Dear Editor,
The idea advanced by President Ali of decentralizing the presidency, on the face of it, is laudable and I have no doubt that he means well, for this is what the few operating within the area of authority feel. One friend who I have known for many years assured me that he is not a member of the PPP but is convinced that President Ali has good intentions. Editor, herein resides a serious problem, a dangerous dilemma and a daunting danger leading us to believe that this latest rubric of One Guyana is the initiative of President Ali.
On Monday, 30th October 2006, the PNC led group entered Parliament under the rubric of One Guyana. Second, the idea is not new. The Burnham-led Government, for the identical reasons advanced by President Ali, established six regional sub-governments and six Regional Ministers were appointed. As far as I can recall, four are still alive – Phillip Duncan, Oscar Clarke, Abdul Salim and Joshua Chowritmootoo. Later, the ten Administrative Regions were established with ten regional chairmen to deal speedily with issues and concerns affecting residents within these regions. This is a legal and constitutional requirement.
Having within those ten regions, large Municipalities, such as Georgetown, New Amsterdam, covered by By-Law 28:01 is a problem that existed and still does and needs to be resolved. The big question is what are the unsatisfactory aspects of the present system? Is it that the decentralizing of the presidency within established regions is either a campaign stunt or a step to one man centralized control of all facets of our lives? For the purpose of this letter, I will not insinuate a slide to dictatorship or the emergence of, as we’ve seen elsewhere, the ultra-right government where everything is centralized and devolves from a presidential hierarchy. This of course is the hallmark of a dictatorship.
Third, is what appears to be a worrisome dilution and denigration of the established public service. This is the appointment of a number of persons to perform specific duties known as Contract Officers, inserted between and betwixt the public service. All of the above is made murky by appointing persons whose major qualifications is their political loyalty to the incumbent government. Fourth, unless the Government actively encourage a professionally driven public service, police force and other security forces, nothing of greatness will take place. A professionally staffed public service is the guarantee that ordinary people are the ultimate beneficiaries. In all of the above, if we are to move forward, we must tackle ruthlessly, fearlessly the boogie-man of corruption and nepotism.
My advice to President Ali, if he is really serious, is to surround himself with men and women of quality and not ignore our cherished institutions upon which the foundation of our democracy rests. For example, I heard the government benches in Parliament set out the reason for this Men on Mission (MoM) programme but could not state who the executive officers were that ultimately controlled the state’s funds.
Decentralizing the presidency must be a deeper concept and be sustainable. No matter what the President says or does, when people in the region see a bridge collapsing after a few months, when they see a building cannot be properly used, yet the contractors were fully paid; when you increase salaries by ten percent but the cost of living went up by thirty to forty percent, decentralizing the presidency to the regions becomes hollow and hard to swallow. President Ali must reach out to men and women at home and abroad, with a deep sense of nationalism, for guidance out of troubled waters into calm seas of plenty and peace. I hope he listens for the sake of a good Guyana.
Sincerely,
Hamilton Green
