I  travelled thousands of kilometres and we spent over D20, 000 dalasis just
to ensure that all doubts about PDOIS is cleared . I hope you will have the
sincerity to acknowledge what happened right in front of everyone's eye.
I have just been reading your comments on the symposium held at the Gambian
Hall in Bronx - New York. I am still finding it difficult to digest the
motivation for presenting the issue as you did. You are entitled to your
opinion. All we need from you is objectivity in the presentation of the
facts. On this  score you have erred.
The fact that you can reduce all I have said to the defence of a " state
controlled economic system'' shows that you have little respect for facts
and objectivity. Furthermore, the fact that you try to project the impact I
had made through the reaction of two people whom you hold in utter contempt
shows that you have little taste  for facts and  much taste for fiction.
It is such tragicomical presentation of PDOIS' role which has kept people
misinformed for so long.  Fortunately, the dust is beginning to settle. What
was most heartening to me is that ten people expressed their desire to be
PDOIS members after the presentation in Bronx. Some of them walked to
deliver notes to me right  before every body's eyes while the discussion
proceeded. Manding Darboe who is the UDP Secretary  came to embrace me even
though we had exchanges on the very subject of economic policy that you
uneloquently reduced to a discourse about pure socialism and pure
capitalism. The black  and white discourse exists only in your brain.I did
not raise any myopic ideological dialogue. You are not in touch with PDOIS.
We wrote a whole pamphlet in our polemics with Saja Taal dealing with state
control of economic systems. If you want a copy we will mail it to you. I
proceeded from facts when it came to PDOIS' economic programme. I have said
in Washington and I repeated it in New York that there was no private sector
or public led growth in the Gambia. I found it ironical that people living
in highly indebted poor countries would claim that capitalism has triumphed
in their country. I struggled throughout to move away from dogma and
substantiated my position with irrefutable facts. Allow me to sum up our
position. I stated categorically that 11 percent of the labour force in the
Gambia is employed by the formal sector comprising the public, parastatals
and small private sector. This means that central government,, parastatals
or public co-operations and private enterprises employ less that 50, 000
Gambians. I made it abundantly clear that the commercial banks could not
recover 17% of their loan portfolio in 1999 because of bad debts; that they
experienced excess liquidity of 392 million. I added that interest rates
have to be high in order to pay depositors; that this discourages borrowing
for the private sector. I emphasised that agriculture employs 57% of the
labour force; that 42% of our import constitutes food products which can be
produced by the agricultural sector. I emphasised that this would amount to
over 1 billion dalasis since imports stood at 2.6 billion dalasis in 1999. I
indicated that crude tools, lack of fertilisers, cold stororage facilities
and marketing undermine their earning capacity; that only a co-operative
economy can save the farmers; that PDOIS is committed to bringing the
vegetable and fruit gardeners together into small producers and marketing
co-operatives to ensure food self sufficiency and income generation for the
informal sector. Lastly, I made it clear that the public sector depends
entirely on taxation especially import duties.  That because of debts 417
million  dalasis out of a budget of 1.5 billion dalasis is being spent on
debt serving. I argued that last year we spent 42 million on defence. This
year it will be about 44 million. I mentioned that if 174 million is spent
on education, 94 million on health I asked where  the public sector will get
more money to improve services and infrastructure. I argued that if the debt
service charges increase there must be more taxation on the poor . I argued
that this is why the public sector must also be productive to generate
income from services other than taxation. I made it abundantly clear that
what our concrete economic realities demand us to have a productive public,
informal and private sector.
I therefore do not know what brought pure socialism and capitalism in your
presentation  except to nurse old prejudices and misconceptions regarding
PDOIS' programme.
I must further ask: What has coalition got to do with purity of capitalism
or socialism? Even when the world was at the peak of its cold war years, the
commintern forces and the nationalists in China formed a united front
against Japanese colonialism. It is differences, which give birth to
coalition. Similarities give birth to mergers. The position you are trying
to attribute to PDOIS on coalition is quite inaccurate. It gives the
impression that we are rigid and are in fact opposed to any form of
coalition.
Let us go back to the facts. When the issue of coalition was raised, I spoke
with sincerity and frankness. Darboe did indicate that a coalition would be
acceptable to him. I indicated that coalitions are tactical instruments and
no political party can dismiss them; that coalitions are means to achieve an
end and not  ends in themselves. I drew lessons from Senegal where PS voters
who ordinarily would not have voted for Wadda were first drawn to support a
splinter party from PS led by Niasse while another  group supported Djibo
Kah during the first round. I explained that the coalition between Niasse
and PDS enabled them to win in the second round. I emphasised that political
parties in the Gambia should study the voting patterns of the people in
order to see whether it is not best to consider a coalition to be more ideal
during the second round of voting. I could have drawn lessons to buttress my
points but did not to avoid casting doubts on the viability of a coalition.
