An atmosphere that could help to effectively curb the murderous armed bandits now on a rampage in this land, and posing the greatest ever post-independence challenge to the competence and integrity of the law enforcing agencies.

Only his most biased and bitter political foes, among them "tele-activists", whose flouting of the laws must soon come to an end, in the interest of racial harmony and national security, may claim that goodwill and anxiety to engage in structured dialogues have been lacking on the part of President Bharrat Jagdeo's administration.

In contrast, the PNC/Reform has been making a virtue of its policy of disengagement and non-cooperation, designed to foster a climate of political destabilisation.

It is refusing to meet and work out new approaches to resume the dialogue process, boycotting sittings of parliament, issuing threats that further poison social/political relations. Last Friday's unlawful blocking of the gates of Parliament was most deplorable.

Worse, the PNC/R continues with its anti-Police attacks while failing to deal with elements within its own ranks who, it should know, have been engaging in dangerous, illegal acts, including hatred-pamphleteering to give comfort to fugitives from justice wanted for murder and armed robberies.

It should be recognised by any objective, impartial observer of the current political situation in this country that what distinguishes statements by Mr. Jagdeo from those of Mr. Hoyte, is the clarity and specificities on the dialogue process, the progress achieved and problems yet to be resolved, normally forthcoming from the President, in contrast to claims by the Opposition Leader.

Nevertheless, it is time for both leaders to cease the verbal tango and meet again, in a determined mood to foster a climate conducive to resolving outstanding issues and enhancing efforts at national unity and orderly development. This could influence a climate to encourage both local and foreign investors, as well as inspire further and much-needed assistance from friendly governments and the international financial institutions.

They should be assisted by civil society in resuming the dialogue and promoting an atmosphere that could inspire the populace at large in helping to arrest the frightening crime wave.

In Trinidad and Tobago, as in Jamaica, civil society, including leading business, labour unions and religious representatives, have been involved in the promotion of dialogue at the highest levels on matters pertaining to governance and dealing with criminality.

There seemed to have been more success in the case of Jamaica, where new general election is expected before yearend, than in neighbouring Trinidad and Tobago that mirrors some of the very racial/political problems of Guyana.

What is important is the fact that civil society representatives in those CARICOM states have shown more active interest, more commitment in exercising initiatives for the political leaders to meet and decide on policies and programmes in the national interest than has so far been the experience here in Guyana.

Indeed, in contrast to the positions adopted by leading unions in Trinidad and Tobago, for instance, the public stance of the leadership of the Guyana Trades Union Council has been, to say the least, most unhelpful.

Yet, there remains hope for shifts in positions and attitudes all around - by the governing and opposition parties, the private sector, trade unions, religious and other representative bodies to engage in new moves to help in advancing the way forward.

For their part, the Guyana Police Force stands in desperate need to deliver some progress in their hunt for the five fugitives from justice and their collaborators in crime, including the 'Andrew Douglas' TV show and distribution of that dangerous, illegal pamphlet.