ENGAGEMENT WITH CIVIL SOCIETY SHOULD NOT BE A ONE-OFF, ONCE-A-YEAR AFFAIR

Apr 05, 2013 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

 

Civil society stakeholders need to demand some respect from the government. It was the PPP government that launched the National Stakeholders’ process, but this has turned out to be a very disappointing mechanism.
Meetings of the stakeholders seem to be only convened mainly when the government is in a bind and needs support. The best example of this was a few years ago when the Lusignan Massacre took place. A meeting of civil society stakeholders was hurriedly summoned and came out with a statement calling for support for efforts to end the shocking spate of crimes.
That served the government well, because they achieved at the meeting a national consensus condemning crime.  After that meeting, which was also attended by the opposition, there were no regular engagements with the stakeholders.
Civil society in Guyana is weak and it is divided, but this does not mean that it should allow itself to be treated like a cloth of convenience by the government. The various stakeholders should demand greater respect and insist on a sustained process of interaction and involvement with the government.
These periodic meetings held at the behest of the government, and mainly when the government needs support on some issue, is highly disrespectful to civil society.
The latest meeting was about the 2013 Budget and was held this week. It comes at a time when the opposition is threatening to institute cuts to the document. The alleged support which the Budget received from civil society stakeholders will no doubt be waved in front of the opposition to demonstrate that the opposition’s proposed actions are not in sync with the views of the country’s civil society.
But what happens after this meeting? Will civil society have to wait until another year before they are again summoned or will they have to wait until a crisis emerges?
There was great optimism when Donald Ramotar assumed the presidency. He was warmly congratulated from unexpected sources after his first meeting with national stakeholders. He was complimented as being a good listener. There comes a time when, of course, one has to both listen and act. Sadly there has been no sustained process that would have allowed for regular meetings with civil society stakeholders and for these stakeholders to be involved directly in national development.
It is not too late to rescue these expectations. Civil society wants to play a role in governance and there is an important role. Civil society needs to be engaged and should be.
The government should therefore commit to meeting more regularly – say once every four months – in a plenary session with civil society leaders. But as part of this process there should be a continuous engagement between civil society and government that would see them working together on identified initiatives.
Four possible areas of cooperation spring to mind immediately: crime-fighting, dredging the Demerara harbour, improving the physical state of Georgetown and moving towards a living wage.
Civil society has an important contribution to make in all four of these areas and the government should ask them to work with it to meet certain defined objectives in all three of these areas.
Crime is a real problem in Guyana. It is costly to the economy; it affects Guyana’s international image and is therefore a problem that affects tourism and investment.  There is no reason why civil society cannot contribute to reducing crime in the country.
The Demerara harbour must be dredged. It is costly to shipping lines to navigate our harbour at the moment. This extra cost is passed on to consumers. Having the harbour dredged will allow for bigger vessels to come in and this will reduce shipping costs tremendously, which will mean cheaper goods. This is a major project that requires skilled expertise and the private sector has both an interest and the expertise to assist. Civil society should be involved here.
Georgetown is in a mess and government alone cannot shoulder the burden of putting it right. If civil society agrees, there can be an effort to bring order to Georgetown.
Trade unions are an important part of civil society and they will support efforts for a progressive unification of the minimum wage with a living wage. For too long this issue has being neglected. Real increases in wages have been marginal over the years and this means that the earnings of ordinary workers are not sufficient.
The private sector also has an interest in a living wage because if it is set too high, it could mean the ruin of their businesses. There is no reason why civil society cannot therefore come together and set a living wage and also make recommendations as to how to unify the minimum wage with this living wage.

---

---