There are some general truths about tertiary education that apply everywhere, the primary one being that you cannot get a decent university on the cheap. That, however, is exactly what the government has been trying to do for the last two decades, and it is the main reason why the institution which Dr Cheddi Jagan created is in the mess it is.
In a somewhat ill-timed letter in our edition yesterday, Mr Hydar Ally, ever gushing about the PPP’s achievements and upbeat about its plans, described the Bank of Guyana and UG as “transformative projects.” The late Dr Jagan, he wrote, was “very passionate about Guyana having its own national institutions to drive the development process,” and “today both [BoG and UG] have become pivotal to our development.” The Bank of Guyana is in an entirely different category from the university, of course, but as far as the latter institution is concerned, his remarks went on record at a time when the staff had been on a ‘sit in’ for a week over wages and salaries following the breakdown of negotiations.
Perhaps Mr Ally hadn’t been to the Turkeyen campus for a long time, and was also unaware of the deteriorated physical infrastructure, not to mention the innumerable deficiencies and problems. If he had been, then he surely would not have written that “in some respects” Guyana is “ahead of other countries in the region in terms of accessibility to university education.” Even if one supposed for one giddy moment that this were true, accessibility is not the issue; rather it is the quality of university education which is on offer. UG simply cannot compare to its counterparts in the region, and a former PS in the Ministry of Education deep down in his soul must surely know that, whatever he is mouthing to the contrary.
And exactly what “pivotal development” has UG been associated with? Perhaps Mr Ally should elaborate for the benefit of the rest of the nation. One is constrained to ask how our local university could be associated with ‘development’ given that it is so starved of funds, and the fact that additionally Vice-Chancellor Jacob Opadeyi seems committed to overloading a severely underpaid and fully occupied staff with four courses to teach. There will be no time for research there – even assuming there is now or that the facilities for research are up to par – and research is what makes a university’s reputation, and which feeds into national development. The Vice-Chancellor’s proposals (which no doubt are endorsed by a parsimonious government) have more the sound of a factory assembly line than that of an establishment designed for serious academic study and learning.
But there is another general truth about tertiary education everywhere that bears mention, and that is the fact that no university worth its salt can function effectively with a political rope around its neck. And that has been an ongoing problem at the University of Guyana throughout the PNC days until the present. The main difference between now and then is that in earlier times UG boasted some teaching and administrative staff of considerable quality (there are still a few, but the complement is much diminished). In addition, of course, the infrastructure had not deteriorated to the level it has now, and money was worth more so salaries could sustain a reasonable existence.
With a preponderance of its members on the University Council, government has been quite shameless about promoting its political interests in the teeth of academic considerations. On 20th January, the UG Council appointed Ms Bibi Shadick, the Chair of the Guyana National Broadcasting Authority and member of the council as the new Pro-Chancellor of the university following the resignation of Dr Prem Misir from the post last year. If the students were concerned about the ‘sit in’ which affected their classes, they were at one with the UG staff on the matter of Ms Shadick’s appointment.
Under the statutes of the university the pro-chancellor is elected by the UG Council from among its own members, and holds office for three years. He or she performs the functions of the Vice-Chancellor in the absence of the latter. It is normally expected, therefore, that the pro-chancellor is someone of academic standing. Whatever Ms Shadick’s talents, however, the new appointee would not under ordinary circumstances jump to mind as a shining light of academia. In the words of President of the UG Senior Staff Association, Dr Mellissa Ifill, “She does not have academic experience to function at that level. The pro-chancellor acts in the place of the chancellor and the chancellor has to be a person who is highly decorated in his or her portfolio… We have nothing against her but for us it’s the principle.”
It might be added that Ms Shadick, who is a qualified lawyer and may be perfectly competent in the practice of law, is not noted for her capacity for research work or even intellectual objectivity. For one thing, she has not distinguished herself as Chairperson of the Guyana National Broadcasting Authority, which is guided by the principle of political partisanship where the allocation of licences is concerned.
What Dr Ifill did concede was that the University Council lacked a sufficient number of suitable candidates to fill the vice-chancellor and pro-chancellor posts. This is a reflection of a problem which has been raised often before, not just by the university unions but also by many others, namely the politicization of UG. “…Most of the appointments that are under the minister of education … are political,” observed the UGSSA President, “We have several members of parliament for the governing party.”
The government, however, has shown no inclination to address the matter of the composition of the council any more than it has its financing, and so it is left with the kind of university it has paid for, and which it ensures it controls. It seems too that it does not feel any obligation to the students who are now required to pay fees, and at the most basic level should be entitled to some kind of value for money, if nothing else.
What do Mr Ally and his comrades hope to achieve in the field of tertiary education when they are constricting the university both in terms of its funding and in terms of its freedom to conduct its affairs in the way that other universities do. One is tempted to the conclusion that big-ticket items like the Marriott Hotel are seen by the government as being far more important to development than the University of Guyana, which is why taxpayers’ money is poured into white elephants instead of into one of Dr Jagan’s “national institutions.”
Mr Ally in his letter commented that there were critics who had been opposed to the establishment of the University of Guyana in particular, but that time had proven them wrong. If the current conditions persist for any length of time into the future, he will not be able to demonstrate to anyone’s satisfaction that the critics were wrong.
