Guyanese will surely be following the upcoming vote in the National Assembly on a No-Confidence Motion brought by the Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP) against the A Partnership for National Unity/Alliance For Change (APNU/AFC) coalition Government. Over time, the PPP has made public its many reasons for not having confidence in the Government which in turn continues to boast of its numerous achievements since taking office in May 2015.
Even since the motion was filed, many have argued about its priority over the recently concluded 2019 Budget Debate. Nevertheless, it is scheduled for December 21, just a few days before the Christmas holidays. If the Government were to be defeated, then it has three months to call fresh elections.
That has the potential to trigger traditional electoral concerns, which history will vindicate, within the mindsets of the electorate during the season of goodwill and merriment. Maybe that’s a reason why the Leader of the Opposition posited the vote be taken in January, given the possibility of it dampening celebrations and infusing electoral fears into the mindsets at this time. That seems only reasonable given how steeped in tradition this season is to Guyanese.
Shortly after, Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo, who is the leader of Government’s business in the National Assembly, in a scathing media release, shut down any semblance of a deferral of the vote urging the Leader of the Opposition to instead withdraw the motion. His argument is that the Opposition, knowing that the motion will be defeated by the Government’s one-seat majority, is wasting parliamentary time and resources in the process.
The Opposition Leader stated that, with the stark economic reality, if the Government members were to vote with their conscious, the motion will be successful. He even noted that in such situations, only the Government can incur a loss since the Opposition cannot lose being the Opposition. High interest therefore surrounds the December 21 vote. However, what appeared striking is the immediacy and the authoritative tone of the Prime Minister’s statement.
This has to be put into context of utterances and response prior and subsequent to the May 2015 General Elections. A recurring decimal-like situation is the coalition’s promise to save the sugar industry and protect the welfare of thousands of workers. This is despite some members of the coalition, while in the Opposition, proclaiming that the PPP Government at the time was wasting money on the Guyana Sugar Corporation. One vociferously stated it was like throwing money into a black hole.
That said, the Prime Minister is a seasoned politician coming through the ranks of the PPP and holding ministerial offices in its Government. He was close to the founder of the Party, Dr Cheddi Jagan, and even claimed he was anointed to succeed him as President in 1997. He was part of the struggle to free Guyana from the iron grip of dictatorship imposed by the People’s National Congress (PNC) Government; the party that is the literally the current Administration.
While in the trenches with the PPP to restore democracy, the Prime Minister would have had firsthand knowledge of the importance of sugar to the national economy and the challenges sugar workers face. He would have known that they are poor and hardworking people who toiled to contribute towards the development of the country and how much their lives and that of their families depend on the industry for survival.
In other words, his knowledge and experience would have made him fully aware of the devastation closing the estates would unleash on the workers as currently unfolding for all to see. This brings into question why didn’t the Prime Minister, armed with the knowledge of the consequences of the estates’ closure by the Government he now represents, did not immediately and forcibly articulate the sufferings such action would bring upon the workers and demand it not be implemented. He is also a journalist and therefore could not be short for words then as he clearly isn’t now.
As it is, many of the workers are still to receive their severance pay, some two years since being made redundant. It must also be asked what could have prevented him, as opportunities abound during the recent Budget Debate, to demand that the severance be paid and point out that an injustice has been done by withholding their monies.
Given what has transpired in the context of the ongoing sufferings of the sugar workers with regard to the Prime Minister and his lack of action, it may appear that for him, nothing of the sort happened for it couldn’t be a case of him being oblivious. Arguments can therefore be made about his priorities and his expected loyalty in his new found political abode. This once again epitomises what many have come to believe of his lack of influence.
Through his statement, he is strongly urging the Opposition Leader to “bring it on” on December 21. One can only wonder had he “brought it on” and urged that estates not be closed, the sugar workers may not have been in their current unjust situation and his influence may have been at a different level.
