It is difficult at this time to press on with normal life oblivious to the fact that thousands of Guyanese remain inundated by black, contaminated water. Having been out of the country when the waters rose, I will not pretend to be one of the many experts on the conservancy dam, on weather patterns, or on the drainage systems of Guyana like many have become overnight. I will not point fingers of blame at any quarter because to do so right now would be dishonest except to say that in my estimation based on what I have seen and heard, what we face is a combination of negligence and nature combined to deliver a wallop like none before. At the end of this the Government must be brave enough to commission an enquiry into why this happened and most importantly, to make recommendations to ensure that it never happens again, but if it does, that there is an action plan that can immediately be put in place.
It is bewildering why after the destruction witnessed in Grenada, Cuba and Jamaica late last year there appears to be no master plan for disaster response in Guyana. If there is any known natural disaster that threatens Guyana it is flooding caused by breaches of the sea defence or of the drainage and irrigation system. Given the fact that half of the population occupies a narrow strip of land on the coast it would be impossible to believe that there was no plan to deal with a scenario such as this. There are many persons who have adopted a philosophical outlook on the crisis saying that this is nature's work and cannot be controlled, others say it is God's intervention based on prophesy for our sinning ways. I will never discount the strength and purpose of either possibility but still I believe that somewhere within the series of events which unfolded, there was some human failure, which could be considered negligent or reckless. Because I believe that we must ground ourselves in reality and find answers not only in the book of Revelations and in the Spanish twins El Nino and La Nina, we must find some answers which can only come from a proper investigation. This investigation or inquiry must be comprised of professionals and be given a strict time frame within which to operate because we cannot wait forever for a report knowing that more rains are coming in May.
The inquiry must answer certain questions including:
1. Was there a failure of the East Coast Conservancy?
2. Can the failure if any be attributed to negligence in its construction and/or maintenance?
3. Were the consequences of heavy rainfall known to some in advance, and if so, by whom and when?
4. Did the drainage system of Georgetown contribute to the problem?
5. Should Georgetown's drainage be taken out of the control of the City Council?
6. Did the Civil Defence Commission fail to mobilize and respond expeditiously, and if so why, and did this lead to the President having to establish a command structure at his residence?
7. Was there a national action plan in place for disaster management and relief and did it fail, and if so why?
8. Why was the relief effort managed more by politicians than by experts trained and experienced in the area of disaster response and management and did this in any way affect the response capability?
9. What is the likelihood of the present conditions occurring again in the near future?
10. Should the drainage and irrigation system for the coast be re-examined and re-configured?
11. Should certain vital aspects of our daily existence including important institutions and communities be relocated and to where?
12. How much aid was received by the Government and other organizations, from whom, and how was it distributed?
13. Will compensation be offered to persons affected?
Unless we have a thorough and transparent investigation this matter will become a bigger political football than it already is. There is no political mileage to be scored from the suffering of thousands and this is why it is hoped that there will be a toning down of the rhetoric and the blame-throwing coming from all sides. I have been into areas of every sort and all that I have seen is suffering which has affected everyone equally and it therefore bothers me to see the degree to which this crisis has become political. In many places that I went to I heard the lament that nothing had been received whilst others openly spoke of discrimination in the manner of distribution. Generally, people are tired and frustrated and need to know the truth about what happened and what lies ahead for them. People need at this time proper and responsible leadership.
The leaders of the nation and the people would do well to look at the way in which other countries united in times of disaster. There are many persons and organizations who have worked tirelessly and unselfishly during this process and I believe that at an appropriate time, the state should honour them, though it seems that the awarding of national honours has now become a thing of the past. This disaster is a crucible for Guyana and we will either emerge better off or permanently divided. The outcome rests in the hands of very few persons.
I would be failing in my moral duty if before I closed I did not make mention of the recent ban placed on Channel 6. The government has behaved true to its horrible form in using the opening created by a national crisis to go after one of its most strident critics. The manner in which it is done tells that this is not only unconstitutional but also immoral and begs the question who next? I believe that solidarity has to be shown for Mr. Sharma and Channel 6 television, and every television station should offer him airtime until this issue is resolved.
The internationalization of the issue must also be paramount and the Guyana Press Association and its members should spearhead this drive. Sharma may have a "big mouth" and talks out of turn but who hasn't. These faux pas pale in comparison with the thousands who have benefited directly or indirectly from his work or to whom a desperate plea was given vent. None can deny him a place at the table of equals. I hope that his resolve is strengthened and that he gains more than one seat at the next elections as vindication for his work and the obstacles he has had to surmount.