Resuming dialogue
Editorial
Stabroek News
April 2, 1999
The efforts of civil society to get dialogue going again
are timely and welcome. A delegation comprising
representatives of the private sector, the unions, the
consumer groups and the churches met Mr Desmond
Hoyte, the leader of the People's National Congress
(PNC) on Wednesday and discussed a number of
matters with him and other senior PNC representatives
The same delegation is scheduled to meet Mrs Janet
Jagan, the leader of the People's Progressive Party
(PPP) next week.
On March l9 the appointment of the facilitator Mr
Maurice King expired. The donors have since indicated
a willingness to fund his re-appointment until July and
have raised the suggestion that his terms of reference
should be strengthened. Perhaps that could be
negotiated by the Caricom Secretariat and the donors
with the PPP and the PNC. It is certainly desirable that
Mr King be given increased powers to help him push
and steer the dialogue and to enable him to raise
constitutional issues for discussion. The first terms of
reference reduced him almost to the role of a notetaker
and were not conducive to a vibrant dialogue.
The dialogue process has been in cold storage for two
weeks since the abortive meeting between Mrs Jagan
and Mr Hoyte. The PNC has withdrawn its demand for
an apology by Dr Luncheon for his remarks about
unequal status and have indicated that they will accept a
withdrawal of the remarks. However they had
requested that they be allowed to vet the wording and
this has not been agreed. A dialogue could, of course,
have been resumed informally without the facilitator and
pending his re-appointment. But in fact all talks have
ceased.
Civil society is admirably placed to tackle these issues.
It can surely craft a form of words for Dr Luncheon that
both sides would accept when it meets Mrs Jagan. It
can also discuss the broadening of the facilitator's terms
of reference and outline some of the issues it feels can
be dealt with in the dialogue. The delegation represents
many of the important organised interests in the society
and its united voice should be heard. Indeed it may
even wish to offer compromise suggestions on some of
the issues that have been occupying the two parties
such as the composition of land allocation committees
and representation on state boards.
Civil society had earlier proposed that the dialogue
should be expanded to include representatives of civil
society. It may well have raised this with Mr Hoyte.
Whether that is accepted by the two parties or not civil
society can continue to play an important role as an
intermediary which can supplement the work of the
facilitator particularly when an impasse has arisen on a
particular issue. It should seek to have this principle
recognised.
It is in the interest of the nation that dialogue be
resumed as soon as possible and in a more structured
form. Civil society should continue to play a part.
|