DECISION 2006 (Part 2): ‘It’s about the economy, stupid!’

by Emile Mervin

Far from being impolite as the headline suggests at first glance, the quote actually was a catch phrase coined during the Bill Clinton presidential campaign of 1992.

At that time, then President George Bush, Sr. was still basking in the after glow of a well-prosecuted Gulf War, with his favourability rating topping 60 percent. However, at that time, America was also experiencing the tail end of a mild economic recession that affected employment levels, and the Clinton camp refused to buy into the incumbent’s favourability factor due to a successful war by screaming at the Bush camp, “It’s about the economy, stupid!”

Almost fourteen years later, and about six thousand miles south, in a country called Guyana, the rallying cry after almost 40 years of political independence, but more specifically almost 14 years after the PPPC first returned to power, the rallying cry is no longer about the lack of democracy under the PNC or the wrongs the PNC did; instead, “It’s about the economy, stupid!”

“Stupid” here is not intended to denigrate as much as it is to differentiate between a commonsense approach and a foolish approach to governance in Guyana. To say that the PPPC’s approach leaves a lot to be desired is to put it mildly; but when one takes a hard look at Guyana and Guyanese, what the PPPC is doing flies in the face of all logic and everything sensible. It is downright stupid!

And because the PPPC ‘appears’ to be run by a ‘collective leadership’ grouping, then the ‘collective leadership’ has to be blamed for this high level of crass stupidity called communism. If Forbes Burnham’s PNC encouraged party paramountcy over the entire country, then the Janet Jagan/Bharrat Jagdeo PPPC is encouraging ideological paramountcy over urgent needs of the economy.

The economy needs a major jump-start, but the PPPC is too preoccupied with consolidating its position in power so it can work its communist program into the political, social and economic fabric of the nation. The ruling party could not be bothered that the people have lost confidence in government as an institution, as long as the people don’t do anything to jeopardize the party’s grip on power.

Whatever political power the government is wielding should be translated into economic empowerment of the people, and this is not happening. In fact, it has not really been happening for the people since May 26, 1966.

Going back to the date we attained political independence, can we recall or list all the major foreign investments that were done in Guyana that led to an economic boon and a corresponding substantial rise in employment rates?

When the Burnham PNC nationalised the bauxite company in Linden in 1971, and took the country down the socialist route in 1974, it was the beginning of the end of major foreign investments with substantial returns as we know them.

While there are many lessons from the Burnham socialist experiment that should tell any Guyanese politician that this is not a road to take again, don’t tell that to the ‘doomed-to-repeat-mistakes-of-the-past’ collective leaders of the PPPC; they think they know a better way to walk this same unproductive road, and their ‘success story’ of the past 13 years is what they are using to try and convince the country they are right on track. The worst form of deception is self-deception.

Now what on earth drives this obsessive-compulsive commitment to the left-wing ideology in Guyana, first by Cheddi Jagan in the fifties and early sixties, then Forbes Burnham in the seventies and eighties, and now the PPPC, starting with Cheddi Jagan in the nineties and followed by team Janet Jagan/Bharrat Jagdeo? Is Guyana doomed to exist in a state of perpetual struggle all because of the tunnelled vision leadership in the ruling party that is foisting their failed brand of ideology on the people? If it has not worked for Guyana since the fifties, what makes the PPPC think it will work now?

Communism is supposed to be all about the equitable distribution of wealth, but if there is no generation of wealth, what is there to be distributed? And communism does not generate wealth; just look at the PNC for 28 years and the PPPC for the past 13 years! Hopefully, the PPPC’s concept of wealth distribution is not linked to annual pay increases to public servants, Christmas bonuses, payouts to flood victims or donations football clubs, else wise this is a new low for communism.

With elections tentatively set for August, next, the ruling party is banking on its ethnic support base to deliver the votes needed for the party to continue its “stupid” communist approach to governance for the next five years, and that base will likely deliver if the emerging political alternatives do not get out their messages of hope to a deeply frustrated nation.

No Guyanese, regardless of race, should sponsor failure, and communism has not only failed Guyanese, it has brought enormous pain and suffering on the land; a land that needs massive investments, but which first needs to be purged of antiquated politicians with archaic systems of governance that, in Guyana’s case, have kept major investors at bay for the past 13 years.

