Page 04
Kaieteur News
Kaieteur News Printed and Published by National Media & Publishing Company Ltd. 24 Saffon Street, Charlestown, Georgetown, Guyana. Publisher: GLENN LALL Editor: Adam Harris Tel: 225-8465, 225-8491. Fax: 225-8473, 226-8210
EDITORIAL
What can one expect? The firing of the Minister of Health, Bheri Ramsaran on the eve of the election for his ‘slap and strip’ remarks against Rights Activists, Ms. Sherlinga Nageer, has served to shift the population’s gaze, with more intensity than ever, onto the APNU+AFC Coalition. It would seem that barring unexpected developments of massive proportions, the Coalition is likely to win the general election on May 11. That is the prediction of the Coalition’s Presidential Candidate, David Granger. Is he right? I personally believe so. But the key question to be asked is, what is there in the current configuration and operation of the Coalition to suggest that if it wins this election it is going to be any different from the PPP government. What makes the Coalition and its leader different? Given the character and background of David Granger, the answer would lie in his personality and leadership style. As far as the coalition itself is concerned, it is different from the PPP in structure, type of leadership and philosophy. It comprises six parties. As far as the people are concerned, what they need to note is the tone of the vicious vituperation and personal attacks in which the campaign was conducted. Whatever one might have thought of David Granger, the fact is, he is a decent man with strong leadership and organizational skills and therefore, will lead the coalition to victory and become the next president of Guyana. But because of his military background, he has been branded by his opponents as someone who should be feared. But the fact is, David Granger is not the only military leader to enter politics or to seek high office, more than half of all U.S Presidents had some sort of military background either from the Army, Navy, Air Force, Militia or the National Guard. So for anyone to be critical of David Granger’s military backgroundis not only insulting to the armed forces, but is to court disaster as his opponents will find out after the elections. The point here is simple. If this is how the incumbentexecutive conducted their campaign, what is there to suggest that they would govern in any way differently? Of course, it could be argued that the way the 2015 election campaign was conducted demonstrated the abnormal vulgarity and absurdity of campaigning in this country. During the campaign, every weapon including personal attacks and character assassination were used to destroy the character of David Granger and in the process destroy his electability. But to use one’s ethnicity or tribe to gain votes is poor leadership and politics at its worse. And I would respond “exactly.” Now let me be fair and objective. Most of the issues raised against David Granger in the campaign are not new. What is new to the voters are the false accusations against him as a leader who will send ex-soldiers to kick down the doors of East Indians if the Coalition wins the election. However, such fabrications and distortion of the truth will not stick with most of the electorate because they know that there is no one in the current administration who is as honest, decent and honourable as David Granger. Further, no one should believe that the political culture of the country would change if the incumbent party is reelected. For this to happen, it first must begin by changing its own political culture. If that party did not operate differently as a party from how it has always done, it would be foolish for anyone to expect anything different from it as a government. Just as how a tiger cannot change its stripes, so too, a human being cannot change his/her essential character! A government of the people, by the people, for the people is truly needed to unite the races and move the country forward. Will there be one?
