Lincoln Lewis seeking new audience for fallacious claims

Dear Editor, REFERENCE is made to a letter from Mr Lincoln Lewis, captioned: “Under Jagdeo’s presidency the bauxite industry self-contributing Pension Fund worth more than $2.5Billion was destroyed” (KN 2023-02-13).

Therein, Mr Lewis not only repeats previously debunked accusations about the PPP/C government’s treatment of workers in the bauxite industry, but also launches into a wide-ranging diatribe, accusing the government of racism and discrimination.

It is no secret that Mr Lewis currently finds common cause with the APNU+AFC and the contrived racialization of issues is consistent with what is evidently the political strategy of the main political opposition.

While almost all of Mr Lewis’s accusations have previously been comprehensively discredited, we are aware that every year or so, when he revives these claims there may be people who have never noticed them before. It is for this reason that we respond.

Firstly, Mr Lewis asserts that Vice-President Jagdeo is “squatting on the people’s interest” and I think it is incumbent upon him to explain this cryptic assertion.

If he is implying as his associates in the opposition do, that the APNU+AFC “won” the last election, he should have the moral and intellectual courage to forthrightly posit this discredited position, so that we can deal with it. He should not hide behind cryptic innuendoes.

If this is not what he means, he should say what he does mean, so that people can engage him to the extent that what he says merits engagement.

Secondly, it is incumbent upon Mr Lewis to prove (not merely assert) that the Prime Minister does not function as the Leader of Government Business in the National Assembly.

He should also give us the benefit of his expertise on Constitutional Law and to educate us on the “functions” of the First Vice-President following which he should prove that the Prime Minister does not perform those functions.

Should Mr Lewis be able to prove these two assertions, we can then proceed to treat with the unsubtle race rhetoric that is embodied in his subsequent statement that the Prime Minister “appears content to support the [alleged but unproven] constitutional violation” and all that follows.

Mr Lewis then goes on to make his oft-repeated claims that PPP/C governments have discriminated against bauxite workers, but support sugar workers.

The objective of making this comparison is obvious. Mr

Continued on page 8