Time not ripe for unity talks - Gaskin … says forensic audits could embarrass PPP
MORE THAN two weeks since Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo announced that the government is open for unity talks with the Opposition, Social Commentator, Ramon Gaskin says though the move by the administration is laudable the prevailing atmosphere is not conducive for such discussions. He said the impending findings of the various forensic audits could embarrass the People’s Progressive Party (PPP), which can undermine those talks.
Speaking with the Guyana Chronicle, Gaskin said from the information in the public domain, it appears that the proposal by the David Granger-led Administration has not been well thought out.
“The forensic audits are still ongoing; no one knows what will come out of it. From what used to happen, there is likelihood that there would be discovery of massive fraud. The time is not right for it now,” he said, pointing out that Local Government Elections are also in the air.
Gaskin is also of the view that the government and the Opposition can and should discuss the unity government in the open and the place they can do so is the National Assembly. According to him, the National Assembly is the place such talks should be first held and not behind closed doors since the masses would want to know upfront and from the horse’s mouth, what such a government would entail.
In the interim, the social commentator said the government should focus on gaining the trust of the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) by giving them full control of the seven regions they won at the last Regional and General Elections. But for now, he said while a unity government would be good for Guyana in terms of bridging ethic divides and ensuring inclusivity in governance among the major political parties, the time is not ideal now for such talks to be held.
Committed
President David Granger has reiterated that the government remains committed to inclusionary democracy and is prepared to consider executive power sharing with the opposition People’s Progressive Party/ Civic (PPP/C). At the last General and Regional Elections, the governing coalition of APNU+AFC secured some 51% of the votes cast, and Granger has since contended that it would not be prudent for the government to lock out the PPP. “We have at all times aimed at having inclusionary democracy and inclusionary government, so that the 49 per cent don’t feel locked out,” he had said, pointing out that Prime Minister Nagamootoo was on spot when he told Berbicians two Saturdays ago that the administration is open to a national unity government with the PPP.
Granger said that national unity is part of the philosophy of the coalition, pointing out that there should be some form of sharing, some form of national unity and some form of inclusionary governance.
Non-starter
The APNU+AFC Government has since put forward Nagamootoo to lead the unity government talks but the PPP has said it will not engage the Prime Minister, contending that his selection to lead the talk is a non-starter. Nagamootoo, a former PPP Executive has said he has “no axe to grind” with the PPP and stands willing and ready to lead talks on national unity with his old party. “I have worked with Cheddi Jagan – the late President in the 70s, on the issue of a national front government. I worked with the late Dr Walter Rodney to put a programme in place for a united government and later on it was morphed into what the WPA had called a caretaker government,” Nagamootoo had said.
In fact, he revealed that he assumed those responsibilities because it was thought by his colleagues in the APNU+AFC camp that he would be a suitable facilitator to work with a party that he had worked with for over 50 years. But the issue of personality clash, he opined, has been one of the effects of Guyana’s biggest problem, which is the lack of “political unity” and the will to bring about that unity.
Minister of State Joseph Harmon at his weekly post-Cabinet briefing last Friday said the administration is still open to the PPP for talks on a unity government and hopes that they will come onboard. He said from the voting patterns of 2011 and 2015, there is a strong indication that the people want a unity government and not one party dominating in government.
In 2011, the PPP lost its majority in the National Assembly while in 2015 they lost power to the A Partnership for National Unity+ Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) coalition.
“What I can say is that the APNU+AFC Government, this administration, is ready for talks with the PPP/C any day that they are ready for us to start the conversation on a government for national unity. We do not believe that sharing of just a few Cabinet positions really would amount to the inclusive governance which is spoken about in Article 13 of the Constitution. We believe that it has to be much deeper, it has to be clear conversations on how it is going to work and whether in fact you are talking about inclusive governance just at the Cabinet or Executive level or you are taking it all the way down to the various levels of governance. So these are the things we have put on the table to talk with the PPP/C and we trust that in a very short time that they will be able to come back to us,” Minister Harmon said.
Face-to-face interactions
He also said that the administration does not intend to engage the PPP on the unity talks through the press but through face-to-face interactions across the table.
Harmon told reporters that if the PPP has issues with the composition of the government team for the unity talk, as a responsible political party, the PPP should write to the government outlining its concerns. “Let Mr Jagdeo, Mr Rohee and the PPP come to us a say we don’t want to talk to you because Nagamootoo is there, because he is Prime Minister; we don’t want to do this and we don’t want to do that. As of now, that is our team. The Prime Minister has the fullest confidence of this administration. We believe that he is a fair and just person who is capable of leading our team in the unity talks with the PPP/C,” the Minister of State said.
Meanwhile, also weighing in on the debate, Former PPP Minister and political commentator Dr Henry Jeffrey told the Guyana Chronicle that given the antagonism that exist with the Prime Minister and the PPP, it would not be ideal for him to lead the talks, but that is not to say he should not be part of the conversation. For Dr Jeffrey, anyone can lead the discussions, including Minister of Governance Raphael Trotman. But, he said the invitation for the talks should have been extended by President Granger since he is the leader of the country and the coalition that won the last elections and would lead the unity government, and not the Prime Minister.
No arbitration
Dr Jeffery, a political scientist, also contended that in spite of the differences between the two major political parties, it would not be ideal for a civil society member to lead the talks, because it is not an arbitration but, a negotiation involving parties with varying interests.
He said the discussions should be led by political leaders of the two parties since they will be better able to articulate their concerns and reach common solutions, taking into consideration their various interests. Former Speaker of the National Assembly Ralph Ramkarran writing in weekly blog Conversation Tree said there were times in the history of the PPP when the national interest took precedence.
He pointed out that in August 1975, the PPP offered ‘critical support’ to the PNC Government, noting that at the time the PPP perceived that government was moving in an ‘anti-imperialist’ direction. “It had embarked on a policy of nationalisation of foreign-owned industries and was perceived to come or likely to come under attack by ‘imperialism’. In these circumstances the PPP felt compelled to protect what it saw were advances made by the PNC Government by showing solidarity,” he wrote.
But he said the PPP today is intent on throwing obstacles in the path of national unity in order to ensure its own ethno-political dominance.
“As Ogunsaye [Tacuma] says, the PPP believes that it can win the next elections just as it believed it could have won the last two. In order to defeat this objective, the government needs to define and coordinate its approach. The government may consider it necessary to make a formal approach to the Leader of the Opposition, broadly defining its ideas on national unity, without taking public positions from which it would be reluctant to climb down. It needs to recognise that the Prime Minister can lead the process without being physically present at the talks. The PPP must not be handed on a platter the opportunity to cause the failure of a drive for national unity,” Ramkarran stressed.
