Better to be part of the solution rather than part of the problem

Mar 23, 2009 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

A few weeks ago a report in the newspaper indicated that the Guyana Teachers Union (GTU) was no longer keen on participating in the promotion of teachers by the Teaching Service Commission (TSC).

The TSC is a constitutional body, which was created to insulate the employment, promotion and dismissal of teachers from direct political influence. Apparently, the GTU was given representative status on the particular committee that has to deal with promotions, thus allowing it to have a say in the process.

The GTU had some concerns about the manner in which the TSC was operating and thus decided that it no longer would be part of a process over which it has concerns. There is nothing fundamentally wrong with withdrawing from a process over which it has concerns.

What is however fundamentally flawed is for a trade union to be part of a process, which in the course of its representation of workers, it may have reason to criticize. The GTU is in a conflict of interest when it comes to being part of the process of promotion of teachers, since as the representative of the teachers, it may have reason to question the promotion or lack of promotion of a teacher.

Thus, the GTU has done the right thing by withdrawing from the process. It ought never to have been there because it cannot effectively represent teachers against unjust promotions when it is part of that very process.

The GTU will be more effective by staying outside of this process so that it is free to make representations on behalf of teachers without being accused itself of being part of the very problem which it is intended to correct.

This is the same principle upon which this column had many years ago been critical of the decision of the government to appoint opposition representatives to government Boards. This column had railed against that decision, pointing out that the opposition, which is supposed to be watchdog against the policies and actions of government boards when the opposition itself was a part of that Board.

The decision of course to have the opposition represented on government Boards was apolitical agreement which emerged after the terrible protests which greeted the 1997 elections, and this representation was said to ensure greater inclusiveness in the work of government.

As we have seen, this agreement has fizzled and not worked and the reason for this is quite simple. One goal, the need to promote greater inclusiveness, conflicted with a much greater role which is the duty of the opposition to offer criticisms of the actions of the government.

Greater inclusiveness need not however lead to such conflicts. What is required is a better relationship between the critical stakeholders with each respecting the role of the other. In the case of teachers, the GTU need not seek to be part of any committee of the Teaching Service Commission but should be prepared to offer vigorous representation for teachers who it is felt has been unjustly treated.

On the wider political front, the opposition parties have complained that very little heed is given to their suggestions and that the nature of the political system marginalizes them. As such there has been a call for greater responsiveness on the part of the ruling administration.

This responsiveness can emerge without having to compromise that fundamental role of the opposition as a watchdog against government excesses. It can be achieved without the opposition having to be part of the very process over which it is expected to provide scrutiny.

There is within the National Assembly a number of Parliamentary Committees and constitutional commissions, which allow tremendous oversight of government. Unfortunately, this mechanism has never effectively been put to use by the opposition, which it must be recalled, chairs some important committees such as the Public Accounts Committee.

One of the reasons why these mechanisms have not been fully exploited is because there is still the preoccupation with gaining political footholds rather than serving the legitimate role of being an oversight group.

This is why there is more talk about power sharing than there are summons of government officials to appear before these Parliamentary Committees and commissions to explain specific actions by the government.

It is hoped that the recently passed motion in the National Assembly concerning the problems of CLICO (Guyana) will lead to the opposition becoming more appreciative of how effective its powers in parliament can be utilized.

The motion calls for Parliament to monitor the developments in CLICO through a specified mechanism. This mechanism should be immediately put to work because in so doing it will exercise oversight over an important aspect of our national life which left thousands of policyholders wondering whether they will ever again see their investments in CLICO (Guyana).

---

---