Tuesday May 12, 2015
Letters... Where your views make the news
Reform and political compromise needed DEAR EDITOR, We should wait patiently for the election commission to count the ballots and announce the results. e must abhor violence and peacefully accept the outcome. And we should encourage the winner to form a national inclusive g o v e r n m e n t o f representatives of varied stakeholders, including the opposition. The people have rendered their verdict in what has been a very competitive, racially divisive election campaign. It is time for national healing and the establishment of a
government - preferably a national unity government in which the loser is not completely left out. The victor should reach across the aisle and incorporate some members from the other side. Given our divided politics, it will not hurt to co-opt members or supporters or even candidates from the other side to promote healing and reconciliation after this bitter campaign. Besides, given the limitation of our human resources, the country needs all the talents it can access for national development. It may also be a necessary price for political
stability given the history of the aftermath of elections the loser never concedes, stirring up trouble, making the country ungovernable. This makes investment difficult, and by extension, development becomes affected. Whoever wins must give a commitment to political reform in which the people will be empowered - they must be able to exert some influence over policymaking and contracts. The winner must redefine the role of government to include the views of the opposition. The policies of the government must be people focused -
reforms must be instituted so that people are consulted on every aspect of governance and policy-making. The opposition must demand this concession if the ruling party does not consult the people. This will strengthen public support for and the legitimacy of the government. Mechanisms must be put in place to insure proper accountability of funds and efficiency in governance. A spirit of compromise is required from the winner and cooperation is required from the other parties to improve governing. Vishnu Bisram
Oxford Dictionary Editor supports Sanders for C/wealth SG position DEAR EDITOR, While electioneering is in full swing in the Caribbean since a few countries are voting for new governments, there are moves behind the scenes in most Commonwealth countries to elect a new Commonwealth Secretary General. A l e x M a y , a distinguished writer and commentator, who is the research editor of Oxford Dictionary, feels that Sir Ronald Sanders, a senior
diplomat, commentator, is the best person suited for the top position of the 53 nation body. Writing in the Round Table: The Commonwealth Journal of International Affairs, he stated that the election will be a crucial one since there is need for a “turn around” and it is of vital importance who is elected to make this move. He said that the choice is between two persons. One from the Caribbean and the other from Africa: The first is a distinguished woman who
served two terms as deputy Secretary General under Lamaesh Sharma, with responsibility for Secretariat’s activities. Mmasekgoa MasireMwamba has considerable experience in business (including Chief Executive Officer of the Botswana Export Development and Investment Authority) and the other Sir Ronald Sanders who he said “brings considerable experience of management (including in
the international finance and telecommunication section) and of the Commonwealth as a diplomat, political commentator and key figure in the: (“Eminent Persons Group) appointed in 2010 to advise on reform of the Commonwealth (some of whose recommendations were rejected and others accepted, though their implementation has been very long in coming). Well known and widely respected in the Caribbean (Continued on page 5)
THE IDENTITY CONUNDRUM
DEAR EDITOR, The discussion on the question of identity always seems to heat up during an elections campaign in Guyana. The language of the discussions is often coloured to influence voters around a particular identity as dictated in recent letters to this newspaper. These coloured identities are afraid of being left out of the political process, but fail to see that voting for your own identity results in other identities being left out of the political process which in turn fuels a host of unwanted human behaviour. The point I make here is that no matter what colour your identity is, the resulting behaviours are human. Nelson Mandela summed it up in one line, “We are fighting for a society where people will cease thinking in terms of colour.... It’s not a question of race; its’ a question of ideas.” If a government makes decisions on behalf of all human beings all ethnicities will benefit, but when a
government is only representative of one ethnicity all humanity does not benefit - but is there such a thing as a human identity? In all the letters that I have read there is no mention of the human identity, despite the fact that there is enough scientific proof to justify that we all belong to the human race. So the question I would like to leave with our identity writers is: what is your identity? And if it is not human how is it different? Is it superior or inferior to the human being? I am not an academic or a scholar by any stretch of my own imagination, but as far back as I can see into the past, this ethnic identity that we have accepted is one which was given to us by those who usurped their power over us for their own economic benefits. As long as we continue to hold on to these subdivisions of our humanity, we will continue exposing ourselves to economic exploitation by selfish
human beings. I will close with these thoughts from Nelson Mandela. “The anchor of all my dreams is the collective wisdom of mankind as a whole. I am influenced more than ever before by the conviction that social equality is the only basis of human happiness... It is around these issues that my thoughts revolve. They are centered on humans, the ideas for which they strive; on the new world that is
emerging; the new generation that declares total war against all forms of cruelty, against any social order that upholds economic privilege for a minority and that condemns the mass of the population to poverty and disease, illiteracy and the host of evils that accompany a stratified society.” Our fight is with Ignorance, not with each other. Jai Parsram Toronto
The nation holds its breath
DEAR EDITOR, As never before in the last twenty-three years, the nation awaits the results of an election. As the saying goes, all is fair in love and war but in Guyana, the phrase “he who laughs last, laughs best” will define every moment until the results are known. The people, especially the youths, were fully aware
of the importance of this election, and turned out in their numbers. They were cognizant that it has put the fate of the nation at stake and could not be taken lightly. Further, everything was on the line in this election and nothing was taken for granted. So as the votes are counted, the nation holds its breath. Dr. Asquith Rose