Government by remote control?Frankly Speaking...........
The caption immediately above might be somewhat misleading, as I am not suggesting merely that the business of administering government business is being executed from afar, or by a Cabinet, executive and Parliament not with hands-on authority, or by absentee officials, indirectly. Rather, I am suggesting that, by grand design, intimidation and menace, the major Minority Party, certain trade unions and pressure groups and fronts are contriving to wrest control from the elected representatives, usurp the authority of the State and "govern" from the streets and from not-too-distant places. Follow me now as I ramble meaningfully - though in a not-too-cohesive sequence. Recall Cheddi Jagan saying, in his rustic, characteristic, undiplomatic, don't-care-a-damn manner, that (a) the PPP/Civic won political power, but that the opposition, in Georgetown and in many ministries, seemed to retain bureaucratic power, and (b) that "the IMF" runs Guyana. However crudely put, the late Doctor's words of wisdom should not have been, nor should not be dismissed easily. Nothing is really secret or confidential in government ministries with crucial functions or negotiations being easily compromised or sabotaged. And ever since Mr Burnham mortgaged this country, through loans from the multilateral financial institutions - and even Trinidad - resulting in huge debts, it might not be an exaggeration to say that foreign entities and governments exert great influence if not control. A weak or scared government attracts bullyism from the wrong-and-strong. An incompetent or inefficient or dishonest administration invites manipulation and breeds the contempt of its foes. So that those who were not elected nor can ever win majority mandates, champion the causes of minorities, "the poor and the dispossessed" and seek to influence or direct the course of government activities. Of course it helps that these are the days of "inclusionary democracy", "consulative democracy" and "power-sharing". I conclude by stretching it a bit perhaps when I put the following to you: it's government by remote control when vendors and squatters ignore and defy central or local government authorities and do as they wish illegally; it's government by remote control when strikers usurp non-strikers' rights and one set of workers are denied their right to work; it's remote-control government when too much inclusion, participation and influence results in non-government agencies re-directing government expenditure. And when certain leaders and organisers influence, control or compromise the authority and role of the country's security forces! Even if you think I'm being extreme or ridiculous - don't dismiss these views. Just ask yourself constantly: who's responsible, who's running the ship, who's in charge? (Who faced the electorate?)
Respect, Mr Hoyte... I respect you, for example, as a past president of the Republic; as leader of the Parliamentary opposition; as leader of the PNC; as president-general of the Guyana Labour Union; as senior counsel, attorney for Faith Harding, MP; as patron of the Bartica regatta and Linden football competitions. As a matter of fact, you are still a sort of parallel president to your PNC members and supporters and protesters. You do command respect. That is why, respectfully, I appeal to you not to lessen your stature, by pandering to the "populist" demand or image, by denigrating your political opponents in unsavoury language at your meetings and rallies and demonstrations. At the rally at your 1763 Square this Tuesday, there was no alleged would-be assassin to be beaten bloody this time. But you were so personal in besmirching Janet Jagan, Sam Hinds, Jagdeo, Fung-On, Luncheon and Xavier that it bordered on the vulgar. Yes, you wish to connect to your Georgetown "masses", but you are being so "out-of-character" with this personal abuse. I suggest that you leave the vulgar descriptions of "Jagdeo and Janet" or "Luncheon and Fung-On" to your protesters and trade union advisers. Statesman-like, you continue to expose the government's broken promises of say, 1995. Bitterness ages people. And you become a PPP - a "Perpetuator" of Polarised Peoples. If a cop dies Or should I write "when a policeman is killed"? It occurs to me that the calls and campaigns against our overworked, underpaid police force can one day result in the death of some responsible law enforcer. I don't deny that there are isolated cases of corrupt or inefficient cops behaving unprofessionally. Or that there are a few genuine instances of excesses or brutality. But, frankly speaking, I have witnessed police being cool under aggressive harassment and law-breaking recently. Even as policemen need better pay too, they strain to do their job fairly. Now it is being suggested that policemen, under siege or fire from professional demonstrators, should not even defend themselves. Can you imagine the consequences of the disbanding of the Quick Reaction or TSU squads? Mob-rule and criminals would hold us to ransom! Poor Commissioner Lewis. He has a challenging assignment keeping his policemen impartial and professional against the background of GPSU president Patrick Yarde threatening "civil disobedience" as an extension of industrial action and Desmond Hoyte declaring that "this is the last time the police will be allowed to fire upon people without an adequate response" - or words very near to those. Poor police! Media mischief on TV I've been influenced to repeat the item which revealed the humorous/destructive nature of some TV programmes. There is this morning TV programme which tends to be partially political. That is its right. It has about ten regulars who call in to say regular things. That's their right. (Except that sometimes the comments are vicious, libellous, even treasonable). However a few Fridays ago, the technician slipped up! He was quite audible in alerting a regular that "you're on next, get ready, you're on, now..." Oh-oh fellow. Then two Fridays ago, before the poor host could caution a female regular who was annoyed with Joey Jagan's visit to the GPSU, the regular declared: "I don't truss' e. De only good coolie is a dead coolie". Poor host. Can't really be blamed for the views of his regulars. Other stations, most likely, arrange priority for their regulars to be heard too. I'm told that on another show, a regular claimed that a mini-bus with Indo-Guyanese tried to run her vehicle off a Berbice highway. Ravi Dev defends "Indian" concerns on Channel Six and an ex-GTV hunk destroys and rapes acceptable pronounciation and English generally. A pro-PNC Evening Newscast pleases the faithful ignoring any governmental thing positive. But I have a tiny suggestion: What about one phone-line for regulars on certain show and another separate phone for others?
Here's hoping
1. That the strike has ended `till next week!! 
|