Parties’ MPs heavily tilted in favour of Region 4

Dear Editor,

Reference is made to Mr Freddie Kissoon’s column (August18) in which he lambasted the AFC for choosing six or two thirds of its nine members of parliament from Region 4. An examination of the selection of MPs for the other two parties would also reveal bias towards Region 4.
For the PNC or APNU, 68% of its MPs come from Region 4. For the PPP, 75% (highest percentage of all parties) of its MPs come from Region 4. The PPP is supposed to be a working class, rural centered party with most of its support, some 62%, coming from rural areas. Instead it sends three quarters of its MPs from town. It has become an elitist town centered party that draws its support from the rural and hinterland areas. Dr. Cheddi and Mrs Jagan must be turning in their graves.

For the record, Region 4 accounts for less than 40% of the voters yet sends three quarter of the MPs to the assembly. The rural areas account for over 60% of the voters but only some 25% of the MPs are chosen from those rural areas. The rest of the MPs are Georgetown centric or elitist oriented.

For the PPP, Region 3 accounts for six of its MPs, but only three come from the region. Region 6 accounts for seven of the PPP’s MPs, but the PPP only chose four MPs from Region 6 to send to the assembly with the other three from town. Region 4 accounts for some 12 MPs for the PPP but the party chose to send 22. The PNC is more rural oriented than PPP and AFC in its MP selection. All of the PNC’s MPs from regions 2, 3, 5, 6 are from the rural areas. Only three of the AFC’s MPs are from the rural areas. The LJP is the only party with 100% rural representation from where it got the bulk of its vote. It is the only party with a true rural representation. The other three are fakes.

Clearly, all three parties heavily lean towards or favour Region 4 (Georgetown centered) at the expense of the other nine regions. The PPP selected MPs who are not from the region they reside. Priya Manickchand, for example, lives in Region 4 (town) but she represents Region 3 (West Coast and West Bank). She never campaigned in or champion development in Region 3. She was in charge of monitoring voting in Regions 4 and 5. But she is chosen to represent Region 3. Others are also selected to represent areas where they don’t live or campaign in the election. Is that not a conflict? Why isn’t Freddie and other writers also condemning this practice in the PPP and APNU?

The voters in the other regions should rebel against their marginalization in selection of MPs. Region 4 account for a maximum in terms of votes for some 12 MPs of PPP and 16 for PNC for a total of 28 MPs. Yet both parties selected 44 MPs from Region 4. Clearly the voters of the other regions are being exploited and denied their fair share. Naturally, they would also get a smaller share of resources. With two thirds of MPs coming from town, they won’t champion the interests of the rural areas. The voters must demand that the right number of MPs be chosen from their Regions.

Yours truly,
Shawn Simmons