Where is the discrimination?

Aug 04, 2022 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – It is a sign of the intellectual bankruptcy of those opposed to the PPP/C that they have to revert to the same worn old narratives which were peddled for 23 years. Instead of offering new ideas, instead of engaging in class analysis to defrock the PPP/C policies, the opposition continues to make excuses about ethnic discrimination and oppression.

But what discrimination is the opposition talking about? If anything, the discrimination by the PPP/C favours African-Guyanese.

Region 10 which is a predominantly African-populated region enjoys the lowest electricity rates in the Caribbean. It pays a considerably lower electricity rate than the rest of the country. Is this discrimination?

The bauxite industry was bankrolled by the PPP/C government for decades until the industry was privatised. Is this discrimination? The community of Buxton has benefitted from substantial infrastructural upgrades, including a more than G$50M in rebuilding Tipperary Hall, under the PPP/C, far more than any Indian community. Is this discrimination?

Bharrat Jagdeo spent more than $300M to acquire private property for vendors, the majority of whom, at the time, were African-Guyanese. And the Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport has made substantial investments upgrading sports facilities and providing sporting equipment and gear to Buxton and Agricola. Does this amount to discrimination?

The available data points to greater poverty among Indians than Africans. Based on an analysis of the Household Income and Expenditure Survey (HIES) of 1999, done by Dr. Ramesh Gampat, 32.9 percent of the Indian population lived in absolute poverty. The corresponding figure for Africans was 28 percent.

Since the Irfaan Ali-led administration came to office, and amidst the challenges posed by the pandemic, the government has paid out billions in bonuses to the predominantly African Disciplined Services. The government has also paid allowances to nurses.

The PPP/C has given public servants a special bonus. Is this discrimination? A case of ethnic discrimination cannot be made out in relation to the COVID-19 support cash grant. A small number of persons have complained that they did not receive the grant. But these persons are drawn from all ethnic groups. No community or Region has been left out.

Old age pensions have been increased across the board. Has there been discrimination? Pensioners have also benefitted from a special grant. No one has claimed discrimination.

The disabled are receiving a grant of G$100,000 per year. No cries of ethnic discrimination have been heard. There has also been no discrimination when it comes to the schools’ cash grant.

The government launched a scholarships programme under the Guyana Online Academy of Learning (GOAL) programme. The government has made public the names of the more than 3,000 individuals who were awarded scholarships. The public will see from the list that there has been no ethnic discrimination in the award of these scholarships.

But just perhaps the PPP/C government may now wish to make public the names of the persons to whom the APNU+AFC granted scholarships and house lots. Make the list public so that the public can decide for themselves who was more discriminatory!

One former government official has said that support was given to terminated sugar workers, farmers and to fisherfolk but none to terminated public servants. That person ought to know that the government cannot terminate public servants. Public servants enjoy security of tenure and can only be dismissed by the Public Service Commission. He probably meant those contracted workers whose contracts were either allowed to expire or determined following the change in government. But what about the many contract workers who were let go under the APNU+AFC? Do they not count too?

The PPP/C’s support for the sugar workers, farmers and fisherfolk was part of assistance given to distressed sectors of the economy. The sugar industry was pulverised under the APNU+AFC. The downsizing of the sugar industry affected the rural economy in which 54 percent of African Guyanese live.

The floods of last year affected thousands of farmers and destroyed large tracts of cultivation, including in the sugar industry. The agriculture sector was thrown into distress and needed support.

The fishing industry which, according to the Ministry of Agriculture, employs close to 15,000 Guyanese, has been hard hit by low catches. The support by the government was not based on ethnic considerations but rather economic considerations because of the fishing industry’s employment and more than G$8B contribution to the country’s Gross Domestic Product.

The government has launched a multi-billion dollar programme to provide part-time employment to Guyanese. All regions of Guyana are part of the programme. Persons from all ethnicities are being given jobs. Where is the discrimination?

During the protests which erupted following the killing of a youth from Golden Grove, some elements tried to justify the violence which occurred on the grounds that this was in protest against ethnic marginalisation and neglect. They pointed to the poor state of the roads in some African communities and the large army of unemployed persons in these communities.

Well, this was less than two years after the APNU+AFC left office. So what did the APNU+AFC do for these villages in its five years? But it is not African villages alone which have poor infrastructure – this is a national problem affecting almost all villages across Guyana.

And who was it that said the government cannot provide jobs for everyone? So tell me where is the discrimination?

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

 

 

---

---