Allow me to quote facts to buttress my points. If you consider the Kiang
East bye- elections, one would notice that despite a coalition between NRP
and UDP, the UDP vote dropped from 1412 votes in 1997 elections to 991 votes
during the bye elections in 2001. How are we to interpret such results? Do
we conclude that APRC is popular or do we conclude that there is need for a
third force that would be able to earn the confidence of the people to up
root the APRC. How is this to be assessed? To us, all these observations
lend credibility to the argument that there is nothing wrong with the
Gambian people being given  broad choices or political options in the first
round so as to know where their support lie.
In short, some people may wish to vote for the APRC if PDOIS, UDP or NRP is
the only option, but would vote for one of the parties if they have multiple
options. Furthermore, I indicated that where coalitions can be further
forged is in connection with National Assembly election. I indicated that
opposition parties could ensure that where one party puts a strong
candidate, the other parties would give way. It is interesting that you
ignored this completely in your reporting of the facts. I hope those who
review the cassettes/tapes will concentrate on what Darboe really said. His
reaction however, could be summed up in few words. He felt that there can be
a harmony or merger of programmes in the first round and a coalition. Mr.
Darboe even mentioned the possibility of subcidising women gardeners in
agriculture which is against the type of policies his party advocates. I
mentioned Mr. Hamat Bah's claim of being a liberal and capitalist to show
that merger of programmes was inconceivable. This however did not mean that
coalition on another  basis is not possible. Coalitions and mergers are
different political instruments. In fact, Darboe went as far as to argue
that the party which wins the Presidential elections would generally win the
National Assembly Elections to show his preference for coalition for the
presidency. It was very clear from his reasoning, which he backed with a
call for honesty and the putting of national interest first. That without
having coalition in the first round, forming a coalition under any other
circumstances would be futile. I did not want the discussion to degenerate
into an argument. I therefore posed the question as to what formula Darboe
had in mind for the selection of the presidential candidate. I asked whether
each party was going to select a given number of delegates to form an
electoral college as it were, to select the presidential candidate. At that
point any competent observer would be able to read from Darboe's words that
when he was talking about an electable candidate he did not have any formula
in mind for the coalition to select its candidate. Eventually, Darboe
suggested that since none of us had the mandate to discuss on a formula for
a coalition, it was best to leave the matter until we return.
This was how matters stood. It is surprising that you have reduced the whole
issue into a pure capitalist or pure socialist phenomena. In our view, even
though our programmes are fundamentally different from the other political
parties, there can be basis for coalition on the issue of governance. The
APRC regime has come up with an Indemnity Bill, abrogated Chieftaincy and
Alkaloship elections, retarded the devolution of power to local authorities
by coming with a Local Government Act and Local Government Elections,
crippled the office of Auditor General and is now threatening to dismantle
the IEC. Its  monarchical inclinations are obvious.
Political parties can obviously commit themselves to restoring the
provisions of the constitution, which are democratic, ensure devolution of
powers to local authorities scrap the Indemnity Act, strengthen the
independence of the IEC and the judiciary and ensure a more democratic
atmosphere.
In our view, formulae are definitely possible that can lead to greater
democratisation without depriving the Gambian people of choices of economic
policies. For example, PDOIS' Presidential candidate would easily accept
being a president for one year to restore all the constitutional provisions
that are reasonable and justifiable in democratic society. Strengthen the
IEC, open up the media and then call for another presidential elections
after creating the constitutional machinery for that to take place in a year
after assuming office. In this way the people will make an undiluted choice.
Such formulae are bases for coalition. We can go on and on. Other political
parties may also come up with their own formulae
Iwentto Washington to put all the cards on the table as far as PDOIS is
concerned. Out of over D20, 000 we spent, the sum received from the US
amounted to just US$500 dollars. Some people even took cassettes and civic
education materials from the table without giving a dime. At least what we
don't expect now is the wasting of our time to clarify distortions. Those
who sincerely want change in the Gambia should encourage the party of your
choice to do its best and not undermine others who are doing their best.
This is one code of conduct that all those who want change should adopt.
Greetings
Halifa

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

To unsubscribe/subscribe or view archives of postings, go to the Gambia-L
Web interface at: http://maelstrom.stjohns.edu/archives/gambia-l.html
You may also send subscription requests to [log in to unmask]
if you have problems accessing the web interface and remember to write your full name and e-mail address.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------