Power sharing should be seriously discussed - Debbie Backer The Westminster model has not worked well By Gitanjali Singh Stabroek News February 4, 2000 PNC central executive member, Deborah Backer believes that power sharing can work for Guyana and feels the Constitution Reform Commission (CRC) missed a golden opportunity in not debating the issue fully. "My greatest disappointment (in the CRC's work) is that power sharing was not taken on board as a serious alternative, discussed, dissected and then perhaps discarded. I think it was discarded without properly being dissected and discussed and perhaps we may have missed a golden opportunity" Backer said in a recent interview with Stabroek News. For Backer, the Westminster model of Winner take all inherited at Independence in l966 has not been working in Guyana's interest and there is a serious need to look at alternatives. Backer, a lawyer who joined the PNC slate in 1997, said that the Westminster type model is ideal for a country which is largely homogeneous. The ethnic make-up of Guyana makes the success of such a model difficult. She feels the country ought to seriously look at another form of government and identifies power sharing as the option being promulgated by those not in favour of the Westminster type model. While accepting that power sharing can mean different things to different people, Backer said the people who want the status quo to remain are not giving the concept of power sharing a fair hearing. "I think it is important enough that the two major parties (the PNC and the PPP) should seriously address it, with all of its ramifications; what are its advantages; disadvantages," Backer asserted. She said as it stands now, the onus is being put on those who are pushing for the change rather than the two parties looking at the issue impartially and alluded to the concept being "still-born". Backer holds the view that power sharing can work in principle and said it conceptualises a give and take relationship. She does not see why if the two major parties are genuinely interested "first and foremost" in the development of Guyana they will not give the concept a try. "At least let us try it and if it does not work, we could say it didn't work, we tried it. But do not try it on the premise that it not gon work," she said. She noted that the Westminster model has been tried for a long while and is not working as it should and pointed out that there is no harm in giving another model a chance. She feels that the power sharing model should be tested for a 10-year period before it is judged, noting that it will allow for the energies expended in party bashing being spent in a more positive way to push the country forward and heal the rifts created in society by ethnic voting. Backer said she would continue to support the model from the position that politicians owe it to Guyana to give it a serious chance, discussion and debate before casting it aside. A PNC backbencher, Backer said that the issue of power sharing has been raised at the executive level of her party and said it is not fair to say that it has been discredited because it was not seriously addressed. "I feel if the PNC feels that it is in the best interest of Guyana, it will adopt it or would be willing to seriously consider it," Backer said. However, she said there was the view that because elections are due by January 2001, there is not enough time to look at this issue. She also said she knew people in the PPP who were not necessarily against power sharing. Interim government Alliance for Guyana representative in parliament, Dr Rupert Roopnaraine has been promulgating an interim national front government between 2001/2003 until fresh elections can be held under a new constitution. He does so recognising the difficulty in running off a referendum and elections in 11 months. Backer also recognises a fluidity in the political situation in Guyana contending that many are of the view that there was enough evidence coming out at the election petition hearing to show that there were major flaws in the management of the last elections. She said this is not to say that the PPP did not win or that the PNC won but it points to serious administrative and logistical flaws in the 1997 elections. As such, she said people do not see Dr. Roopnaraine's formula as a bad option given what can arise as a result of a court ruling one way or the other. She said that this option is not against the spirit of the CARICOM-brokered Herdmanston accord as the PPP/Civic term will still be cut by two years. It will allow for a proper electoral machinery to be put in place for national elections in 2003 and dampen political tension. She also referred to Mr Bryn Pollard's contention that the changes necessary for fresh elections are not possible by January 2001. She feels that external circumstances may sell the Roopnaraine proposal to the parties but noted that as of now, both the PNC and the PPP's position is that elections can be held within the scheduled time frame. Backer says she has no mandate from the PNC to speak on the issue, but that if it becomes impossible to hold elections by January 2001, she believes something will need to be done. "I would think at that stage it would be incumbent on the two parties if they both hold themselves out as responsible parties, and I am confident that the PNC is a responsible party, that they would definitely be open to any discussion that would make sense to move the country to bridge that gap until the elections could be held," she said. She said the Roopnaraine proposal may then be looked at. Backer said there is no way the PNC would contemplate an arrangement where the PPP will be allowed to remain in full power for the next two years if elections cannot be held by January 2001. Asked for her views on the Roopnaraine proposal, Backer said that she would like to see elections by January 2001 but if it cannot be held, the proposal holds itself out as an alternative which she has not addressed her mind to in great detail. Divisive elections Asked whether she felt the country was heading for another divisive election and what can be done to reduce ethnic tensions, Backer said there is no doubt that Guyana becomes openly divisive at election time. However, for her, what needs to be done apart from the Ethnic Relations Commission and the Code of Conduct for the parties which prohibits ethnic slurs, is to have mechanisms institutionalised which allow citizens to feel economically secure whichever party is in power. She said the voting public needs to be educated and systems which preclude any form of discrimination ought to be legislated and entrenched. By this means ethnicity will not determine the fortunes of individuals depending on the party in power and over time the system will gain the confidence of people who will then begin to vote on issues rather than ethnicity. Backer said such systems ought not to be left to the goodwill of individual parties but ought to be legislated and the issues have to be dealt with frontally to instill confidence. The PNC parliamentarian feels that if people voted on issues, the PNC would win overwhelmingly. She cited the Essequibo coast road, the Mon Repos sea defence breach, the stone scam, and the milk scam as legacies of the PPP/Civic administration. She feels that the Bharrat Jagdeo administration has not achieved anything tangible, apart from promises and public relations exercises. PNC leadership On the question of the PNC leadership and who she would support as well as what type of pressures the youthful Jagdeo candidacy for the PPP will place on the PNC, Backer said that Jagdeo as the PPP's presidential candidate will help the PNC as he has proven to be ineffective. She said without the media hype about his first 100 days in office and with an impartial assessment of his presidency, of concrete issues and not photo opportunities, one will see that little has been achieved. As to the PNC leadership, Backer said she would want to see a new face in the top two positions of the party for the next elections and feels others in the party may hold this view. She said that in the number one and number two slot in which PNC leader, Desmond Hoyte and Chairman, Winston Murray fall, there should be a new face. However, she asserted that Mr Hoyte had himself officially laid the issue of succession on the table and will be an integral part in a decision as to whether he leads or does not lead the party to the 2001 elections. Backer said the PNC will choose a slate which it believes will win it an election. She said if the party congress is held this year it is not automatic that Mr. Hoyte, 70, will lead the PNC into the next elections. The PNC biennial congress is due this year but it is not certain if it will be held. Backer said the issue of succession will not deal with just one individual but with a group of persons capable of leading the PNC forward.