Change can only come from us

Dear Editor,

I wish to commend your staff for the insightful coverage extended to the issue of poverty and its attendant social ills in Guyana (Sunday Stabroek, January 19).  While the article was admittedly not comprehensive, it nevertheless delivered a more graphic and detailed perspective than any available in recent memory.

Having served as an economist at the Bank of Guyana in the eight years up to January 2008, many of the analyses and interpretations from the various reports by the Bank, including work which I privately pursued, have remained with me, so that my recent letters in KN and SN were broad sketches with minimal recourse to numbers, which tend to belabour readers. In particular, my letter in both SN and KN on January 10 were justifiably without numbers to describe poverty, since, as your Sunday article pointed out, there are no recent statistics which could serve as a basis for discussion.  This does not however restrict my engaging in social commentary to raise this topic as an issue of paramount concern to many Guyanese; this also attested to by your feature.

I wish to acknowledge the, at times empathetic, distilled thoughts of Dr Clive Thomas, in particular, and also the contributions made by Mr Granger, the Leader of the Opposition.  They have undoubtedly witnessed first hand, more than myself, the extent and prevalence of poverty throughout Guyana.

I would like to remind our readers of the deeply held sentiments of Dr Clive Thomas regarding Guyana’s thrust for a better life for us all.  It takes tremendous moral courage to step out of the secure role of a professional; to stand up and actively engage in opposition to the government we should all be serving; to speak out against the social injustices and corruption endemic in our society; to struggle with government to take that path which we should be taking, the one we know will lead to the fulfilment of our dreams as a nation where everyone has a fair share in the wealth, income and prosperity that we all strive for ‒ versus the self-serving ideas served annually as the national budget (massive budgets are not the solution).  I imagine the difference between Dr Thomas and the rest of Guyana’s politicians is that while they all know that many things are wrong about how our country is run, only he knows the sure path to economic prosperity.  We still have a chance to try his ideas.  It sure beats reading how it should be accomplished.

The problem with previous national budgets was that none of them in a comprehensive, cohesive and structured manner addressed the basic questions that need to be answered.  These are, very simply, higher incomes and jobs.

Our economic woes are the unfortunate outcome of the choices we have made at our general elections for the last two decades.  For this, the entire country has had to bear the strain of the PPP’s seemingly limitless instances of corruption, from gross manipulation of the procedures for the issuance of government contracts for capital and other works, to the reissuance of government contracts to the businesses of its cronies, some of whom make a mess of projects  resulting in the waste of hundreds of millions of dollars. Some of that money has been borrowed and has to be repaid by us. Then there is the matter of providing money to its friends and associates through over-priced projects, to controlling the media through grossly unfair, uncompetitive practices. This latter tactic is part and parcel of the PPP’s brainwashing mechanism; its attempt to control what we think.

The supporters of the PPP will not forget the mess made of GuySuCo, and the economic chaos inflicted upon the families dependent upon the existence of that corporation.  One can hardly imagine the distress and suffering of the children of these families. GuySuCo could be wound up as a result of the PPP’s failure to grasp, among other things, the tide of change which would have resulted from the EU’s adjustments to its preferential arrangements, and this, if it happens would be among the most unremarkable events during its tenure in government.  What will happen to these families still remains to be answered.

The PNC for its part has proven that it is not at all the monster envisaged by the PPP, but a party for all Guyanese, with a plan for all Guyanese, a plan which is blind to the issues of race and religion. The PNC promotes democratic values and is capitalist-oriented in economic policy, meaning that the private sector (business, not excessive government spending) is the engine of economic growth and prosperity. Government’s role is as a facilitator and promoter of economic growth, and as a provider of the necessary laws, accompanying regulations and a judicial system to safeguard both the business environment and the general society.

The AFC includes those former supporters who became fed up with the PPP’s corruption and have made themselves available as an alternative to the PPP’s supporters in particular, and the wider population, knowing that at the very least, they could handle the country’s business a whole lot better than the PPP. These gentlemen literally grew old in the PPP’s organization.  Listening to Moses Nagamootoo recently, I was struck by the absolute frustration of the gentleman with the PPP. Both he and Mr Khemraj Ramjattan serve as sterling examples of what the PPP’s character should be, but is not.

Every day Guyanese continue to look forward to more and better paying jobs while the PPP continues to feed its friends and associates. The PPP has stolen in excess of two decades from us. How many more years will we give up?

I shall not even comment on the public nonsense over the LEAD Project offered by the Embassy of the United States, except to say that probably even our pets have more diplomacy than our current government.

We look for a change. That change can only come from us.

Yours faithfully,

Craig Sylvester