Dear Editor,
Diaspora is an asset — economic and political. Since the time of President Cheddi Jagan, I have been goading succeeding governments to develop a formal policy (establishment of an institution or office) of continuously engaging the diaspora which since then has grown larger than the population of Guyana and perhaps have developed a greater interest in homeland affairs than pre-1992. Presi-dents toyed with a diaspora policy but their hearts were not in it. The President Irfaan Ali government announced a conference with the diaspora for May 22. It is long overdue, and it is hoped it would not be a one-off engagement like happened under previous governments. Some formal network should be established to engage the diaspora – whose presence in America alone is bigger than the population of Guyana – and whose investment (financially and skills) in Guyana would be key to rapid development. And there should be delineated goals.
From my studies and practical experience of working with Indian diaspora groups, mounting evidence confirm that Diasporas play a significant role in the development of countries of origin. Aside from sending remittances, they have helped home countries with promoting trade and investment, transferring knowledge and skills, spurring entrepreneurship, creating businesses, forming civic groups, funding charities, building schools, opening foreign currency accounts, among other contributions to development. Indo-Caribbeans have done all the preceding in the US. Politicians from every developing country have been coming to the diaspora (in North America and Europe) since the 1980s for funding for election campaigns and selected development projects of a self-interested nature. Politicians looked to see what they could get out of it for self-benefits not heart or compassion or national interests driven.
There has not been a formal policy per se on the Guyanese diaspora. It was not about country but themselves. Guyanese politicians ‘talked’ to the diaspora in their visits telling them to return home and invest but they offered no specific or concrete projects. There was no formal policy. Succeeding Guyanese governments worked with some members of the diaspora on discrete projects that benefited a few or that were self-serving. Missing is an engagement policy of mutual interest for the entire diaspora or practical collaboration as equal partners. They did not engage the diaspora as active equal partners in development; they did not seek the advice of the diaspora as the governments of India or El Salvador or Mexico or Jamaica did.
There is need for a formal policy or structure to link diverse communities of Guyanese Diaspora, strengthen overseas the bonds, and explore the benefits of collaboration between government and diasporic groups. Just like how India formally engages her diaspora and countless overseas Indian organizations with an institutionalized structure and an office established specifically for that purpose, holding regular meetings with community leaders and consulting diaspora experts, Guyana government should examine that or a similar workable model. The government must recruit people with expertise in the field to assist it. It is not a task for amateurs or those who will learn on the job. Government needs specialists in the field. Staff has to have a love and interest and background in the field. Guyanese like Ramsaran and myself, with extensive experience in the field, would be willing to lend a helping hand.
Yours faithfully
Vishnu Bisram
