POLITICAL gossip in Guyana, now at an all-time high, tells us that Guyana is heading for General and Regional elections, as there is no hope that the ruling People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) can stop this inevitable outcome vis-à-vis the Alliance for Change (AFC) no-confidence proposal; and further, that a new ruling party will enter political office. Indeed, this is mere gossip, and perhaps, there is nothing reliable about it. But of course, the people who are orchestrating the gossip have to work hard to make their gossip happen.
Working hard to make this happen, indeed, is a strategy to overwhelm both the print and electronic media to ensure that ordinary people lose sight of any good that has come from this Government, and perhaps, the strategy is enjoying a fair success. But the PPP/C has a lot going for it, and it is doing precious little to let the world know of the PPP/C-imprinted transformation of this country. So why is the PPP/C group not making deafening noises about the quality changes it has brought to ordinary people’s lives?
Nonetheless, demonstrating the PPP/C’s holistic and positive impact on Guyana requires some attention to the country’s baseline data at the time when the PPP/C re-entered political office. However, there are some who would say that you should not go that far back because the ruling party has had 22 years to make things right.
It is a fair argument, but it does not cover all the parameters of economic and social devastation that the PPP/C involuntarily received as a legacy in 1992. The argument merely addresses the economic and social status of the country in 1992, but fails to address the parameter that has to do with consequences of this devastation, consequences that penetrated the fiber of Guyana for several years beyond 1992.
In fact, Guyana did not achieve financial viability until year circa 2000. Without financial viability, development would have proceeded at a slow pace. And so it is an erroneous position to take when people say we should not harp back to the past and to go as far back as 1992, because the People’s National Congress’ (PNC) legacy to the PPP/C did not have a timeline that stopped at 1992; that PNC legacy had consequences beyond 1992 and well into beyond year 2000.
Let me provide some sense of the situation circa 1992: “…economic and social decline caused by misdirected government policies and an over-extended role of the state. Real GDP grew at only 0.4 percent per annum on average… Demand management policies were expansionary, the economy
lost competitiveness, external balances came under pressure, and the government relied
increasingly on price controls and quantitative restrictions on trade… The
Government’s capacity to deliver essential services has virtually collapsed. Infrastructure
remains severely dilapidated. The supply of potable water is limited to a small proportion of
the population, drainage and irrigation systems have deteriorated to the point that they are no
longer useful, and health and education services have become so inadequate that social indicators
for the country have fallen to among the lowest in the Caribbean…” (World Bank, 1994, p.v).
Undeniably and with limited resources, the PPP/C brought radical corrective action to the People’s National Congress (PNC) legacy of social and economic decline. The PPP/C must continue to outline and publicise these early benefits it brought to ordinary people, where necessary. I do not intend to embellish the trail here with numerous statistics on these benefits. But the PPP/C will have to act now to inspire voters to sing the song of achievements that will have to go beyond the early benefits brought to the people. The PPP/C already has alleviated the concerns people had in 1992 and some years beyond and the people have acknowledged this improvement.
And so talking and impressing people about these early benefits will not have the penetrative capacity to enlist voters to your camp, as improvements produced by the benefits, are by this time a done deal. Such improvements have alleviated many concerns. And since people’s concerns have been resolved, they may have zero motivation to listen to the same song that obliterated the early apprehensions.
Nevertheless, there may be other concerns aching the people, but these concerns invariably are not unrelated to their previous concerns. These concerns are extensions of their previous concerns, and the PPP/C continues to address many such new concerns amid serious gridlock and blockages from the combined Opposition A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the AFC; consider APNU and AFC’s contributions to the termination of the Amaila Hydropower project, and the slowing down of several other public capital investment projects, major conduits for job creation.
Nonetheless, the PPP/C may have to compose a different song on a different platform and sing it vociferously to gain the attention and secure the motivation of ordinary people. Composition of this different song should not be difficult, as the PPP/C has a lot going for it; and, especially, as the PPP/C’s working-class story is yet to be told.
Reference:
World Bank. 1994. Guyana
Strategies for Reducing Poverty [Online]. Available: http://www-wds.worldbank.org/servlet/WDSContentServer/WDSP/IB/1994/05/06/000009265_3961006053648/Rendered/PDF/multi0page.pdf [Accessed November 1, 2014.