Skip to main content

FM
Former Member

I think the real legacy of this Government will be its approach to reforming or presenting a new Constitution. Constitutional reform from a Government point of view will encompass the following:

 

1. Ensuring an electoral system favorable to PNC outright wins.

2. Decreasing/minimizing as much as possible the impact of racial voting especially the still as yet too monolithic Indian vote.

3. Diluting the PPP's hold on Indians. Ensuring the further splintering of the PPP's Indian base.

 

Every possible change has pros and cons for the PNC. Any reform of the electoral system has to seem democratic in character even and especially if they're not. The main problem as I see is that smart people can come up with the credible hypothesis that a constitutional structure has to be erected to contain the Indians, the PPP, and dilute their voting power to an extent that the PPP is doomed to Opposition for at least the foreseeable future under this lot. Such an anti-PPP designed Constitution would keep the PPP out but ultimately serve to corrupt the PNC in Government.

 

Depending on the intentions of President Granger to either put party or country first, we'll see easily the course Guyana will go down for the next few cycles.

 

1. Will Granger modify or re-create the electoral system? If so to what?

2. Will the nominations for major party presidential candidates and MPs be subjected to a membership/district vote by law like party primaries?

3. Will we continue to vote for parties or individuals on the ballot?

4. Will MPs be free to vote their consciences once in a while?

5. Will the Presidential ballot and the parliamentary ballot continue to be the same?

6. Will post-elections coalitions be allowed?

 

Personally, I think the most sensible route is a fixed term Presidency elected indirectly by the people post-national elections. A National Assembly with FPTP and lots of marginal seats forcing ethnic cooperation to achieve 51% of the vote in each district. And a complete and total abandonment of parliamentary governance. We should opt for an independent Executive and an independent Legislative where no MP sits in the Cabinet and vice cersa. Since Cabinet will no longer be responsible to the House then the House can be substantially reduced by about 1/4 to 1/3.

 

Any thoughts?

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Originally Posted by Shaitaan:

I think the real legacy of this Government will be its approach to reforming or presenting a new Constitution. Constitutional reform from a Government point of view will encompass the following:

 

1. Ensuring an electoral system favorable to PNC outright wins.

2. Decreasing/minimizing as much as possible the impact of racial voting especially the still as yet too monolithic Indian vote.

3. Diluting the PPP's hold on Indians. Ensuring the further splintering of the PPP's Indian base.

 

Every possible change has pros and cons for the PNC. Any reform of the electoral system has to seem democratic in character even and especially if they're not. The main problem as I see is that smart people can come up with the credible hypothesis that a constitutional structure has to be erected to contain the Indians, the PPP, and dilute their voting power to an extent that the PPP is doomed to Opposition for at least the foreseeable future under this lot. Such an anti-PPP designed Constitution would keep the PPP out but ultimately serve to corrupt the PNC in Government.

 

Depending on the intentions of President Granger to either put party or country first, we'll see easily the course Guyana will go down for the next few cycles.

 

1. Will Granger modify or re-create the electoral system? If so to what?

2. Will the nominations for major party presidential candidates and MPs be subjected to a membership/district vote by law like party primaries?

3. Will we continue to vote for parties or individuals on the ballot?

4. Will MPs be free to vote their consciences once in a while?

5. Will the Presidential ballot and the parliamentary ballot continue to be the same?

6. Will post-elections coalitions be allowed?

 

Personally, I think the most sensible route is a fixed term Presidency elected indirectly by the people post-national elections. A National Assembly with FPTP and lots of marginal seats forcing ethnic cooperation to achieve 51% of the vote in each district. And a complete and total abandonment of parliamentary governance. We should opt for an independent Executive and an independent Legislative where no MP sits in the Cabinet and vice cersa. Since Cabinet will no longer be responsible to the House then the House can be substantially reduced by about 1/4 to 1/3.

 

Any thoughts?

Furst sensible post from the devil.  But how will they achieve the furst 3 pints?  Wha yuh mean by this “Presidency elected indirectly by the people post-national elections” â€Ķwhat is indirectly?

 

Reasonable last paragraph.  There has to be separation of powers, however, where the new house cannot pass a no confidence vote on the sitting president as is possible today.

FM
Last edited by Former Member

The best possible scenario for Constitutional reform should encompass the following:

 

1. An Executive Presidency with powers comparable to the U.S. Presidency prior to the Imperial Presidency we have now. We currently have the Governor with all the reserve powers of the Queen to trample on any opponent anywhere in the system like the power to prorogue the Legislature. Said President should be nominated by party primary and elected by not less than a 51% majority. Runoffs if necessary.

 

2. The Cabinet. Ministers should be exclusively in the Executive branch and should not sit in Parliament. They are creatures of the President and should be banished from Parliament for the very reason.

 

3. The Prime Minister. There should be no Prime Minister. One VP should be good enough for purposes of Succession.

 

4. Parliament. Parliament should be divided into two chambers. A lower House fully elected by fairly drawn districts taking into account geography and race to create as many marginal seats as possible. Also, 65 MPs for 750,000 is waaaaay too much. 39 as in Trinidad (with almost twice Guyana's population) is reasonable.

 

5. Senate. The Senate should be the real deal in being our true House of Peers. 20 co-equal Members seems adequate. And it should have equal power with the Lower popularly elected House. However, the Senate should have extraordinary powers much like the U.S. Senate. But unlike the U.S. Senate it should not be fashioned to be of the people but like the Roman Senate and the House of Lords, it should be FOR the people. It should be able to face down political parties and check their destructive tendencies. It should be composed of our gray eminences. Men and women who are old but not senile. Accomplished and of good public reputation. Perhaps even lifetime tenure. A place where we can harness men such as Eusi Kwayana. Men who can be trusted as patriots and are not tribal hustlers or on the make. The problem here is in the method of selection to prevent the place from becoming a place for party hacks and/or a second Lower House. Perhaps some novel requirements such as a college education and a real non-political career. The problem here lies in how to achieve this without election and through nomination for merit and sagacity while shielding the process from being tainted by party politics.

 

6. A Strong Constitutional Court with lifetime tenure.

 

I know we can never have meaningful reform because the process and results are in the hands of those least likely to produce a system not favored to themselves....party politicians. The bane of every political system is party politics. They just are not going to do anything to diminish themselves.

FM
Last edited by Former Member

You have pretty much describe the US system except for the appointed Senate.  In a perfect world your arguments might be feasible.  However, Guyana is far from perfect; maybe imperfect is the best word to describe Guyana.

You know what goes on in the USA about this: A lower House fully elected by fairly drawn districts.  Even in the USA those districts are drawn to favor the party in power at the time the districts are drawn/redrawn.  Imagine what will happen in Guyana.  I think they will have to go with current LDC boundaries or something less prone to political manipulation.

I am not sure how you will come up with your appointed Senate.  Why not have the Senate appointed at the RDC levelsâ€Ķmaybe 2 from each RDC.

I don’t think a small country need a dedicated Constitutional Court.  Guyana Supreme Court with recourse to the Caribbean court of justice should be sufficient.

FM

Add Reply

×
×
×
×
×
Link copied to your clipboard.
×
×