Convention Begins To Be Discarded
Sandy Grant | Monday March 31, 2014 16:41
It also surprised me that someone could have published this kind of highly personalised book whilst they are still Speaker of the National Assembly. Could this have happened in other Parliamentary democracies where the Speaker is expected to be completely non-partisan?
But then it might also be asked if it would be acceptable for a previous head of government to express criticisms – albeit implied – of a current head as former President Masire did in the Patriot (March 23) with the headline, ‘You Can’t Eat Guns’? But then again, as I have previously suggested, it would be extraordinary in those democracies if a government with the disappointing track record of the current BDP government here were to be returned to power, perhaps with an increased majority, as could well happen in the October election. I suggested that such an outcome could happen here because there are other factors in this country which may weigh more heavily with voters. In a sense, this may indicate that, with a total national vote of less than one million, this country may more realistically need to be compared with the democratic systems that pertain in one of the world’s larger cities. When one party has won 10 successive elections on the trot, the conventions that have been developed elsewhere should not be applied here without careful thought.
In other countries where one person is both the elected head of state and head of government, as in the USA, it is improbable that any of them would criticise a successor. Similarly in the UK, it may be a convention that a past Prime Minister does not criticise a successor when they belong to the same party. When they belong to a different party there is little to be gained from doing so but a great deal to be lost. The bitter relationship between Ted Heath and Margaret Thatcher may have been something of an exception, a one off, certainly in the last hundred years or so. In this country, we may need to start recognising that we are in a different kind of democratic situation and that the conventions that have developed elsewhere need to be reviewed and adapted.
When everything was going well, there was probably no need for former President Masire to comment on the performance of the government. But we are now in a very different situation, one that is new to all of us and for which we have had no previous experience on which to draw. The government will naturally play down the gravity of the situation and suggest that much public comment is unnecessarily alarmist. The fact is that Rre Ketumile Masire has now decided that as a founding father of both the BDP and the country and as an ex President, he needs to speak out. We should all be grateful that he has done so. As with all older people, his instincts, drawn from historical experience, would have told him that when there is a problem, personal differences need to be put aside and everyone should pull together.
Internationally it is a practice for former national leaders, such as our two ex Presidents, to advise how they believe some of the world’s major problems can be tackled. Both could regularly contribute their experience here as they contribute it elsewhere on a larger scale worldwide. This could be the beginnings of a process of significant change prefaced by a review of the country’s method of governance after, give or take, 50 years, which would decide what element of government has worked well and what hasn’t. A review of the constitution would follow such an exercise, not precede it. I get impatient with those who continue to attribute the country’s problems to the constitution on the grounds that it was never popularly approved. No one has yet cited even a single instance of a country which has submitted a draft constitution to a popular vote; certainly not the UK which doesn’t even have a constitution to submit to anyone.
In a time of national need – has this arrived? – it cannot make sense to have outstandingly capable people spending long years on the opposition benches whilst some who are more modestly endowed can enjoy years on the government side whilst contributing little of real gain. But would the BDP be willing to start thinking about such matters in an attempt to find a system of democratic government which is better suited to a country with such a tiny voting population?
It came as a surprise to me that MPs in the National Assembly should have been so complimentary about the blessed Margaret’s recently published book. After all, if newspaper comment is to be believed she had been scathing in her comments about most of them. It also surprised me that someone could have published this kind of highly personalised book whilst they are still Speaker of the National Assembly. Could this have happened in other Parliamentary democracies where the Speaker is expected to be completely non-partisan?
But then it might also be asked if it would be acceptable for a previous head of government to express criticisms – albeit implied – of a current head as former President Masire did in the Patriot (March 23) with the headline, ‘You Can’t Eat Guns’? But then again, as I have previously suggested, it would be extraordinary in those democracies if a government with the disappointing track record of the current BDP government here were to be returned to power, perhaps with an increased majority, as could well happen in the October election. I suggested that such an outcome could happen here because there are other factors in this country which may weigh more heavily with voters. In a sense, this may indicate that, with a total national vote of less than one million, this country may more realistically need to be compared with the democratic systems that pertain in one of the world’s larger cities. When one party has won 10 successive elections on the trot, the conventions that have been developed elsewhere should not be applied here without careful thought.
In other countries where one person is both the elected head of state and head of government, as in the USA, it is improbable that any of them would criticise a successor. Similarly in the UK, it may be a convention that a past Prime Minister does not criticise a successor when they belong to the same party. When they belong to a different party there is little to be gained from doing so but a great deal to be lost. The bitter relationship between Ted Heath and Margaret Thatcher may have been something of an exception, a one off, certainly in the last hundred years or so. In this country, we may need to start recognising that we are in a different kind of democratic situation and that the conventions that have developed elsewhere need to be reviewed and adapted.
When everything was going well, there was probably no need for former President Masire to comment on the performance of the government. But we are now in a very different situation, one that is new to all of us and for which we have had no previous experience on which to draw. The government will naturally play down the gravity of the situation and suggest that much public comment is unnecessarily alarmist. The fact is that Rre Ketumile Masire has now decided that as a founding father of both the BDP and the country and as an ex President, he needs to speak out. We should all be grateful that he has done so. As with all older people, his instincts, drawn from historical experience, would have told him that when there is a problem, personal differences need to be put aside and everyone should pull together.
Internationally it is a practice for former national leaders, such as our two ex Presidents, to advise how they believe some of the world’s major problems can be tackled. Both could regularly contribute their experience here as they contribute it elsewhere on a larger scale worldwide. This could be the beginnings of a process of significant change prefaced by a review of the country’s method of governance after, give or take, 50 years, which would decide what element of government has worked well and what hasn’t. A review of the constitution would follow such an exercise, not precede it. I get impatient with those who continue to attribute the country’s problems to the constitution on the grounds that it was never popularly approved. No one has yet cited even a single instance of a country which has submitted a draft constitution to a popular vote; certainly not the UK which doesn’t even have a constitution to submit to anyone.
In a time of national need – has this arrived? – it cannot make sense to have outstandingly capable people spending long years on the opposition benches whilst some who are more modestly endowed can enjoy years on the government side whilst contributing little of real gain. But would the BDP be willing to start thinking about such matters in an attempt to find a system of democratic government which is better suited to a country with such a tiny voting population?