(If communist China is ever referenced as a communist-run state with free market tinkerings, let it be known China’s success story, pretty much an exception rather than the rule, is coming on the backs of Chinese people working in sweat shop conditions that the International Labour Organization and human rights groups would go ballistic over if it were happening in any other developed nation. Still, even the hard-line leaders had to bend over backward in order to prevent China from breaking under economic pressure several years ago. What’s wrong with Guyana’s hard-line communist leaders?)

Whoever coined the phrase, “Stupid is as stupid does,” probably had no idea it could be applied to 21st century politicians with 19th century dreams that quickly turn into nightmares for undeserving citizens.

To all Guyanese who deserve better given the potential in the land, this is your year of decision – to either continue the nightmare or start living your dreams! To all those Guyanese communist sympathisers in and outside of Guyana, it is no longer about a failed ideology; “It’s about the economy, stupid!”

The Private Sector can help Guyana bolster Free Trade

by Dr. Christopher A. Johnson

In a previous article, mention was made about the Caribbean movement towards a Single Market Economy or `CSME’. Indeed, preparations for global free trade is a process of erecting a framework to move the regional economy from protected inward looking arrangements to a system which will improve their chances in dynamic global markets, in the Western Hemisphere, Western Europe, Asia or elsewhere.

Guyana is largely dependent on foreign trade for external revenues more than some of her larger, contiguous neighbours – Brazil and Venezuela. The Republic also maintains a lower percentage of international reserves and consequently, has a stronger dependence on external financing, a more liberalised trade system and a concentrated and vulnerable export structure that poses greater external risks for the country.

It is important that as Caricom countries prepare to join the Free Trade Area of the Americas (FTAA), they continue to implement macroeconomic policies and institutional changes designed to achieve low inflation rates, stable exchange rates and higher levels of saving and reserves; promote gradual processes of trade liberalisation, particularly in agriculture; implement policies and allocate resources to improve the coverage and quality of education and increase the assimilation of technology; and, in general, make a significant effort to improve their public administration.

Guyana’s private sector needs support from the government in export information for various goods and services, as well as competitive indicators on countries with which Guyana does business. This type of support is very necessary in light of the pervasive influence of the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) which links the US, Canada and Mexico. This Agreement can affect Guyana’s chances of favourable access to North American markets and European markets.

Further, limited concessions offered by the developed world to non-industrialised states, bring into question whether global trade co-operation is a fair. The recent World Trade Organisation (WTO) talks in Hong Kong was an object lesson in brinkmanship where on the one hand, developed countries insisted on protectionist measures while on the other hand, the developing and emerging states, fought to bring agriculture and services to the negotiating table. Developed states that have a liberal agenda, tend to prattle free trade, but continue implementing huge tariffs on agriculture, textiles and other raw materials from developing countries. Though the provisions were inadequate however, the WTO Agreement demonstrated that Guyana could work with other nations successfully to help dismantle trade barriers, regionally and internationally.

Expedient Approach

Traditional development economists tend to argue about free trade from a purist and generalist notion without due regard for the domestic imperatives of each Member State in the Region. One of the foremost authorities on the subject in the Caribbean is Dr. David Lewis, who ‘threw down the gauntlet’ at the Region’s private sector in this way. “Caribbean exporters should take advantage of Caricom’s preferential trading arrangements with Colombia and Venezuela and similar arrangements being sought by Caricom with other Latin American countries and groupings such as Mercosur. It might be possible for Caricom countries to pursue all options at once, to assure its exporters of maximum market opportunities. But this will demand extensive negotiating energies, even if there can be an effective division of labor of the various issue portfolios with various Member States and the Caricom Secretariat, as well as effective collaboration between the government and the private sector in Caricom/OECS countries.”

Guyana has a matured private sector comprising the Chambers of Commerce and the Guyana Manufacturers Association, two distinct bodies that have carved a niche of trade liberalisation, creativity and the capacity for adapting to challenging, economic times. Their leadership was tested severely during much of the 1980s when Guyana’s exports were declining and an import substitution and export replacement policy was introduced to stem the flow of a declining national economy.

However, experience teaches that the vagaries of regional and extra-regional markets demand different tactics so aptly illustrated by nearly all of the Eastern Caribbean states as they struggle to save their economies from being swallowed by the financial might of the industrialised North and the burgeoning economic power of the Far East. As far as Guyana’s private sector is concerned, apart from market intelligence, global markets require operational efficiency of scale, high order management resources, adaptive organisational and institutional systems of governance and advanced negotiating skills, especially in dealing with multinational corporations or related conglomerates.

