The transformation of governance should be a priority

Feb 02, 2020 Letters

---

Dear Editor,

There are two important priorities, which I believe our new government, after the upcoming elections, should consider: transforming Guyana’s economy and our contentious partisan model of governance.
Success in these twin objectives will require a strategic partnership between the new president and opposition leader that binds them in a post- election covenant. We do not know if the second day of March this year will bring us an Irfaan Ali’s presidency or the return of President Granger in this leading role. I am hoping against hope that either of these two gentlemen would have evolved in their philosophy of political governance to the point that our outmoded system of partisan governance would be rejected outright going forward These leaders would have to be clodhopping foolish to want to continue a model of political governance that is not good for Guyana.
In regards to the first priority, the president would know he has chosen a job that gives him limited power to transform anything, let alone the economy. We would not get a high-performance economy because the president orders it. With his military background, President Granger for example would know that if he barks orders loud enough in the army, the lower ranking officers will line up to carry them out.
He also knows that our political world is nothing like the army. President Granger can bark orders to rice farmers to double production and nothing will happen. He can adumbrate commands to gold mining companies as well and production will go nowhere. Our crime statistics will not plummet because the president has ordered the police to get it done. It is not the case that the president has turned on the tap of lawlessness and criminality in the first place and he is now in a position to turn it off.
The way the government preferably plays a role in economic management is by creating a supportive environment, helpful to private business and foreign investment. It can do so by proper funding of public infrastructural projects, education and training programmes.
No president can be so grotesquely uninformed to believe he can magically change our economic and social environment. He must pursue progress through intermediaries who play leading managerial roles in business, education, our communities and other sectors of our economy. Our society is made up of institutions managed by lead persons and CEO’S. It is at the level of institutional management where the most important decisions are made. The president should have ability to motivate and inspire.
In regards to political governance, the president can be the architect to usher in a new era of inclusive governance and persuade the opposition leader to join hands. It is not about power sharing, but mechanisms that allow for cooperation. No longer should the opposition be confined to after- the- fact governance- critique the performance of the governing party and then wait anxiously for the next election cycle to bring a victory. The opposition must be involved in shaping national policies and plans. If the governing party develops a plan to spend oil revenue, for example, then the president should ask the opposition to present an alternative plan. Let there be an integrated solution. If the governing party has plans for the development of eco-tourism, let us see the opposition roll out a plan too, and let there be compromise. Let the government and opposition jointly monitor public policy result. They have to insure that public policy benefits touch the lives of everyone. Ethnic bias has no presence.
For much too long, rabid partisanship in governance has denied us the opportunity of building a strong nation. The lousy oil deal that we signed with the oil giants is a case in point. I am convinced that we would have done better if both government and opposition had a seat at the negotiating table. I would even dare to say that one party hegemony in governance has been the singular cause for many transformative projects that have gone bust. Too much money throughout our post-independence has gone down the proverbial drain.
Inclusive governance can be the precursor of better times. Just the symbolism of government and opposition working together sends a message to the rest of our society that our political leaders prefer national unity over division. It is also noteworthy as well that the party that wins the general election gains power, but scarcely a mandate to impose hegemonic rule over us. Just look at the sliver of seats or votes that separate the winner and loser. The loser party with such a sizeable segment of support deserves to sit at the table of governance.
I do not know if the so-called mother of all elections on the second of March will bring us a new dawn in political governance or it will disappoint us once again. It is the mindset of our political leaders that will birth a turnaround. We can only hope.
In the spirit of inclusive governance, we would also deservingly benefit should we see a new attitude on the part of the president and opposition leader towards their critics in the media, civil society or some other place. They should listen, read the newspapers, and meet their critics in person. They may learn something they need to know.
Victimising those with opposing views is behaviour typically associated with the darker corners of the third world. It does not speak to good governance.

Wesley Hicken

---

---