The USAID-funded $300m Leadership and Democracy (LEAD) project to be implemented by the International Republican Institute (IRI) will be of great value, according to Opposition Leader David Granger
Granger, also leader of A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) was speaking to reporters yesterday on the government’s rejection of the project on the grounds that it was insufficiently consulted.
Cabinet Secretary Dr Roger Luncheon has led the government’s charge on this matter and severely criticized United States Ambassador to Guyana Brendt Hardt after he said that the administration had been adequately consulted. Luncheon accused Hardt of challenging Guyana’s sovereignty after the Ambassador said that the project would go ahead. .
Granger made it clear to the media that he does not know of the level of consultation held between the government and the US, because “the US is saying that adequate consultation was undertaken while the other side (Guyana’s government) is saying that this is not the case.
“Obviously if it is a government to government matter the US should ensure that the Government of Guyana is aware of what is taking place,” he shared. He also said that it is equally important that this project gets implemented considering the amount of benefits its holds in store for the Guyanese people.
He said that APNU has had some amount of interaction with the IRI during which the coalition pointed out that there exists a lot of room for improvement with the public information aspect of local government elections, and suggested that public awareness and education be a main component of the project.
Granger said that the electoral system required for the elections, which Local Government Minister Ganga Persaud says will occur next year, is quite complex, and that since many young people were born after the last of such elections were held in 1994, a deficiency of information exists and must be corrected.
“People simply do not know enough…there are so many provisions that need careful explanation and our advice to the IRI and the USAID was that emphasis be placed on public education,” Granger explained. He said that the need for public education is what spurred the coalition to mount such a programme for young people in Anna Regina, and added that this was accomplished with the help of the IRI. Granger says that APNU sees the work proposed by the IRI as holding a lot of potential for bolstering the quality of democracy in Guyana.
In fact, he said that the government’s claims against it are an attempt to create a smokescreen so that it can continue to prevent help from coming to people who need the information the most. “We are being starved for information (but) the more information we get about the local government process the better,” Granger told reporters.
On Thursday, the Alliance for Change reiterated its backing for the project, arguing that “any effort which improves the participation of a broader cross section of the population in the decision making process of the country is not only welcomed but necessary”.
Noting the government’s opposition to the project, the party said “…what could be the justification in not wanting to support a project as this which has increased participation of the citizenry in democracy building, consensus building in the National Assembly, funding for research and legal drafting skills for Parliamentarians, women and youth civic education festivals, and local government education and awareness? It could only be the downgrading of participatory democracy and the abandoning of a once loudly heralded PPP goal `No Development without Democracy’”
The government has since written a formal protest to the US State Department. On Tuesday Luncheon said: “The note verbale is to the State Department. You don’t try Caesar in Caesar’s court. This note verbale goes to the State Department. It does not go to the Ambassador…he has to seriously consider what he is going to answer…what response. That is going to be seen as official US policy. Whatever they put in that note verbale in response to ours will be the US policy”.
Luncheon has said that the government is opposed to the project providing financial support for political parties, although the ambassador has said that there would be no funding to political parties. Another area of concern, Luncheon says, is that the project would support activities for the formulation of policies that may lead to constitutional reform. But, when asked if government’s concerns were relayed to the project head he said that government reserves the right to accept or refuse a project without giving reasons.
The LEAD project covers a wide scope of activities from boosting citizens’ engagement with local parliamentarians and education on recently-passed local government reform legislation to assistance for parliamentarians in legislative research and drafting of laws.
