Dear Editor,
How does one reconcile ‘Regional Outreaches’ with the authority and responsibilities of constitutional Regional Administrations? What organisational processes would provide for follow-up remedial action by the Regional Executive Officer and staff? Will the latter be accorded a comprehensive briefing of the oral commitments made at meetings where words have to be interpreted later in relation to individual needs and aspirations, by official subordinate staff?
For it is tantamount to a fallacy to claim that unrecorded thousands of complaints have been settled – in just ministerial mouthfuls; for there must be varying agencies and processes that have to be respectively engaged and maintained over related periodicities. More critically the follow-up exercises require explicit accountability to One Nation that is being observed; and behaviour analysed, possibly for exploitation by other nations, and/or qualified professionals who are Guyanese of critically informed institutional memory.
Indeed, the latter can recall the range of Caribbean Heads of State who invited criticisms from those they served, so that they could assertively prove their respective arguments by more reflective and productive action. They of course displayed the moral stamina and humility to admit faults, for which they earned applause from voters who considered themselves as equals. There was therefore no need for an inflated communication system. On the contrary the initiative would be for citizens to ‘REACH-IN’ – a constitutional entitlement!!!
Sincerely,
E. B. John
