Dear Editor,
Since A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) proposed the need for a new social contract on January 3, there has been a barrage of misinformed and distracting criticism from PPP/C officials and the usual PPP/C apologists. This is not surprising. The import, merit and relevance of APNU’s fundamental proposal are far reaching, socially and politically relevant, and well conceived. And, opposition critics will naturally criticise.
Such criticisms, from those who habitually accuse the opposition of lacking ideas, may result from a basic misunderstanding of an intellectually impressive idea or, more likely, from a desire to debunk a proposal from APNU, that would actually work to make Guyana a better place.
The idea of a social contract is very simple and easy to understand.
Members of a society agree to give up some rights, such as the right to kill a person who offends them, so that the society will function in an orderly manner. These personal ‘rights’ are given to the state or government which agrees to protect the citizens. A social contract is supposed to be a fair exchange, with each side, the citizen and the state, honouring their respective obligations.
APNU’s call for a new social contract is both timely, relevant and, perhaps, born of necessity. The ruling PPP/C regime is failing on all fronts to honour its end of the deal or contract.
Crime is spiralling out of control; unemployment and poverty are rampant; citizens must resort to protests and strikes to obtain a reasonable wage; and the PPP/C insists on continuing the politics of confrontation, in a political reality where they are the minority representatives of the citizens.
Clearly, things are not going well.
In other words, the citizens have surrendered many rights, and the PPP/C regime is not providing the services which it is contractually obligated to deliver.
The APNU proposal is simple. The ruling regime must completely rethink its approach. All stakeholders must be involved in the decision-making process, since we all are part of society and our future is at stake. The ruling regime must engage citizens, civil society, political representatives, business organisations and other private sector entities, trade unions, students and other Guyanese.
The PPP/C regime must realise that it no longer has a majority mandate, and must act accordingly; the political opposition must be appropriately recognised. The National Assembly must be respected and the constitution must be obeyed.
The ruling elite must engage the workers and their union representatives, instead of imposing arbitrary wages on public servants, in an arrogant manner, dismissive of their living standards and individual needs.
The Minister of Home Affairs and PPP/C columnists, try as they might, cannot rebut the position that a new social order is desperately needed. They cannot distract Guyanese from the current reality. After all, we are reminded of our sad situation every time our homes are invaded by bandits; every time we must purchase water, even though we pay water bills. We are faced with the need for a new social contract whenever we must buy candles, even though we pay for electricity. When we must grill our windows, we are reminded of the failure of the security forces. The list goes on.
As APNU articulated, we need co-operation between government and citizens. We require sustainable development instead of waste and squandermania. We must have systems for developing the talents and skills of our citizens, and we must have a government that holds up its end of the bargain.
We, the citizens of Guyana, have our part to play in making a new social contract effective. We expect that the government will honour its part. And since the current arrangement is obviously not working in our interest, APNU was absolutely right in demanding a new, different and effective approach to the relationship between the citizens and the Government of Guyana.
Yours faithfully,
Mark DaCosta
