The opposition should be at the street corners

Aug 22, 2010 Features / Columnists, My Column

---

By Adam Harris

I have been called many things in my lifetime. Some of the terms have been most derogatory. The difference is that with the passage of time the very people who attached labels to me changed their minds. They sought me out when they needed help.
It was not so long ago that I was described as a soup drinker because I acted professionally with the administration. Then some of my colleagues took offence that President Bharrat Jagdeo and me were ‘friends’. One of them had the gumption to say that “I was too close to Jagdeo.” The truth is that I like the man as a person. I find him easy to get along with. It is the same with so many other politicians and me. I even boast that I shared a similar relationship with almost every President in Guyana —Forbes Burnham, Desmond Hoyte (he sacked me thirty-three times), Cheddi Jagan and Sam Hinds. I was perhaps closest with Desmond Hoyte.
Some of the people with whom I worked at Prime News started one of the most interesting rumours that spread like wildfire. I was supposed to take up a position at Office of the President or the Guyana Chronicle with effect from January 1, 2009.
When that did not materialize the next rumour was that I was being paid $250,000 a month by President Jagdeo for being his adviser.
I remember Rickford Burke and me having a lively commentary about me writing some column on behalf of the government. I also knew where that came from.
Amidst all that I remained quiet for the greater part because they always say that sometimes the defender “protesteth too much”. I am not sure what is being said these days and I simply do not care. My life is an open book and I am old enough to do as I please within the limits of human decency.
I never make a noise about myself nor do I go crying to others when the situation becomes difficult. I learnt this more than five decades ago when my mother said to me that in life I should learn to bear my chafe—whatever that means.
I was therefore somewhat disappointed when a friend with whom I share a political affiliation wrote to me to say that I have suffered a lack of professionalism. His comments had their genesis in a column I wrote last week. In that column I lamented the apparent silence on the part of the political opposition to some of the happenings in Guyana.
Way back, when party politics was different in the People’s National Congress, party members met in groups in the various communities every week to inform people of developments and to seek from them the kind of action that would be needed if situations were not in keeping with the norms of the society.
That is no longer the case because the politicians, to my mind, sit back and rely on media releases to get their messages across. The political campaign these days is done almost entirely in the pages of the newspapers and on television. I find this annoying when the very newspapers are needed to do so many other things.
Last week my peeve was that reporters were facing the brunt of attacks that should really have been directed at the politicians. Some of these reporters have now become political enemies of the state and this should not have been.
Because of this I wrote that the opposition politicians seemed to be sitting back and I still maintain that view. This is my professional view. Issuing statements and making comments for the press is one thing; actually meeting the people is another and this is my grouse.
The opposition should be involving the people in any discussion. What has become of the public meetings? What has become of the community meetings where the people are afforded a chance to talk to the people for whom they voted?
Then there is the parliamentary approach. I am aware that many motions are shot down for reasons best known to the Speaker of the National Assembly and him alone. I know that he quotes the Standing Orders but as they say, the law was made for man and not man for the law.
The mere idea of trying to get answers to serious issues in the National Assembly maintains the impression that the opposition wants things done to what it perceives as wrongdoing and irregularities. Simply making statements and issuing releases can never achieve the same results.
I agree with Mr. Lance Carberry that a lot has been written about the Amaila Falls road project and a lot of releases issued on the matter but the public is still to hear the opposition voice on the matter.
Yes, there have been motions tabled in the House to ventilate this issue and the National Assembly which should be impartial, has not seen it fit to allow the motion to see the light of day. To my mind, this should not be the end of the opposition move to have this matter brought before the public. There is always the public parliament and this is what is lacking from the opposition these days.
Burnham used Parade Ground and Bourda Green; the PNC has been known to use Square of the Revolution. I am sure that those venues are still available. The absence of such forums prompted my column last week.
As for the charge of opposition bashing, I have never been one to join bandwagons. The political opposition has done some silly things but so does every political party. I say to Mr. Carberry, “Let there be a return to the basics. You would be surprised at how much more could be achieved—much more than the statements and press releases.”
And in any case, newspapers reach no more than fifteen per cent of the population and each reader has his or her special interest.

---

---