One year ago, there was non-partisan elation in many quarters following the results of the last elections. Those elections saw, for the first time since 1964, no party holding a majority of seats in the National Assembly.
The euphoria has evaporated quickly and has been replaced by widespread despondency over the make-up of the National Assembly. So great has been the disappointment over the 10th Parliament that many Guyanese are now convinced that Guyana needs to return to majoritarian politics.
A new locus of power emerged in the National Assembly following the elections of November 28, 2011. One small party, the Alliance for Change, held the balance of power. Even before the results of the elections had been announced, the AFC elatedly proclaimed to all that it would hold the balance of power in the National Assembly.
There were many who felt that this make-up of the National Assembly would have finally led to a situation of all the parties working together for the good of the country. There were many who felt that finally a new political culture would emerge.
For many years, politics in Guyana had been reduced to a contest between the two main parties. Now with a third party holding the balance of power, it was hoped that negotiation and compromise would have replaced bickering and protestations.
The AFC obviously held the key to this new political culture. In fact, it seemed pleased that it held the balance of power between the two main parties. Its showing at the elections vindicated its decision not to join A Partnership for National Unity (APNU).
The AFC had always felt that the more parties that participated in the elections, the better would be the chances of defeating the People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C).
The PPP/C was not defeated, but the lost its majority which for years had allowed it to dominate the National Assembly and eschew any form of political compromise.
The fact that the AFC now formed part of what is being labeled “a triangle” of political power in the National Assembly, raised the hopes of many, including persons within the business community that the country would finally “settle down.”
The AFC has squandered that opportunity, and in the process dashed the hopes of many, including hundreds of thousands of Guyanese, who want nothing more than to see an end to political squabbling.
As in any other part of the world, the people of Guyana have their own political loyalties and affiliations, and these often run deep. But in the main, the ordinary man would not be bothered by who wins the elections, so long as all the parties can work together.
It does not matter whether you are a die-hard PPP, a devoted PNCR supporter or a dyed-in-the-wool AFC activist, there is nothing more that you want to see than good relations between the political parties. There is nothing more comforting than for these political parties to sit down in a matured manner and work for the betterment of all Guyana.
The AFC, following the last elections, was in the unenviable situation of promoting this new political culture. Instead of using its hold on the balance of power to mediate and intermediate between the two main parties, the AFC took the most obtuse decision to convert a triangle into an axis with poles of power at each end.
The great betrayal of the AFC was that it never established a triangle of power in the National Assembly. It was determined from day one to change the political culture by replacing the domination of the government with the domination of the combined opposition. The talk about a triangle of power in the National Assembly is, therefore, misplaced rhetoric.
There is no longer any political triangle in the National Assembly. What there is, is a straight line with two extremities. At one end is the government still stubborn and still defiant, and at the other end the combined opposition, the AFC and APNU, bent on getting their way at all cost.
Instead of a new political culture of cooperation, negotiation and compromise, what we now have is the old combative political culture that has existed. And the main blame for this state of affairs has to be laid at the feet of the Alliance for Change, which seems to have lost its way politically.
The AFC is now indistinguishable from APNU. You hardly now know what is the difference between what the AFC stands for and what APNU advocates.
And yet the expectation of those who supported that party was that the AFC was supposed to stand above this political fray and hold the balance of power between the two main political titans. Instead it seems determined to join with APNU in shattering the expectations of its supporters and the many others who want to see a new dispensation mean a new political culture.
It is hard to see how the AFC can now claim to be an independent political party, because it is operating as a surrogate for the main opposition, APNU.
It is not too late for the AFC to return to its role at the apex of the triangle of power in the National Assembly.
