LONG LIVE THE NAYSAYERS!

Mar 16, 2010 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

The State media has to distinguish between official acts of the President and those related to his membership of the PPP. They must also differentiate between events that are organized by the government and those that are party organized.
The event at Babu John two Sundays ago was a party affair attended by the party faithful and addressed by leaders of the PPP. The President was presumably there in his capacity as a leader of the PPP and not in his official capacity.
It was therefore disappointing to have observed that extracts from the President’s address at Babu John found their way into The Diary which should really concentrate on the President’s official engagements and not his participation in events organized by the party.
This is not nitpicking. What the President said at Babu John remains a matter of public interest. It may or may not be viewed as constituting a matter of public importance. But it was definitely not the type of presentation that deserved to have found its ways into a program that deals with the official engagements of the President.
This column has also been critical of the use of State House to host party events. This ought never to have been allowed. However, thousands of Guyanese somehow do not see the dangers of this practice and they turn out in their numbers to support something that may be worthy of support but which is being done in a less than exemplary way.
In his Babu John speech on The Diary, the President was seen lamenting the naysayers in our society who never see anything good that is done by the government. This sounds like an appeal for some plaudits to be given to the government.
But there is another side too. Not everyone that criticizes the government has ill-intentions. Some people concentrate on the negatives, not simply because there are no positives, but because the wrongs are of such gravity that they go to the very heart of governance and represent trends which left unchecked- and great many excesses still remain unchecked- can destroy the very gains that have been achieved.
Instead of ranting and raving, the government should carefully analyze what the naysayers are complaining about. They should ask whether there is indeed a fundamental problem with governance within the society. But to answer this, one must first know the role of governments.
We all accept that we cannot exist without some central authority. With a government there is going to chaos. Without a government, disputes are going to settled by the law of the jungle: the strongest and fittest will survive. Without a government, every citizen would have to be his or her own protector. The government is also expected to provide services which support the economy and which cannot be provided by the private sector. Without a government, foreign armies would constantly be knocking at our gates.
All of the above give a general idea of what role government is expected to play: public order, justice, physical protection of the citizens, providing services and the defense of the nation.
We all accept that there is a need for a government. But having identified this role, it needs to be asked how well the government has been performing in executing this role. Every government is judged not only by what it does but how it does these things.
It is judged for example, by its health services. And in assessing these services, the public may in time examine not just the adequacy of medical supplies that it procures to take care of the health of its citizens but also by how fair was the system of procurement under which these supplies were acquired.
A government is judged not only by the structures that it builds but also by whether there was corruption involved in this process and also by whether there was value for money.
A government is also judged by how it administers the property of the citizenry of the country. That is, it is judged by how it maintains the assets of the State as well as the fairness and justness by which it disposes of these assets.
This is why persons who are willing to be critical of the government are often indispensable to ensuring good governance. Many do so not for the sale of criticizing but because of the value of such criticism in holding governments accountable.
If there were no naysayers, governments would be less inclined to rule by fair and just means.
The role of the watchdog bodies, including the media, is therefore to hold the government responsible for the proper administration of the affairs of the country. And in this role, there will always be a role of naysayers.

Latest News

LONG LIVE THE NAYSAYERS!

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Eagles survive shaky start on Rain-affected opening day

TCL hand over trophies for Mashramani Street...

Nagassar was re-elected as President of GCUC

Herstelling and Eccles SC chalk up wins in latest...

Golden Jaguars CONCACAF home match against...

Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport endorses...

Features/Columnists

An Open Letter to the election observer missions

OAS Secretary General Election and renewed OAS Consensus

Azruddin Mohamed development-the constants

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]

LONG LIVE THE NAYSAYERS!

Share this:

Related

Similar Articles

The Glenn Lall Show|| February, 10th, 2025

Follow on Tik Tok @Glennlall

THE BLUNT OF THE DAY

Sports

Features/Columnists

Publisher’s Note

Weekend Cartoon

Bridge Watch

Demerara Harbour Bridge

> Berbice Bridge […]