A (MIS)MATCH MADE ON VALENTINE’S DAY

February 16, 2015 | By KNews | Filed Under Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom, Source - Kaieteur News

The marriage between A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the Alliance for Change has not yet been consummated. What has taken place is a mere proposal to tie the knot, an agreement on principles to guide any nuptials.

There is no pre-election coalition between APNU and the AFC. What exists is an undertaking, referred to as the Cummingsburg Accord, in which both parties agree to pursue such an arrangement with an understanding of what is likely to take place after the wedding. This is how the Valentine agreement must be interpreted.  We are still in the planning stage. There is no wedding as yet.

A coalition, unlike the euphoria exhibited in yesterday’s Stabroek News front page headline, is not a done deal. Election coalitions require a great more than just the agreement that was signed between APNU and the AFC.

It requires building a coalition, constructing a common slate, agreeing on a campaign strategy, agreeing on how expenses are going to be shared, agreeing on a common programme and agreeing on a range of other issues.

These things do not happen overnight. They take time, considerably more time than there is available before May 11.  It is therefore a race against the clock. With less than three months to elections, it will take considerable effort to cobble the coalition, the common slate and the shared programme.

What is likely to emerge is an adulterated coalition, one that will be susceptible to the wily PPPC which always knows how to exploit weaknesses in its opponents’ armory. Even if the opposition parties are able to do this, they then have to sell it to their parties and their constituents.

At the least, one would expect that such a major agreement would require the sanction of the larger organs of the two parties. In the case of APNU, it would be the General Council of the PNCR. In the case of the AFC a special congress would likely to be required to agree to the wedding.

There is no certainty that this will happen. The AFC has taken a major decision which is at odds with what the party has always stood for. The party’s position was always that it would never join with either the PPPC or the PNCR. Now that it is proposing to marry the latter, this has serious implications for the party and is a matter that is likely to cause division within the AFC ranks.  People are going to be asking questions and the two parties must be prepared with the answers to those questions.

It is also a decision that is likely to affect its fund raising capacity. It is one thing to ask persons to give money to a Third Force party. It is another thing to ask persons to give money for a marriage with the PNCR. Asking your supporters to agree to the Valentine’s Day agreement is not going to be an easy sell.

Selling this marriage will take doing. A new brand is being created a mere three months before elections. Developing this new brand is not going to be easy, much less to sell to an electorate that is known to be rigidly divided along ethnic lines. Time is not on the side of both APNU and the AFC. Going to the elections with a new, relatively unknown brand may confuse people. That is a risk that has to be considered.

Also, the two parties have to find compatibility. The common interest of power is not enough to achieve this. While the AFC has worked together with APNU in the National Assembly, the stakes are bigger here. This is not a fling. This is marriage and the implications are that AFC can end up losing its identity in this process.

History is not on the side of this marriage. The PPP had reached the stage of agreeing to a marriage with the other parties of the PCD in the run up to the 1992 elections. But the whole plan fell apart when it came to deciding who should be the groom.

There is no agreement between APNU and the AFC on either the groom or best man so far. The agreement inked merely says that one party will nominate the Presidential candidate and the other the Prime Ministerial candidate. Nomination is not appointment and there is no mention as to who will decide if the nominees are fit and proper.

The PPP was never ousted by a coalition. In 1964, the talks on a PNC/ UF coalition collapsed. But the two sides came together in a coalition government after the elections. Four years later, Burnham had had his fill of coalition politics. He vowed that never again would he lead his party into a coalition.

History is therefore not on the side of the proposed marriage between APNU and the AFC. We shall have to wait and see whether it can and will be consummated.