Dear Editor,
I have had an opportunity to carefully study the President’s 104 word letter to Mr Granger in which he states that he stands “prepared to meet”, to “initiate steps” since there was still an “opportunity” provided by the prorogation to still have the 10th Parliament” “discuss” and “conclude” those issues.
He is referring here to the “unaddressed many important issues of the day” that a defeat on the no-confidence vote would have left hanging. The basic thrust of the President’s letter is a preparedness to meet to “conclude” the issues which the government wants concluded. Nothing else.
Clearly, the government is interested only in its agenda – Amaila, Anti-Money Laundering amendments, supplementary spending, Telecoms bill, etc, and has no intention of moving on critical issues like the Procurement Commission, local government elections, unauthorized spending, NICIL, Bai Shanlin, Marriott, former President’s uncapped benefits, CJIA/China secret deal, corruption, etc, which led in the first place to the opposition tabling the no-confidence motion, having justifiably lost all confidence in the government.
The letter characterizes the stubbornness of the government to always have its way, not to compromise, behaving as if it secured a majority at the last election, seeking to ram down people’s throats its will.
Clearly in the PPP old habits die hard, and they have proven incapable of rising to the challenge of the new situation opting for arrogance instead of consensus, bullyism instead of dialogue.
Suddenly, there is a lot of insincere talk about dialogue since the opposition stood its ground. The President’s letter to Mr Granger once again confirms this mindset but in softer, subtler, ambiguous language although the basic message remains the same: ‘We want our issues concluded; your issues can go to hell.’
Any solution to the present crisis must include a willingness to put all issues from both sides on the table, to fix a firm date for reconvening parliament, say January, 5, 2015 and to use this period to attempt to resolve all issues preferably facilitated by a group of independent, skilled Guyanese mediators.
All of this is still possible. I am sure that there are other ideas around to end the deadlock.
Yours faithfully,
Ramon Gaskin