Dear Editor,
The discriminatory approach to cash grant distribution must stop, forthwith. What the Jagdeo/Ali regime has done is taken a well-intentioned policy, initially articulated in 2018 by Professor Clive Thomas to create economic opportunities and lift Guyanese out of poverty, to pursue a partisan political agenda that is dividing more than uniting this nation. Where at least half the nation lives in poverty in the world’s richest economy, per capita, we must demonstrate high level of intolerance for the pervasive discriminatory policy that aims to do two things: (1) transfer the nation’s wealth to a few, and (2) as token handouts to secure silence, buy or keep votes.
The mismanagement of our resources and wealth is not what our forebears fought for and envisaged. Theirs was the vision to create a society of inclusivity and an economic programme where all benefit. Ours become the responsibility to pursue, protect, build and bequeath these values even moreso now with this tremendous wealth at our disposal. Let us not be fooled by the ‘one Guyana,’ talk, which was a 2006 Elections Campaign slogan used by Robert Corbin, now adopted and misappropriated by Irfaan Ali. This regime, apart from casting aside a carefully thought out and consensually arrived at national motto, is seeking to superimpose one man’s ego on the entire society but after four years has failed to articulate a policy and show this nation how that ‘one Guyana’ is inclusive of all.
The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) is good at taking well-intended ideas and policies and screwing them up. For instance, the Guyana Trades Union Congress (GTUC), in its 15-point proposal on the cash transfer/grant identified using oil and gas money to support home improvement projects in a just and equitable manner. The PPP has taken the fantastic idea and misappropriated it for its own self-serving and voting buying agenda, creating more animosity than camaraderie among the people in the communities. The same can be said for the disbursement of cash grants for business and to workers in various sectors of society.
In this oil and gas economy Guyanese are being reduced to feel they must grovel to benefit when they are equally entitled. Also of national import is that there exists no accountability for how the money is being spent. This policy is underpinned by corrupt and criminal intent. This is the people’s money and why must it be distributed, in salt bags and cartoon boxes, outside of a structured organisation like the post office where a trail can be kept and opened to auditing. This regime is running ‘cow’ with our money. Whilst some are advocating for renegotiating the oil contract, the money that flows from the existing contract sees the majority economically marginalised.
It is disgusting to watch our men, more particularly our women, driven to put their dignity under their feet, gyrating to Ali and other government officials who are operating like lords, in order that they too can get some of the oil money. It is unfortunate that all who are equally entitled, some feel they must sell their dignity and soul for a mess of pottage or a better life.
This money is ours. We must develop the willpower to hold the Government and Opposition accountable to ensure its fair, equal and equitable distribution. And when I say this, I mean now, not after another election. The Opposition has a responsibility to give political leadership to a vexing matter of public import that requires political resolution. The push by citizens and civic organisations will mean nothing if the Opposition looks past the present and only focuses on the future.
Cash transfer or cash grant is the right of every Guyanese citizen. The Constitution of Guyana expressly outlines that we are heirs of the nation and entitled to participate in its bounties. We must fight not grovel for the respecting of this right. I repeat the call for equitable and transparent cash grant disbursement made by GTUC in 2018, shortly after Thomas made his proposal public.
There is nothing new about social programmes with direct and indirect cash transfers, with or without conditionalities. Cash transfer programmes already exist in our society where we see the business sector getting indirect forms of cash transfers through tax waivers, duty-free concessions and much more.
The opportunities and conditionalities are limitless. The benefits to society are bountiful. Guyanese must not allow this opportunity for people’s empowerment through cash transfer to be dismissed or discriminatorily applied. And where the regime is recalcitrant, we the people must force them to see the errant of their ways and change course.
Sincerely,
Lincoln Lewis