Not optimistic about national dialogue on electoral reform

Dear Editor,

I commend the good citizens who put private voices in public papers to share their thinking.  Without reading a word beyond the caption I identify closely with, `We need a  national dialogue on  electoral reform that puts citizens at heart of process’ (SN Novem-ber 1).  I offer this humble fare.

We have a problem, several of them, in fact; many such, to be truly realistic.  Here it is that after a (the) most bruising of elections, there is publicly tabled, once again, the crying need for “national dialogue” and electoral reform” and inserting “citizens at the heart of the process.” If I remember well, CARICOM recommended similarly; and so did the EU and OAS (maybe) and the powerbrokers from alphabet societies.  In the throes and traumas of the last sordid elections, the rush and flush of that forgettable historical interval, none were interested.  Not any leader.  Certainly not the greatest many of citizens.  I have difficulty, therefore, with a start being made with this laudable heartfelt recommendation that should engage all of us.

Government leaders speak well about unity, but commit atrocities, through agents selected, who deliver the opposite. Opposition leaders are still trying to figure out where they stand on anything positive on nation and citizens.  My first problem is that since it is currently insurmountable to get any two (government and opposition leaders) to converse honestly about the welfare of country and citizen, then I envision enormous difficulty in getting the two clashing races (first) and all of them thereafter to have any kind of dialogue on anything. As an example, there were those who held themselves out as authentic patriots in recent calls for truth and reconciliation.  I must question their sincerity, since they have faded in the fullness of electoral triumph.

Who was/is real about truth and reconciliation and who was/is the hypocrite and fraud here?  Those are strong words, but we are going to need stronger stomachs to get from those to national dialogue on electoral reform, since truth and reconciliation are inseparable components of such an undertaking. They are not mutually exclusive. And now I throw another spanner in the engine: national dialogue must, of necessity, conceptualize and prioritize and emphasize the role of the widest grassroots fields. It cannot be, will not gain enduring traction and work, if it is an elitist or establishment, political or so-called civic, process powered by those specific segments of this multi-ruptured society that are all of their interests and their prosperity.

It is imperative that the Guyanese grassroots be integral to any national dialogue process.  Only that will place their visions where they should be, give them the legitimacy that such deserve. The local cognoscenti and intelligentsia, such as they are, can provide shape and context, but no more. Like the venal politicians of every strain-PPP, Civic, PNC, APNU, AFC, old and new, and god knows what else-there has been, and will be even more of what feathers their beds.  Now that oil is here, I dismiss their supposed integrity as cellophane thin and just as obvious.  Their inspirations are not about lowly citizens, but of what is good for themselves.

Many of them have taken care of themselves, compliments of the new government. Citizens are still waiting and wondering why the big buses pass them by.  The ones involving the real deal, the big money. On those notes, I am convinced that dialogue is already occurring.  The striking thing is that it is neither official nor public.  It is personal.  This was going on before, through self-serving coalition conversations that spared corrupt public servants under the previous PPP regime the rod. Dialogue is going on today, but this time it is for the bigger jackpot: oil and personal enrichment.  Where and how do electoral reform and citizens’ involvement and/or interests feature elude me.

It is better to have them at each other’s eyeballs: less effort, less dirty hands at the top, less explanations and defenses to deliver. And there is this crux: since the opposition’s future electoral prospects look grim, the PPP’s door is there to walk through and barter. For self-enrichment.  The corrupt bargains that were finalized during the coalition’s reign are now being reciprocated.  There are the right kinds of people at the top on both sides.  As I see it, this means goodbye to national dialogue towards electoral reform and citizens’ matters in front. There is no juice in that for deceiving leaders; and on that score, we have the best that are around.  Citizens are on their own staring across Guyana’s racial Maginot Line at each other.  Maybe, they will celebrate Christmas like the English and Germans did a century ago.

Yours faithfully,

GHK Lall