for 28 years under the PNC – which blatantly rigged elections using all sorts of crookishness – and to hell with what the people wanted!! Now, we might say that was the past, and we should leave it in the past. But the very people who’re now calling for Executive Shared Government sat mute when the PNC – under the fig leaf of APNU – tried to rig the elections just three years ago!! In fact, they were part and parcel of the APNU apparatus, giving cover to the PNC when they tried to rig again. This means they got skin in the game – so they ain’t exactly unbiased.
Now, it may sound reasonable to say that all the parties winning seats should be at the table in a country that has so many different groups. But the proponents never spell out exactly how things would change if this were to be put into practice. Wouldn’t the parties that were voted in on their own platforms insist on pushing their agenda? So, wouldn’t the party with the majority of seats at the table still get their way?? Exactly how would the losing parties have a say?? Or are the Executive power sharers also saying that decisions gotta be unanimous??
But we know where THAT would lead us, don’t we? We presently have a rule that the top two judicial officers gotta be selected unanimously by the Govt and the Opposition. That’s Executive Shared Governance on this issue, innit?? So how has it worked??
See what your Eyewitness means by “context”?
…old tricks
From the rhetoric being deployed to demand “Shared Executive Governance”, your Eyewitness pointed out above the “or else” aspect. And that’s why these calls will never be heeded by the PPP, after winning elections. When they lost in 2015 – even though they claimed there was some hanky-panky done by the PNC – they didn’t come out into the streets with any “or else” demands. They accepted their role as the Opposition, but were creative enough to pull the rug out from under the PNC with their constitutionally mandated “No Confidence Motion”!!
But the Opposition only knows brute force and ignorance when it comes to power. Right now, they’re focusing on how much the PPP’s doling out from oil revenues. But they should know it’s human nature that the more folks get, the more they want – and they’ll always be convinced that they ain’t getting enough. And your Eyewitness ain’t talking about riling up Opposition supporters and further dividing the country.
Why not target “PPP supporters”??
…old contradiction
The Essequibo border was demarcated in 1899 after Venezuela invoked the Monroe Doctrine and challenged the US to confront Britain. Now Mad Maduro’s complaining bitterly that the US is invoking the same doctrine to stymie his land grabbing agenda!!
