What does a country in crisis look like? Let's look at only at a few images of crisis.

A country in crisis does not have fundamental civil rights, like freedom of expression, freedom of movement, freedom of assembly, etc.

A country in crisis does not have a positive economic growth rate, an increase in per capita income, and increased tax-free allowances.

A country in crisis does not have good education and health outcomes.

A country in crisis does not have a low to moderate debt burden and a stable exchange rate of its currency.

Guyana can boast of having all the aforementioned.

Therefore, Guyana is not in crisis.

Consider the great debt burden, devaluation of the currency, extremely high real interest rates, a credit squeeze, and spiralling interest rate, inflation and speculative trading activities, etc., that accompanied the People's Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) Administration in 1992.

Review how the PPP/C has provided, in some cases, substantial remedies for the country's social and economic ills.

THE GREAT DEBT BURDEN
Further, we need to really understand how a poor country services a foreign debt in excess of US$2 billion and the consequences of coping with a large debt. The PPP/C inherited this debt in 1992.

Servicing this debt required 105% of the Government's current revenue; this servicing of the foreign debt was reduced to 90% of current revenue in 1993.

Sir Alister McIntyre in his 1989 report for the Commonwealth Study Group said that Guyana's high debt service ratio was inconsistent with sustained economic growth. The implication is that many programmes for sustained human development were sacrificed at the altar of pruning the national debt.

Preliminary estimates in 2002 place the total foreign debt at US$1.2 billion, reduced from US$2 billion.

Due to adequate management of the debt burden, today education constitutes 17.2% of the Budget, health 8% of the Budget.

These are significant developments compared to the entire social services consuming a mere 8% in 1992.

Given that Guyana has experienced real positives in the economy, why is this attempt to shut down the country?

Some semblance of an answer to the shutdown on Wednesday and today may very well lie with the opposition's campaign of hostility against the People's Progressive Party (PPP) Government in the 1961-64 era.

THE 1961-64 DESTABILISING FACTORS
Clive Thomas once referred to the previous regime's terms in office as having produced a crisis in all sectors of society.

This country certainly is nowhere near a Thomas' crisis dimension, despite sustained attempts by some forces to destabilise the society.

These destabilising factors are quite similar to the 1961-1964 period.

The PPP in 1961 won 20 of the 35 seats, People's National Congress (PNC)

11, and United Force (UF) 4. The PNC then orchestrated a campaign of hostility.

This campaign, to name only a few elements, included numerous election petitions against PPP candidates, squatting by Burnham and other PNC legislators in front of the gates of the Public Buildings to prevent the Governor from entering, and hostile and violent protests, and riots and fire in 1962, under the ruse of the PPP Budget embodying new taxation provisions.

The opposition's aim was to destabilise the society, in order to remove the Government.

Anyway, what was so bothersome about the budget?

Nicholas Kaldor, a Cambridge University Economist, recommended the budgetary provisions.

The PNC and its allies asserted that the budget would reduce disposable income due to the tax burden on workers. Estimates suggested that the cost-of-living index would have experienced an increase of only one per cent that was less than the advantages to be gained from the overall development programme to which the budget was attuned.

The Kaldor Budget attempted to end the outflow of capital, eliminate tax loopholes, stop tax evasion, and impose taxes on capital gains, gifts, and net wealth.

The tax system then was prejudicial to the advantage of the wealthy and to the disadvantage of the poor. The Kaldor Budget intended to correct this deficiency.

Clearly, the PNC opposition and its allies used the budget as an excuse to destabilise the country.

This ploy to bring down the PPP Government was attempted again in the next year.

In 1963, the ruse for the campaign of hostility was the Labour Relations Bill.

This Bill was fairly similar to the one introduced in 1953 when Burnham was part of the PPP Government. The Bill, among its provisions, catered for a secret ballot of workers through which the union securing a majority would eventually become the recognised and official union.

The 80-day strike called by the TUC followed with participation from the PNC, the UF and business enterprises, and was tainted with violence and numerous incitements to racial hatred.

I refer to the 1961-64 period because the campaign of hostility against the

PPP Government was primarily aimed at bringing down that Administration.

Is the current campaign against the PPP/C Government any different today?

