What happens for the five years following voters’ five-minute thrill in the polling station on election day? How can candidates who care little about voters’ concerns be held responsible for fulfilling their campaign promises to represent their constituencies? How can voters be sure that they will be represented effectively in the National Assembly and that their interests will be realized in the government’s plans?
These were the questions former President David Granger posed on the programme – The Public Interest – as he examined Guyana’s electoral system. His answers were based on his conviction that constituencies are the bedrock of democracy which should ensure that the people’s concerns can be presented to the National Assembly and central government. However, the ideal of representative democracy can be compromised when candidates can be ‘extracted’ from parties’ lists to represent various constituencies even if they are not resident in the area and are ignorant of the people’s needs.
Mr. Granger acknowledged that, although the Proportional Representation system replaced the unbalanced ‘First-Past-the-Post system sixty years ago in 1964, it is better than the alternative FPP but its application is far from perfect. Abuse of the electoral system can smother individual freedoms and community concerns in the competition for parliamentary representation.
He pointed out that the purpose of democratic representation can be compromised by the absence of consultation by candidates with their constituencies whose participation made the election possible. He cited the flap created by decision of three parties – A New & United Guyana, Liberty & Justice Party and The New Movement – to enter a “joinder” agreement under the Representation of the People’s Act that provides for parties to do so. The ‘agreement’ seemed, simply, to be an arithmetical expedient rather than ideological initiative. Notoriously, by disregarding the opinions of the 5,214 voters who supported them, disagreement erupted over sharing the spoils.
Mr. Granger argued that candidates who campaign on different platforms could be challenged to realign their policies overnight to represent their voters’ diverse interests and hold the government accountable. The zeal to make deals could ignore the interests of the very people who should be the reason for parliamentary representation. The practice could be improved if all parties – such as those in a joinder agreement – are required to meet a standard vote threshold to occupy a parliamentary seat. Each candidate should be nominated to represent a specific constituency for the duration of a parliament prior to the elections and should serve a full parliamentary term.
Constituencies are not political playthings. They are democratic necessities. They should aim at ensuring that the people’s livelihoods are improved and that their collective franchise is not cynically bought or bargained. Problems can be resolved by ‘meaningful’ meetings within constituencies and continuous communication with electors so as to confront challenges facing them. Accountability to constituents and continuous dialogue are critical to fostering a fuller and deeper understanding of how people can play a constructive role in the electoral process.
The Former President affirmed that people, not parties, are the most important purpose of the political process. Every opportunity should be taken to close the gap between people’s enthusiastic participation in general elections and MPs’ effective representation in the National Assembly.󠄀
