Dear Editor,
Hydar Ally, in a letter in SN dated January 25, captioned ‘No confusion about PPP’s ideological orientation’ tried to convince readers that the PPP post-Jagan continued to practise the principles of Marxism Leninism.
What principles? Marxism Leninism? He has got to be joking. When was the last time he or anybody in the party wrote or spoke of those principles? Now that he has mentioned them I would be glad if he could write something explaining these principles and how the Bharrat Jagdeo government practised them.
Did the PPP government privatise as much as possible? Did they sell state resources to friends at prices below value? Did they give away the patrimony to foreign companies in sell out deals? Explain Baishanlin and Sanata Textiles Mill. How about prime lands near the university which were sold at low prices to friends? Are these all part of Marxist principles?
Now let’s see if the PPP practised neoliberal policies. That government placed its faith in the private sector and the private sector did not deliver. Recognising that the private sector did not deliver, did Leninist principles not encourage the government to invest in processing plants to process the farmers produce and so diversify the economy by creating value added?
Why did this Marxist government during the 23 years, not carry out the expansion of the Black Bush Polder so that farmers could get land? Why did it not develop the second phase of the MMA scheme? Mara was abandoned because the government let the road fall into disrepair.
Look at the condition of Black Bush Polder after 23 years of PPP rule.
These areas would have benefited its supporters so you can imagine how it treated those who were not its supporters. If the private sector did not invest in Region 10, among others, was it not incumbent on the Marxist government to invest to create jobs?
The reality is that the PPP post-Jagan directed its energies to enrichment. One can only look at the accumulation of wealth by some. The principle ‘lean and clean’ was thrown through the window.
The working people and the farmers were neglected. The unemployment among youths was very high. Migration continued to be high and the sad reality which I am sure Mr Ally would admit to is that Guyana remained a remittance country, and had it not been for the high level of remittances from families overseas our people would have had it very hard.
There are those PPPites who attack me on social media saying I was corrupt and that I stole money during the flood time, and as a consequence was fired. First it was 5 then 10 then 15 million. The reality is that the flood was in 2005 and my contract at Office of the President was signed in March 2006. Basic chronological logic defied them.
I will just say at this point in time that I was invited by my friend Michael Carrington to be on an Alliance for Change programme that dealt with taxation. We were advocating for allowances to be given for children for we thought the present tax regime was unfair to the workers who were parents. I was asked about and I criticized the corruption that existed.
There are those who say I am not writing against the ills of this government. Well for one, those asking me were silent under the previous government. The reality was that I spoke out internally for years and was marginalized. I do recognize that this government has done some wrong things and in the same way I am critical internally as I am giving it some time as I did with the PPP.
Those who know me know that I have not given up my left-leaning ideology and I have written on it in the not too distant past and on social media.
I will end at this stage but would consider continuing my writing for this country cannot advance in any real way unless our people remain divided. I have always stated this, that race is not a homogeneous unit. Each race group has varying interests. The working people are unfortunately misguided and are kept divided by race. The only way the working people would advance and the politics of this country be transformed is if the working people place their interests as workers before their ethnicity. The six weeks’ strike when bauxite and sugar workers were united in struggle is a prime example of what can be achieved when our people are united in their common interest.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Bisessar