The extent to which the private sector becomes an effective co-facilitator in Guyana’s quest to access opportunities in the FTTA, will depend on the extent to which the government invests and encourages long term strategic planning, market diversification, stronger institutional capacity and efficient marketing for goods and services. If the services sector is anything to go by, then the trade machinery must be fully integrated to allow for services to remain the `main engines of (stable) growth’ for Guyana’s economy.

The South American Republic stands a good chance of transforming its economy through free trade in the Americas as a result of the current status enjoyed under the Association of Caribbean States (ASC). Dr. Lewis posited that the ACS could provide a “way-station” to the FTAA, but he added, “this will only be possible if the process of transformation within the ACS is so efficiently and expeditiously managed as to provide a liberalising momentum to cascade into the FTAA.” The chances of using the spur off the FTAA to persuade the “laggers” seem to be better within the familiar confines of CARICOM than in the newer and more heterogeneous ACS. For the “leaders, the ACS could provide a test ground for market opening but the timing is unlikely to be sufficiently generous for that benefit to be realised.”

So the role of the private sector is especially important in this instance. In the mid and late 1980s, as was the case with other Governments in the region, Guyana introduced a free-market system in which a reformed private sector was expected to be the engine of economic growth. In the new strategy, government was expected to concentrate on the provision of public goods (such as education, health, roads, etc.) and set an environment that facilitated private sector growth largely through an enhanced policy and regulatory framework.

Private Sector’s Role

This period saw both a whole new dimension of market forces and policy `free-wheeling’ combined with the `say-so’ of the international financial institutions such as the IMF/World Bank. As a first step, the government had to free up the economy – selling off national assets and introduce more liberalised forms of governance. In effect, the priority was to concentrate, although not exclusively, on macroeconomic stability and structural adjustment, a key element of which was trade liberalisation. To cushion the blows at the local and national levels, the Social Impact Amelioration Program better known as `SIMPAP, was the ‘carrot’ used to build capacity and tackle social inequalities exposed by rigid, prescriptive economic measures.

The second phase sought to deepen reforms by liberalising the foreign exchange market, accelerating privatisation programmes and removing the barriers to domestic and foreign investment. Thus the introduction of the Cambios or the alternative foreign exchange window system in both Guyana and Jamaica brought disastrous results in the 1980s, but later enabled both countries economy to benefit from increasing flows of foreign revenue. To varying degrees and different speeds, all these reforms are either being refined to strengthened to prepare the Caribbean economies, including Guyana’s, to fully participate in free trade and universal trade and investment liberalisation. A significant amount of reforms however, remains to be implemented in order to complete the adjustment-process.

The response so far to these reforms has been varied in the Region with some economies performing much better than others; while some have enjoyed relatively high growth rates over the last decade largely due to the accelerated diversification of their economies into tourism, other services and manufacturing. In part, too, this success was due to sound macro-economic management, high levels of foreign investment and the development of the human resources of the country. The Guyanese economy has shown appreciable growth in recent years, but foreign revenues are still comparatively low when one considers the huge investment still needed for its infrastructural facilities to boost production in rice, sugar and the forestry sector. Export performance has also lagged though there have been improvements in export control information mechanisms particularly for small exporters.

The Guyanese private sector is made up of firms varying between small and micro-enterprises to large foreign corporations. Micro and small enterprises (less than 10 employees) cover a range off activities and segments in industry, agriculture, construction, distribution and other services. The informal sector or the parallel market is also vital. Guyana requires huge investments in eco tourism to make this new ‘nature economy’ sustainable and one effective way of doing so, are possible partnerships with Caribbean and Latin American companies that have access to larger markets for consumers who are interested in either leisure tourism or in nature tour exchanges, in the case of young people from Western countries fascinated by the exotic nature of Guyana and the wider Caribbean. Traditionally, free trade is often disguised by the exchange of goods and services, but the natural environment could also be commercially optimised and exceedingly good return of investment, providing that sustainable measures are put in place to protect the natural habitat.

