The PPP is centered on morality, hope and change

Aug 11, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The article in the August 6, 2010, Freddie Kissoon Column accuses the Jagdeo Government of neglecting the interest of the people in there “politics of pragmatism”, describing the government as being driven by a quest for power instead of being centered on the ideals of morality, hope and change.
To say that the Jagdeo government is blinded by its quest for power, and neglects the interest of the masses because it exercises “politics of pragmatism”, is incorrect. President Jagdeo, in his understanding of the needs of Guyana, has made constitutional changes that allow for democratic growth through healthy, constructive competition. Freedom of speech, association and communication ensure that the interest of all Guyanese are articulated and embraced as constitutional rights.
A ‘power-driven dictator’ would in no way tolerate any form of opposition that poses a threat to power! Instead, the President, in his practical approach, acknowledges that although we are historically an ethnically diverse people, the interest of all Guyanese must be respected and embraced.
And also, some Guyanese may feel that their interests are better articulated by different politicians.
Having a pragmatic approach to policy-making should never be criticised, as any rational government, after weighing the advantages and implications of policy, would naturally select the option that most benefits the country. Should this option become improbable, or even impossible, the next best alternative will be implemented.
We cannot be lead to think that the government is disregarding politics of morality, hope and change in their policy formulation. The government honours its moral obligation to protect and promote the interests of all Guyanese through pragmatic politics that generates tangible manifestations of hope and change in Guyana.
Nigel Green

Guyana needs to appreciate people like Whyte-Nedd

Dear Editor,
This is the first time I am writing to you but I felt so strongly about this treatment of a professional and fellow Guyanese.
How can our Government and ministries ever expect to progress in future developments when they are restricting excellent people that do such good work?  Not only is Whyte-Nedd qualified to do the job but she has been doing the job for some years now. I feel it is only fair and right that she should have been appointed to the post.
What really is the reason for not appointing her to this position? Surely it’s not because she is not qualified or does not know the work, I feel even though I do not want to accept it’s a race issue. I believe Guyana is for Guyanese regardless of race because we are all Guyanese, I sincerely hope that this Government/Ministry of Education is not blocking her appointment because of this.
I do hope that the media will be able to bring some pressure to bear on this matter by publishing more articles on this and by requesting that many others join in making their opinions felt. I believe as a nation and a country we need to do something about this if not I fear in the future it will be something or somebody else that will suffer. Guyana needs to appreciate people like Whyte-Nedd and not to destroy or damage them. Money is not all but we need to recognise this lady for all the hard work and effort that she has contributed to our society/country.
Walt Gravesande

On the Chief Education Officer and on financing
the Guyana cricket team

Dear Editor,
If the Government of Guyana wishes to be fair then the current acting Chief Education Officer should be promoted to the Chief Education Officer position effective from the date of her appointment to the acting position to the end of her tenure so that her retirement benefits can be adjusted appropriately.
The fact of the matter is that she performed the functions well enough to be maintained on the job until her retirement date and as such she deserves and has earned the right to have been appointed to the permanent position and remunerated as such. This is the current Government of Guyana’s opportunity to prove that they are indeed race blind and competency minded.
In my opinion Guyana cricket could be financed by the establishment and sales of shares and stocks to the general public; like everyone else the Government can purchase shares and stock, thus all will be “placing their money where their mouths are”. West Indian cricket can also be similarly financed.
Cricket and other sports are now big business worldwide and though Governments can and should ensure that appropriate  laws are  established and observed, the ownership of teams, even National teams should be in the hands of financiers (private citizens) and sponsors (for marketing purposes), not governments.
Keith M. Jones

---

---