Dear Editor,
Guyana is not unique in having among its population persons who, one day can be quite rational, and seemingly even progressive, yet occasionally these very folks set off into unreasonableness and flights of sheer fancy. Such may be the case of a tirade by Mr Ramon Gaskin as he rushed to judgment with his robust penmanship into Georgetown municipal matters. I have always admired Mr Gaskin’s zeal and advocacy.
However, on this question of the Town Clerk (ag) and the Mayor and Councillors he is off kilter, most likely due to a total misunderstanding of the deeper and relevant issues affecting the internal workings of the Georgetown Mayor and City Council and the impact of the present outmoded, sick local government legislation still operating in a purported modern democratic state.
Indeed responsible local and international organizations are appalled that since the widely proclaimed return to democracy in 1992, Guyana has failed to put in place a viable local government system. In other words there is need for an up-to-date mechanism of real shared governance ‒ after all this is the strength of a true democracy ‒ a happy movement away from the existing imperial-like control; a system whereby the elected leaders in their respective communities are allowed to share ideas, mobilize resources and initiate programmes to release the creative energies of citizens, in particular our youth.
The failure to do this for an entire generation, to help put to Parliament modern local government legislation is a disgrace and embarrassment to a country that celebrated forty-seven years of independence a few days ago.
The casual observer cannot help getting the feeling that we are quite comfortable with total central government control and ministerial domination over every facet of our lives, in every community. The very idea of sharing at any level seems anathema to Guyana; if so this is a curse upon our lands.
Looking at the city situation, what is our democracy saying? Since the elections of 2011 in spite of a shared optimism by the majority to see changes, it looks as though it is bully business as usual; how very sad.
Mr Royston King, the Public Relations Officer gave an erudite reply to Mr Gaskin which was published in Stabroek News of May 25, titled ‘It is not the fault of the Georgetown Mayor and Councillors that they are still in place.’ In that carefully written letter the PRO drew attention to the role of the Town Clerk as Secretary of the Council, who has certain duties, encased by protocols, law and time-honoured tradition. The Town Clerk is therefore subordinate to the elected Mayor and Councillors. In Georgetown therein lies the basic big problem: apparently with the compliments of ministerial fiat, this acting Town Clerk feels she is way above the Mayor and Councillors, certainly not subordinate to them. But beyond this, in a letter to the Minister dated May 3, 2013, I made this observation, that is provable, that the above attitude is heightened by what seems to be a difficulty with truth. But then this behaviour may well be in accordance with a policy residing with a higher authority and extant state policy.
In so far as the capital is concerned, this translates to a denial of the rights of voters in Georgetown who when elections for the City Council were held, gave the PPP government only 27%, so we have 27% in the city dictating to the overwhelming 73% majority. The acting Town Clerk is the instrument of this undemocratic exercise, where, for example, the 73% identified who should be the Chief Executive Officer but the minority government decided otherwise, and this painfully is the pattern.
Our system allows for just over a quarter to rule, and I mean imperial-style rule over the 73% plus ‒nearly 3/4 ‒ who did not support the incumbent PPP party. The WPO public support for Ms Sooba exposed this injustice.
Therein lies the great contradiction – an unacceptable state of affairs. The Mayor represents the great majority but must be made to be subordinate to an insubordinate, rude bureaucrat, at the behest of a minority government.
In recent letters I reminded the Minister of these things and asked how is it possible for the acting Town Clerk to openly defy his (the Minister) request and recommendation, that she withdraw an insubordinate memo (the Minister’s words, not mine). After barefacedly saying she will have to consider his request, which was intended to pave the way for a harmonious relationship, the good lady has neither withdrawn the offending memo nor apologized, again as requested by the Minister in the presence of senior ministry officials. This example is but the tip of the iceberg.
The big question is where is her ‘spunk’ coming from? Mr King’s letter deals with the fundamentals of law and good governance. The acting Town Clerk shows a total disdain and disrespect for the duly elected representatives of the people and the Minister seems not concerned. Our patience is being stretched.
The question is that it is this government that handpicked this lady who is now behind this crusade to undermine the 73% gained at the Georgetown City Council elections. The 27% must run roughshod over the 73% majority, that is the situation at City Hall. This last week efforts to meet with the Minister were unsuccessful. As recently as Tuesday, May 28, at 10am, without even the courtesy of letting the Mayor know, the Minister summoned to his office the Town Clerk and senior officers to discuss matters which were not urgent and clearly ought to handled by the Mayor; one was a story about racial profiling. This was a classic case of micro-management, but the state media finds it so very easy to blame the Mayor and Councillors for all of the city’s ills, while decisions are made between the Town Clerk and Minister in the latter’s office.
This is so very easy; control money and management then blame the elected Mayor and Councillors – but we have no intention to surrender.
Finally this is an open plea to those who now rule. At the flag-raising ceremony our Head of State asked for political trust since it is necessary to bridge differences so as to move the country nearer to its goals. We all must agree; these are lofty, noble words. The old folks say “hand wash han mek han come clean.” Surely President Ramotar must know the opposition and all Guyanese are not only willing but anxious to reach these laudable goals, but his group must be reasonable. I can offer a few measures all very easy: appoint an Ombudsman; establish a Public Procurement Commission; fund the Office of the Leader of the Opposition so it can carry out its responsibilities; allow the elected Mayor and Councillors with the appropriate support to manage the capital without an obstinate officer. The President should conform to the example by deeds, not declarations.
Finally, the late Leader of the PPP, Dr Cheddi Jagan fought all his life against imperial-like domination and arrogance. If the President and Cabinet wish to truly honour his memory they can start with the nation’s capital. If they are truly wedded to the values of democracy, the high ideals of local governance, then let the 73% manage the city and not an acting bureaucrat who seems to have the total support of those who represent 27% of voters – an absurdity and a shame.
If the words at the flag-raising are to be taken seriously let them begin by a conversation with the Mayor and Councillors. After 18 odd months the President has not yet found the time to engage the city leadership ‒ ‘wa mouth na load’ ‒ or action speaks louder than words. Free us from undemocratic forces, and uplift true democracy.
Yours faithfully,
Hamilton Green
Mayor