In almost every Caribbean country, the private sector has played a dominant role in trade liberalisation policies, but fresh research has shown that in doing so many national economies have paid the price for such reform. Traditional commodities such as agriculture and textiles have been affected by price controls, business licensing, import tariffs, quantitative restrictions, absence of adequate company law, excessive controls and discretionary criteria on foreign investment, etc., all of which prevent the promotion of competitiveness and the growth of the private sector.

Experts have offered a plausible reason for this situation; some say that Caricom countries have not focused on private sector development in any systematic way because the public sector is not large and government expenditure huge to the point where credit to the public sector is seen as crowding out the private sector. Other say that fear of government increasing its taxes to finance the public sector is not a major concern in the private sector. Even though the reduction in the size of government is not a burning issue, government still needs to reduce its role in the economy by enabling a stable environment and the adequate provision of public goods.

Guyana’s President has spoken about the importance of the private sector to economic development, although critics say that in other Caribbean states, this sector is hardly debated nowadays. In order to assume this responsibility fully, the private sector must be aware of the nature of the challenges faced in today’s globalised world, be able to evaluate its strengths and possibilities, and make a psychological leap that would shift it unreservedly to a more competitive mode through adjustments at the firm level. Information and quality human resources are critical factors in this equation.

Guyana can work in greater collaboration with the Caribbean Association of Industry of Commerce (CAIC) a regional institution that promotes trade and industry in the Americas although it needs to redouble efforts to improve research capability in data collection on growth sectors among Member States of Caricom. The regional chamber should provide too, up-to-date information on regional and international marketing trends, industry classification standards, as well the quantity of managerial, supervisory, technical and non-technical staff in various industries in the Caribbean. The tourism strategy unveiled by the Guyana Government over a year ago highlighted the importance of these requirements.

The GMA and the Chambers of Commerce in Guyana should work towards empowering micro traders to integrate their activities into the formal economy. A thorough annual skills analysis is required to determine capacity in the private sector and also to detect changes that are necessary for better education and training provision. Current market opportunities offer the necessity for seminars, workshops, and other training sessions on a national and regional basis, as well as the provision of business advisory services in terms of studies in relevant areas, the compilation of market information, covering regional sources and markets, sources of technology, as well as trade rules and regulations.

It is hoped, that as Guyana and the rest of the Caribbean prepare for active participation in the FTTA, politicians and the business community will accommodate each other through compromise, constructive dialogue and practical steps on sensitive issues, bearing in mind that the wider agenda is about making `structural’ poverty history, rather than allow it to remain a shallow and perpetual and slogan cliché. [Next time we will examine the importance of Regional Enterprise Agencies to national reform in Guyana].

Will Indo-Guyanese Continue to be Children of the PPP?

by Malcolm Harripaul

In recent weeks much exasperation has been expressed by letter writers over the sloth of the Guyana Third Force and the Alliance For Change in establishing their machineries to contest elections that are due no later than August 2006 but which I am sure President Jagdeo will call as soon as GECOM is ready.

I also share those concerns especially since President Jagdeo has been in election gear for a while now, taking every opportunity to dispense monetary inducements to all and sundry. In any other country that experienced multiple major floods in less than a year, coupled with rampant crime, corruption, and gross incompetence, it would have been a foregone conclusion that the electorate would have had no hesitation in removing the PPP from Government.

However, in Guyana the major ethnic group has in the past forty years not voted on issues but rather along lines of ethnic unity and solidity. So preponderant has been Indian support for the PPP that in the last 10 years such blind loyalty has been referred to as a vote bloc or vote bank for the PPP. Such labelling is not new. Shortly after the 1964 elections US Officials in noting that Indians had voted for the PPP as a unit referred to it as “the Jagan built wall.” That “wall” had been meticulously constructed ever since Dr. Jagan returned to Guyana in 1943, soon followed by Mrs. Jagan with her little library of Lenin books.

Then, the political and educational development of the Indian Guyanese masses and those in India were probably similar. Such was the underdevelopment of the Indian masses that it had caused Gandhi, in a discourse with Tagore, to defend the worship of idols on the ground that the masses were incapable of raising themselves immediately to abstract ideas.

Tagore could not bear to see the people eternally treated as children. (Rev Andrews re 1998 Noble Prize winner Amartya Sen in his book, The Argumentative Indian pg.92) Conditions were such in Guyana then that Tagore’s observation could very well be applied to Indian Guyanese. The political underdevelopment of the Indo Guyanese masses provided ideal conditions for the foundations of the “Jagan Wall.” Those foundations were the manipulation of religion and racial insecurities. Mrs. Jagan was quick to recognise this.

