MARKING TIME FOR THE THIRD TIME

Jun 24, 2012 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

In 1953 after a united People’s Progressive Party swept the polls in the first election held under adult suffrage in Guyana, Britain at the instigation of the sugar barons suspended the country’s constitution and sent troops to ensure order and stability.
The hopes of the working class were dashed, as many of its leaders were placed under detention and the movement of others restricted. For four years, the country would mark time.
In 1985, the PNC woke up to the realization that it did not know what it was doing. All the billions that it had obtained in foreign loans and grants had come to nothing.  It ended up governing an economy that was no longer creditworthy and unable to pay the debts that would have secured a financial lifeline.
For four years between 1985 and 1989, the country was to mark time again. During this period the economy decelerated even further and living and working conditions became more deplorable and humiliating, especially for the workers.
The damage done to the country’s economy during those periods of marking time was irreversible. Apart from the fact that very little could have been achieved economically, these periods had a devastating effect on the psyche of the Guyanese people with many, including droves in the business class, abandoning their homeland and moving their assets out of the country.
Interestingly, both periods of marking time occurred just as the world economy was undergoing recovery and preceded extended spurts of prosperity. In 1953, one of the longest periods of global economic growth was just commencing following the Second World War.
In 1985, there were problems in developed economies in both Europe and the United States, but that year was also a turning point which saw the intensification of the globalization of the world economy and an increase in foreign direct investment in the latter half of the 1980s.
Guyana lost out on both of these waves because instead of positioning itself to ride the future global crests, it was stuck domestically marking time.
Fast forward to today. While the global financial crisis seems to be entering a new phase, the entire world is not catching the flu. The success of emerging economies, in particular Brazil, India and China, provides evidence that even amidst the financial turbulence that is sweeping many rich countries, that there are opportunities for developing countries to achieve greater levels of economic growth and development.
Guyana’s prospects looked very good at the start of this year, considering the direction the economy was taking and the fact that Guyana could easily tap into the growth being achieved by China, India and Brazil, as well as the rise in commodity prices.
Guyana was in fact in an ideal position. The debt problem was no longer a hindrance and both China and India are interested in Guyana’s resources while Brazil represents a large market for our goods. Gold prices hit new highs; export prices for rice were favourable and there was increased foreign investment lined up, particularly in the natural resource sector.
Guyana was enjoying its best years economically, but politically, the failure of the government to gain a majority at the 2011 elections placed the country’s future at risk.
It need not have been that way. Instead of the opposition recognizing the timeliness of their achievements and the need to ensure that Guyana capitalized on its present economic position, it has been content to flex its political muscle and thereby has pushed the country inevitably now towards another period of marking time.
The situation in the National Assembly demanded a different approach by the opposition. It required them to work together rather than against the government. They have failed to do this.
The opposition is all out to try to get back at the government. Their politics is not about creating anything. Instead of boosting investment, they have sent a terrible signal to the international community and to international investors by cutting important projects which were being financed under the Low Carbon Development Strategy.
Already the damage has been done, with the consortium which is putting together the deal for the financial closure of the Amalia Falls Hydroelectric Station indicating that financial closure has been delayed. There is now not likely to be financial closure, because which investor is going to put monies into a project which will take years and which can be hijacked by the opposition majority in the National Assembly?
But that is only part of the danger. The opposition is not achieving any progress for the country by its antics in parliament. In fact, if you examine the record of the opposition so far, nothing has been achieved in the National Assembly.
The mood in there is tempestuous. The opposition’s parliamentary agenda has been destructive. Nothing has been achieved in parliament. Nothing has been achieved through the Budget cuts; nothing has been achieved by not approving the re-submitted financial paper for 2011. Absolutely nothing!
All these things have done is to sour relations between the govenrment and the opposition, and once relations are sour, the country cannot move forward given the make-up of the National Assembly.
More has been achieved outside of the public glare through the tripartite process than what has been achieved by the opposition in parliament. The tripartite process has yielded cooperation which has brought some benefits.
However, the tripartite is now bound to be blanketed with mistrust, because of what the opposition is attempting to do in the National Assembly. They are abandoning their role as an opposition and are taking steps to stockpile motions. This is all part of a scheme to run the country from the legislative branch.
Instead of sitting with the government and developing a common plan upon which there can be cooperation, the opposition is sniping away at the government policies on one hand and on the other hand they are attempting to run the country from the opposition benches through motions. Instead of cooperation, what we have is pulling and tugging. This approach will only aggravate relations between the opposition and the government – in the long run leading to further gridlock and a reversal of the economic fortunes of the country.
Politically Guyana is headed towards a stalemate, and perhaps more dangerously, to four years of marking time.

---

---