The Guyanese people will decide.

THE PRIVATE SECTOR COMMISSION
The Private Sector Commission's Annual Report for 2001 noted that Guyana's economy is performing satisfactorily, despite the impact of the post-elections violence on the economy.

The report said, "...Guyana's economy has been hard-hit by some negative outcomes...These hardships include floods, dry weather, unstable political climate, low foreign direct investment (FDI), and a few financial problems.

"However, despite the few negative happenings in our economy, Guyana's economy has shown some positive signs..."

The Private Sector Commission, among other bodies, points to some positives in the economy.

How then is Guyana in a crisis? Many sectors in the country are just fine.

GOVERNMENT'S CRIME-FIGHTING MEASURES
However, the current crime wave has dominated the thinking of Guyanese, and is destroying a sense of the distance they have travelled in pursuit of excellence in nation building. What is the reality?

Since February 23, 2002, a total of 55 persons have been killed, 13 law enforcement officers and 42 civilians. This is an unwarranted situation.

What has the PPP/C Government done?

Whatever is being done will never be enough so long as the crime wave continues.

The Government's crime-fighting initiatives announced on June 7, this year, include the following:

** A complete reform of the Intelligence Sector is under way.

** A specialised training centre, focusing on modern anti-crime tactics and methods, for Police and other law enforcement personnel, will be set up.

** A special crime unit modelled on the 'SWAT Team' will soon become a reality.

** Community policing groups now have a committed unit within the

Guyana Police Force for the purposes of funding, equipment, etc.

** Amendments to the crime laws have been passed.

** The issuance of gun licences is being fast-tracked, especially for the business community.

Currently, there are joint Police-Army task forces involved in intelligence gathering and special operations.

The Army personnel assist the Police in working the highways, villages and backlands.

The process of National Consultations on Crime, involving the major stakeholders, is now completed.

The results of these consultations will further inform and enhance the strategy and methods of law enforcement.

POLITICAL LINK TO THE CRIMINALITY
Amid the Government's attempts at crime fighting, we should not lose sight of the perception that there is some political link to the current criminality, and indeed, this compounds the criminal problem.

However, the Guyanese people need to see the crime scenario in all its linkages and manifestations. A few examples are:

1. A senior People's National Congress Reform (PNC/R) central

executive member said that it "is in the business of trying to get the

government of the day out of office. There is nothing wrong with any

statements which say that as an opposition party, we are attempting to

remove the government."

2. A national newspaper headline read, "Raphael Trotman had sparked furore when he had declared that the PNC/R should take responsibility for the July 3 invasion of the Office of the President."

3. The 'kith and kin' politics, referring to African ethnicity, was used by the PNC/R Leader at the 1997 election.

4. Jerome Khan, a PNC/R Member of Parliament, cited the case of a senior ranking person of the PNC/R, as suggesting that attacks against East Indians will produce positive outcomes.

5. The statement by the PNC/R of making the country ungovernable still is being utilised.

6. Use of the 'slow fire, more fire' phrase by the PNC/R during the last election campaign.

7. "Shaka lives" and "Five For Freedom" leaflets inciting violence against Guyanese. The "Shaka lives" pamphlet sees the five bandits as heroes while the "Five For Freedom" leaflet indicates that the bandits have targeted all Government officials, police officers, and their families.

8. There is evidence of a PNC/R electoral candidate for the 2001 election inciting violence.

9. Information on other aspects of domestic terrorism (see GINA Website).

Further, a GINA online pilot opinion poll shows that when people are asked whether there is a political link to the upsurge in crime, 44 said 'Yes' and 11 responded with 'No'.

Again, on the question whether the media have contributed to an increase in crime, 12 respondents said 'Yes' and four said 'No'.

While there is limited scientific precision in this poll, we still need to further review this political link to criminality.

SHUTDOWN, A DESTABILISING FACTOR
The Government is vigorously addressing the Guyana crime issue, and at the same time factoring the political link, among others, in the resolution process.

Shutting down the country only exacerbates the crime wave, and such irrational and illogical action plays right into the hands of those hell bent on bringing down a democratically-elected Government.

This sort of action happened before, as the campaign of hostility against the PPP Government in 1962 and 1963, demonstrates.