We need a govt. that can deliver for us

May 15, 2008 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The President and his cohorts in an effort to whip up political sympathy claimed that the PNCR should not protest against the PPP government because the problems of food shortage and fuel are not confined to Guyana.
It is true that the high cost of fuel and food is affecting countries in many parts of the world, countries as poor as Haiti and as rich as the United States. It is also true that in many of those countries affected by these problems people have been, and are protesting these high costs.
Those of us who learnt first about these shortages saw on the BBC News what was happening in Haiti when the people took to the streets and demanded that their government take action to alleviate their pains. In the case of the Great United States, where there is some kind of protest, almost every day, truck drivers (truckers who drive state to state) protested the high cost of fuel in Washington DC, the capital city. They spent a day tooting their truck horns as they circled, within range of Capital Hill, the heart and soul of the U.S executive and environs of the law makers and politicians. Apart from these massive protest actions, truckers met with each of the remaining Presidential Candidates and asked for their specific involvement, in order to ease their burden brought on by high fuel cost. Those candidates, as the President should know, came up with a number of suggestions to ease the gas price on U.S citizens. Those included from John Mc Cain’s and Hillary Clinton’s, short term, “Gas Tax Holiday” proposal for the Summer to Barack Obama’s long term proposal to have the Energy Department and Oil Merchants bear greater tax cost. The point is, unlike what the President wants us to think, it is legitimate, in order, and sensible to protest these burdens if the government remains unmoved in their position.
Sadly, in Guyanese case, this global situation brings on added burdens on an already economically burdened people, who have been bearing the brunt of the government’s poor economic policy.
So, for the President to express surprise at the opposition for mobilizing the people to protest against these situations should be seen as nothing but the “usual PPP/C politicking” or Jagdeo’s own lack of knowledge of socio-political and economic realities throughout the world, and can only be yet another sad revelation of the kind of “top brass”, national leaders that occupy executive government space in Guyana.
Any President seriously wanting to provide good leadership and demonstrate an understanding of global situations must be au fait with such political and economic situations in most parts of the world. To attempt to continue to make statements to deceive the population, in order to gain partisan political mileage, must be condemned and cannot be tolerated.
What was needed was foresight on the part of the government that this problem was inevitable, thus mechanisms should have been put in place to sensibly address the crisis and stave off these added pressures brought on by the larger world crisis.
I guess that Jagdeo must know that long before the truckers strike, and others protest this food and fuel crisis in the U.S, the Bush administration announced, in late January, that it will provide what it calls a “stimulus package” to the people to assist them to cope with the impending situation.
This package will be of two kinds of payments: US$600 and US$1,200; the latter for family and the other for a single person. These monies will begin reaching the people during the month of May, according to reports.
Many persons, according to surveys done, stated that they will use this money to pay debts, mortgage, etc. This demonstrates that the real value of the money will be felt, even though many persons still consider it inadequate as a consequence the U.S. government is believed to be considering a second stimulus package.
In Guyana, had it not been for the protest, the government might not have rushed to announce its piece meal package which certainly cannot offer the poorest of Guyanese to recognise any real ease, owing to depth of their economic deprivation. I recalled that when the sugar workers protested on the Corentyne the Hon. Prime Minster, Sam Hinds, responded to them by stating that “everyone is suffering and not only them”.
Clearly, from Hinds response, the government was not prepared to take action, but for the PNCR protest the government hurriedly made its announcement on the heels of the massive March of Thursday 9, March 2008.
What was surprising, and most unfortunate in the President’s statement, was the fact that the President seem to want to suggest that the high cost of living is only now affecting Guyanese due to the world shortages.
The truth is that Guyanese were affected by poor economic policies of the government long before this crisis, so he must not try to use this as a means to cover the failing economic policy of the government.
Guyanese economic burden became most unbearable when in January of 2007 an outrageous 16% VAT was pinned on the nation. And, despite the government out doing their expectations, having collected, over and above the expected revenue from this tax within a short six-month period, the citizens are yet to receive any direct benefit. Out of shame, or inexplicable satisfaction, the President a few months ago announced that the 16% VAT will be removed from basic commodities. A whole listing of these items were published in the press.
The question them became: why did he take this action? Is it because the government had punished Guyanese enough or is it because the President recognised that the government’s economic policies have been causing tremendous sufferings in homes of most Guyanese and that the 16% VAT on basic food did not demonstrate good understanding of basic economics on the part of the administration?
So the President and government cannot, now, find sanctuary, seek refuge, or find excuse for their failed management of the nation’s economy, due to any, current, global economic crisis.
However, since Guyanese will not be drafted in by the President and the government’s plan to brainwash them the administration will be committed to taking on the people of Guyana at another level, so we will see more open victimization, as with the two police officers who were transferred without notice, as a means of intimidation.
Look out for evidence of more charged statements and comments by senior government functionaries. The belief is that once the “race card” becomes part of the discussion, racial groups will cleave to their enclaves, thus satisfying the principle of “divide and rule”, a principle many feel the government keeps as a sharp weapon to be used in times of political challenges and as a main tool for exercising their idea of good governance.
They hope that both Indo-Guyanese and Afro-Guyanese will neglect their right to demand a decent living standard and to be protected from the criminals that rampage in their communities. In fact, the PPP/C envisages an ideal situation, for them, that will result in Indo-Guyanese clinging to the PPP/C as their only saviour despite living in a state of hopelessness, while the Afro-Guyanese will be seen as a wayward group who, the government will claim, will challenge their government without any cause, as this group may express its lack of hope through, open, protest action.
I call on these two major groups to defy the plan of the PPP/C. We all need a government that can deliver for us.
Let us not play to the race tune but come together in one accord to demand a better life for ourselves and children. As a decent people we deserve this much.
Open peaceful protest is a right all of us must feel free to exercise, if any meaningful change is to come to Guyana. May God help us all.
Lurlene Nestor

---

---