Dear Editor,
I refer to the Honourable Finance Minister, Winston Jordan’s letter, which was published in Stabroek News (SN) on Monday, November 19, 2018, captioned, `All gov’t workers can expect salary increases, going forward, especially in 2018, 2019 and 2020’. The minister at the time was responding to Mr. Lincoln Lewis’ column which was published in Kaieteur News Sunday, November 18. 2020: with the caption `Local Government Elections, though disappointing to some, were not unexpected’.
The minister must be commended for taking time from his busy schedule to engage one of Guyana’s well-known trade union leaders, political and social commentators on what is widely considered a poor performance by the ruling coalition parties at the recently concluded Local Government Elections. My advice, for what it is worth, is that all government ministers do the same and robustly defend the coalition government’s policies, not only in official statements but also from the letter columns of the newspapers, in interviews in every segment of the media and from the street corners and in communities, so that a wide cross-section of the populace would have greater appreciation of the government’s programmes, policies and hopefully, successes, as time evolves.
Very early in the life of the APNU+AFC government the deficiencies in the government Public Relations (PR) strategy or lack of strategy, were pointed out to the leadership by supporters, inside and outside of the coalition, all to no effect. While improved PR is required and is necessary and will be helpful, it will not by itself, successfully suffice, simply because the situation at present is not the same as it was during the first year of the government’s term in office. The incumbents’ failure to implement a sensible and workable PR strategy that is distinct from the very noticeable self serving applause of the actions of one of the main players in the government, whose primary intentions were intended to gain political mileage over the other main partner, was politically, a disaster of massive proportions. Although it could be argued that electors do not vote in large numbers at local government elections the low turnout, particularly in communities where supporters of the coalition reside must be a source of concern to leaders of that group. The apparent loss of confidence of the coalition’s constituency supporters and disaffection with its policies could very well be contributory factors in their failure to vote in larger numbers at the recent LGE.
The political damage has already been done. Given this reality, the ruling politicians have to be political and must be seen to be fighting the “propaganda war” directed against the government by the PPP/C and their agents. In doing so care is needed to recognize that all criticisms are not hostile propaganda or fifth columnist activity.
For example, to the extent that comrade Lincoln Lewis has been less than careful in his articulation and criticisms of government policies, he is not a hostile critic or an agent provocateur in the employ of the PPP. To my mind, Lincoln Lewis remains a patriot who is concerned with what he assumes is a degeneration of standards in the country and wants to see that situation reversed. I will be disappointed if the minister’s rebuttal accurately stated Lewis’s position that he is not mature enough to publicly acknowledge where he was wrong. On the other hand, if he is misrepresented I expect him to fight back – this is what makes polemics useful in the public space. Having made the above observations, I want to share with the minister, the government/cabinet and the public, some of my concerns with the minister’s explanations.
While it is true that the President, Prime Minister and some of the ministers in the government did not get the 50% increase in their salaries, the main point of contention is the decision of the new administration to give substantial increases to their counterparts shortly after assuming office, without first addressing the burning issue of worker’s wages and salaries. This to my mind was bad politics. Explanations after the fact, will not change the perception of workers and detractors/critics of the government, that having got power they were more obsessed with advancing their own interests as a first priority on assuming office. I believe that after committing this colossal blunder that it became absolutely necessary for both the president and his ministers to constantly say to the public that it was a bad decision, which they regretted making. The explanation by Minister Jordan may be good politically, but much more could be achieved by admitting the mistake rather than rationalizing it.
In relation to the government ending the subsidies on water and electricity to pensioners and the concerns of the regime: their commitment to change, the ‘discriminatory situation’ is understandable, particularly since as the Minister explained the action was intended to address the disadvantages experienced by many pensioners. Politically, was the this the only and the best way for the government to achieve its objectives? I am not convinced that it was since the government could have easily solved the problem by a new bill to address its concerns or leave the situation as it was, as they did in relation to the “discriminatory procurement law”. Politically, it would have been better for the government to take action to correct the procurement law than to end the pensioner’s subsidies on water and electricity. By taking action on the latter and not the former it opened itself to the accusation that it is anti-poor and pro-rich.
The next issue is the government ending the PPP/C policy of giving the members of the Disciplined Services a year-end bonus, at the expense of other public sector workers and the possible effect the new policy direction may have influenced the low turnout of members of the Disciplined Services at the recent local government elections. I am in no position to say whether it did or did not. Politically the PPP/C’s policy was indicative of that party’s attempt to buy the loyalty of the workers in uniform. This was good politics on the part of that party given the ethnic and known political preference of the majority of these workers. In face of this reality was the coalition government decision to end the practice wise?
This government’s decision on this matter has to be seen in the context of the pauperizing of the workers in general under the PPP/C’s 23 years rule, that left them in need of financial relief. Members of the disciplined services, in spite of the PPP/C’s bribery, have voted elections after elections for the PNC, APNU and the APNU+ AFC coalition. In light of this why take away financial benefits from this group without their agreement? It appears that the president and government given their closeness to the military and paramilitary forces took for granted that these workers would appreciate the government’s new policy and that there would be no political fallout. Here again, in my opinion, the regime shot itself in the foot by taking away benefits from a section of its support base in a situation where it was not expedient or necessary. Realpolitik in this situation demanded that all benefits working people received from the PPP/C should be honoured and improved by the incumbent administration.
It is good politics for the Finance Minister and the government to give the nation’s workers the assurance that they will be receiving salary increases in 2018, 2019 and 2020. But here again is this enough in the absence of figures? Equally important in the Minister’s statement is the government’s not so subtle indication to workers and their representatives that it is determined to continue the PPP/C’s policy of imposing wages and salaries increase on workers, and not honouring its election commitment to collective bargaining.
In closing, I hope that my reflections may in some small way contribute to our government understanding the depths of the political crisis it is faced with. What I believe is required, is a 360-degree change in thinking and behaviour.
Yours faithfully,
Tacuma Ogunseye
