Realizing our individual and national goals requires switching to rational, constructive thinking

May 21, 2019 Letters

DEAR EDITOR,

As we consider our political dilemma of having two major political parties which have in varying degrees contributed to our underdevelopment and failed at addressing corruption, among the other pressing social problems that result from their policy failures, it is worthy to observe that it makes no sense to fetch water in a bucket with a hole in its bottom.
A half a century of policies which have failed is more than enough to give cause for change. But realizing change can only be achieved with a change in our mindset, a movement towards rational, constructive thinking which evaluates the policy choices our political parties offer us, and through which we choose intelligently among these parties the one which responds best to our desires for increased individual and national welfare.
We need to ask some basic questions about the critical issues we need to focus on as a nation. These are reflective of our current environment, and include a constitution which was designed to enforce dictatorship and autocratic government by effectively barring parliamentarians from making independent, professional decisions, while paying lip-service to democracy. These questions are set forth below.
Is the party I am supporting:
1. Committed to constitutional reform which at least embraces:
(a) The removal of the excessive authority granted to the President and allows him to interfere with and essentially upturn our economy?
(b) The removal of the requirement of parliamentarians to always support their political parties, and allows coalition of political parties after general elections?
2. The removal of the tax-free status of the President and that of the attorney general?
3. Committed to addressing our prevalent unemployment problems which are the cause of much of the crime and at-home robberies with violence?
4. Committed to offering laid-off sugar workers unemployment insurance and support to enable them to become economically viable once again?
5. Committed to addressing the problems within the sugar industry with an emphasis on ensuring that sugar workers are treated fairly?
6. Committed to addressing depressed incomes of public servants, and within the private sector also, where some wages are still below $10,000 per week, which are a direct result of neglectful government policies?
7. Committed to removing burdensome taxes which have made our daily lives so much more difficult?
8. Committed to encouraging private sector investment, which is necessary to creating new jobs?
9. Has a broad policy matrix which addresses our wide range of social, economic and political problems, and makes a clear, discernible path toward our objectives of increased individual and national welfare?
How Have The Policies of the Peoples Progressive Party Benefited:
1. Sugar Workers? 2. Rice Farmers? 3. Public Servants? 4. Workers in the Private Sector who still take home less than $10,000 per week? 5. Our Unemployed Youths who cannot find jobs? 6. Has the PPP worked to address rampant corruption? Why Am I supporting the PPP?
Also, Why Am I supporting the Coalition administration? Have the policies of the Coalition benefited: 1. Sugar Workers? 2. Rice Farmers? 3. Public Servants? 4. Workers in the Private Sector? 5. Our Unemployed Youths who cannot find jobs? 6. Has the Coalition worked to address rampant corruption? Why Am I supporting the Coalition administration?
We also have to ask if our political parties have in the past committed to these policies and whether they have actively delivered on these issues. Because if they haven’t, it is unlikely that they will ever do so in the future.
Yours Faithfully,
Craig Sylvester,
Democratic National Congress

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News