Latest update April 6th, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- Gov’t rejected three cheaper Chinese bids to finance, construct gas plant
- Corentyne mom kills 7-year-old daughter, injures infant son
- Trump threatens ‘hell’ for Iran over Hormuz Strait as deadline approaches
- US$214M still with Exxon – AFC warns of quiet deal as audit dispute drags on
- Govt. launches border patrol unit in Region Nine
Watch this tape before your vote
Feb 26, 2010 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon
A number of persons contacted me after the Christopher Ram interview with Ralph Ramkarran to ask me if I would comment on the show in my column. I guess they knew that Mr. Ramkarran and I had some torrid exchanges in the press. I didn’t see the item. I hardly get time to watch television, and I wasn’t home at that time.
I asked two of my Kaieteur News colleagues – Dale Andrews and Gary Eleazar – if they saw it and they told me that they did.
Wednesday night I received a transcript of the interview and after looking at Ramkarran’s political judgements, I understood the curiosity of those who spoke to me. I would urge all voters to look at this tape. Do not accept my evaluation only. There is a lot to learn about the nature of the PPP Government and the PPP itself from studying this programme.
What follows is my interpretation of the answers of Mr. Ramkarran to Mr. Ram’s questions. When told by Mr. Ram that Guyanese are one of the most heavily taxed people in the world and after Mr. Ram’s description of how the taxes are levied, Mr. Ramkarran agreed that the poorer classes are too heavily taxed. Consistently, Mr. Ram reminded Mr. Ramkarran that he is a huge figure of authority in the PPP and inquired about his role. To comprehend the connection between the oppressive tax framework and the conduct of the PPP in policy-formulation, one must understand that now that Janet Jagan is dead, Mr. Ramkarran is the third most senior member in the PPP’s hierarchy after Harry Nokta and Reepu Daman Persaud. If the tax levy is a repressive regime then there cannot be any escape from the accusation that PPP leaders had to know about it.
The government implements the policies of the party that wins the elections. Mr. Ram pointed this out to Mr. Ramkarran and even directed him to the 1997 election manifesto of the PPP that promised the Freedom of Information Act. The winning party puts its leaders in the Cabinet to ensure its policies are legislated upon.
The question then is, if Mr. Ramkarran agreed that our taxation regime is lop-sided then what has PPP done about that over the years?
Mr. Ram solicited the views of Mr. Ramkarran on President Jagdeo’s lack of protocol in the execution of his duties. He gave a number of examples including the President saying that he doesn’t have to spy on opposition parties; if he needs information he just has to send someone to the rum shop.
Mr. Ramkarran’s attitude was unambiguous and pellucid. He told his interviewer that each man has his style and Mr. Jagdeo has his style. Pressed by the interviewer, the interviewee refused to expand on whether a style can be bad, offensive, undiplomatic, unacceptable, poor etc. He insisted that Mr. Jagdeo has his style.
At this point it needs to be emphasized that Mr. Ramkarran could be the President of Guyana, and it is not satisfactory for Mr. Ramkarran to refuse to discuss the nature of presidential styles. As a voter, I will not vote for a candidate who cannot tell me if it is wrong for the leader of a nation to tell people they are ignorant, ugly etc.
Here is the one that will cause long consideration on Mr. Ramkarran’s candidacy. Mr. Ram wanted to know what the party’s position was on the unceremonious sacking of Mr. Navin Chandarpal. Mr. Ramkarran explained that it was not discussed at the statutory meeting of the PPP that he attended but at two other such meetings.
He also said that he was out of the country so he couldn’t speak on what transpired. Mr. Ram then went into logical overdrive. He let Mr. Ramkarran know that as a senior leader in the PPP, he has to know about decisions of such importance. Mr. Ramkarran maintained his position that he doesn’t know the exact facts of what came out of the confabulation on Chandarpal.
Too many curious shortcomings came out of that exchange that should not go uncommented. I will leave further analysis for forthcoming columns.
Lastly, Ram inquired why no Ombudsman. Ramkarran replied that no suitable candidate can be found. Ram asked; “Out of a population of over 700,000?”
I will make no further judgement on Mr. Ramkarran given his penchant to complain that this writer treats him unfairly on this page. But this I will say, and I believe it is fair comment on a person who publicly stated that he would like to be President. Mr. Ramkarran may have killed his presidential chances.
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.