THE BEST STRATEGIC DECISION FOR THE CPP

There is a split among members of the CPP over what is the best strategy for the party in terms of its electoral moving towards the 2008 General Election.

After 50 years of Independence, it would be quite nice to have the party of the Great father of the Nation, ease back into power and lead us towards desired aspirations. But from all indications it seems it wile take a lot of doing before such a wishful thinking could become reality.

This division in strategy has two man sides, the parliamentary Action Group (PAG) which has changed somehow but the tendencies and practices has not gone yet and the National Executives. There is also another side to it with the Patriot Group also joining the fray with a less clear and aloof views on which way to go.

The PAG is adamant that the only way forward for the CPP is to build up a presence in parliament by doing the ‘electoral deals’ with other parties, particularly the NPP (which is very strange given the history and ideological gap between the two traditions). They contend that the only way to organize a winnable party is to make it very visible in parliament and that from there the CPP can effectively challenge for presidential power.

This group was led by the CPP members of parliament including the current presidential candidate Paa Kwesi Ndoum, and some publicly acclaimed members of the party. They took their ideas too far to the extent of publicly campaigning for Kuffour and activity campaigning against George Agguddey, the CPP Flag bearer in the 2004 elections. It was such an ugly experience for the CPP and I’m sure any one of them with any introspection will look back on it with much shame.

The other side led by the National executive and central committee is absolutely against any such collaboration, and certainly not the NPP which historically is diametrical opposed to the beliefs and philosophy of the CPP. They believe that as a presidential system, does not give room for building the support from parliament and making deals with the devil is certainly not a clear roadman towards presidential power. They consider such an action as patently against the best interest of the great party.

The National Executives and the Central Committee could be said to be the purists who believe it is not worth compromising on party’s core values and philosophies for any parliamentary offers .they believe that presenting a presidential candidate provides the party with a good chance of galvanizing solid grassroots support for all other structures of the party and it provides the only way to present creditable alternative in our political system which is an Executive presidential system.

They considered the actions of the PAG as disingenuous and subsequent instituted disciplinary action against them. This has resulted in a vicious in-fighting among the members of PAG and many Central Committee members This has arrested the needed focus needed to run the affairs of the party and also led to a huge lack of public trust in this party founded by the greatest African ever to live.

These energies have been more expended on pitching battles as to who is smarter instead of concentrating on the important task raising resources and finding a good organizational structure for the party. What is most frustrating to the foot soldiers of the party and the sympathetic second generation Nkrumaists is that those with huge clout and publicity leverage have used their opportunities and platforms to widen the gap between the two sides.

But seriously what are the merits of the arguments of these two sides?

It is worth dissecting the position of the PAG and their allies since their suggestion of winnable strategy is the most radical and unconventional yet seen in the country’s political history. Their insistence on having a so-so-called ‘strategic alliance’ with the NPP to shore up its presence in parliament raises a lot of questions.

In the context of Ghanaian constitutional configuration of the fourth republic and the political experience of the country it a highly contentions suggestion.

Ghana runs an executive presidential system where all policies and programmes are made an implemented by the executive cabinet led by the president.

Our constitution does not allow for the horse trading, negotiation and coalition building that characterizes political practice in exclusively parliamentary Democracies. Also given the trend and practice of legislation in Ghanaian parliament it effectively the ruling party that can initiate and pass laws.

Given this background any alliance that allows CPP members few seats in parliament only gives the CPP no more than few lame ducks. Bearing in mind that NPP and CPP have very little to share in terms of ideology and political tradition even if some CPP MPs are appointed as ministers, then will be obliged to implement the polices and programs of the president not that the CPPs (as has happened with Dr. Kwesi Ndoum). In competitive politics which is being practiced in Ghana, it is only the executive that influence the direction of the country and it is presidential power that would make the electorate feel the impact of the party on their lives.

The Ghanaian electorate has many sides to them but despite the tendance for the “skirt and blouse” phenomena in few constituencies, the general trend is that they vote for parties with better prospect of prendential power. we are not in such a brave new world tha,t the electorate would suddenly see a few CPP MPs as a sign of credible power and influence.

What is more, the practice where such an alliance results in the smaller party joining the majority bench and for all intents and purposes fall under the whip of the majority. We know how strong the whip is and how often it is used in Ghana’s parliament.

Furthermore the history of parliamentary practice in the country has taught us that it is only the Government that has the wherewithal to initiate and push through any legislation in parliament.

In the long and eventful history of the 4^th Republican parliament, there is not even single instance of a private members bill or legislation being initiated in the house. So the position of the PAG that with a good representation in parliament, CPP can achieve clout and push through some of its ideas, practices and programs is only a naïve wishful thinking. The voting record of the few CPP members in parliament actually shows that the power of the whip is more potent than ideas and independence in the chamber of parliament.

Furthermore it looks as if the PAG and their allies have over estimated the magnanimity of the NP.

How far is the NPP going to go to tolerate the parliamentary hunger of the PAG and the CPP for that matter? How may seats the NPP willin and able to cede to CPP in exchange for the support of the NPPs presidential candidate?

The reality is that the NPP is also involved in competitive politics and have different dynamics at play in their party plus it having to deal with the NDC.

For the CPP to have any sort of influence or significance in parliament it must win at least 30 seats in parliament However it must be emphatically stated that the NPP will not be willing to cede that much to the CPP. It will not even go beyond 10 seats. These seats will definitely be in NPP dominant areas. The PAG and their allies will have their fingers burned and leave them bitterly disappointed just like they were before in 1992 and 1996 election when alliances were formed with the NPP and NDC respectively in traditionally CPP territory seat that the CPP could have won on its own.

It must be made clear that strategically such an alliance will not help the CPP achieve its ultimate aim -presidential power to steer the country back on the development track.

What even bad about the PAG is the way the go about their agitation; behaving like a rat that scatters grains it cannot eat. Having failed to convince their fellow members they decided to publicly ridicule and campaign against their presidential candidate duly elected by the party congress in 2004.Their actions only succeeded in disturbing the internal organization that was badly needed to rebuild the party.

The PAG and their sympathizers must realize that their strategic alliance suggestion is not good enough and they must come but with a better one or leave the running of the party to their executives who have been duly elected according to the constitution of the party.

The PAG must accept to work with the confines of the CPP constitution and stop their tyranny of ideas tactics which is dividing and destroying the party. I am sure they do not think of themselves as wiser than the over 1000 delegates that decided that their strategy was not good enough from a strategic point of view as been explained above… it is fatally flawed.

If they really wish to remain in this great party they must accept the wisdom of the majority and the constitution of the party.

I also urge the National executives of the CPP to be accommodating to fresh thinking and suggestion and adopt reconciliatory tone in their dealings with all party member especially those with some clout.

The must crucial element that can lead the party back to power is organization. There are 3 main strategies in the tool box to rebuilding the party; these are is organization, organization and organization.

Ideologies are well and good but the crust of the matter is that the ordinary voter responds better to organization than fancy articulation academic ideology.

The CPP must be prepared breach it old traditions and conventional structure to re-organize to attract the voters in the middle.