Taking advantage of her being perceived as a “White Lady” and donning a sari, I was told by the Leader of ROAR Mr. Ravi Dev, how Mrs. Jagan visited a Mandir at Uitvlugt and read selected verses from the Bhagwat Gita that told of the incarnation of Lord Rama who would descend on earth to deliver his people from oppression and injustice. New York Accountant Mr. Prem Sahadeo related how Mrs. Jagan, attended meetings at Enterprise ECD dressed in a sari and how she impressed all the Indians present with recitations from the Holy Gita. Indian activist, author and Asst. Professor Dr. Baytoram Ramharack recalled how the PPP distributed portraits of Gandhi and Dr. Jagan on the Corentyne. In this way Indians were led to associate Dr. Jagan with the images of Lord Rama and Gandhi and to view him as the one sent to free them from oppression and he therefore required their unquestioned loyalty and faith in him. I have personally seen evidence of such manipulation of Hinduism.

Growing up on Leguan in the 1960’s I saw a few Indians adorn their homes with pictures of Dr. Jagan and Hindu Gods. In the late 1970’s as a PPP/PYO activist on the West Demerara I saw quite a few Indians keep a portrait of Dr. Jagan next to those of their Deotas. As recent as 2001 I saw this at the home of an ex PPP activist on the Essequibo Coast and I also witnessed it in 2004 at the home of a current PPP supporter on the West Demerara.

In 2001, on a house-to-house campaign on Wakenaam, one household had Mrs. Jagan’s photograph next to Mother Sita’s image. However, I don’t think all Hindus kept pictures of Dr. Jagan next to their deities and I don’t think it was a wide spread practice. I simply make the observation to show evidence of manipulation and such manipulation caused blind loyalty and faith in a godless communist party. Religion alone was not manipulated to erect the “Jagan Wall.” Those Hindus who did not fall for the religious ploy were, like all other Indians, susceptible to racial fears and insecurities.

Racial fears were also exploited to build the “Jagan Wall.” Such real fear materialised in 1962. A declassified US Foreign Relations, 1961-1963 Vol. X11 document dated April 11, 1962 stated, “A tremendous increase in the racial tension in British Guiana and in the potential for conflict came as a result of a week of strikes and riots which shook the capital city of Georgetown in mid February 1962.

Paradoxically, the February crisis strengthened Jagan by consolidating the support of his East Indian followers.” The continued violence in 1963 and 1964 concretised Indian support for the PPP. The declassified Johnson Administration (1964-1968) Vol. XXX11 document stated, “Present indications are that the East Indian people, as a whole, dislike the African, distrust him, especially fear him, and believe that they must stay together, particularly as a voting unit, if their rights are to be protected and their aspirations achieved.”

The declassified Johnson Administration (1964 -1968) Vol. XXX11 on Guyana dealt with a report that the US Consul general had submitted after the 1964 elections. It read thus, “Carlson reported that the most striking aspect of the election was the extent of racial voting. He reported that “in one district after another the number of votes for Jagan’s PPP was approximately the same as number of registered Indian voters.” Carlson said that the cause of “such complete racial voting by Indians apparently stems from fear and distrust of African led government” and that the PPP’s propaganda and pre-election violence played on those fears and “created psychology which made Indians impervious to reason.”

The report continued, “Thus Indians deserted United Force with its advocacy of multi-racial approach, non-violence, and prosperity. Likewise rejected was Justice Party leader Rai’s logical appeal to Indian self-interest to obtain share in non-PPP administration which was certain to come about as result of election.” Carlson concluded that the consequence of this racial voting was that the PNC–UF coalition would have to govern without significant Indian representation.”

This exploitation of Hinduism and anti-African sentiments by the PPP was confirmed by Professor Clem Seecharran and Economist Dr. Ramesh Gampat in Dr. Ramharack’s book Against The Grain Balram Singh Rai and the politics of Guyana. Professor Seecharran explained how the PPP painted Africans as Rakshas, the people of the evil king Rawan. Dr. Jagan was portrayed in Hindu imagery as the incarnation of Lord Rama, the noble ruler and the source of all light.

Dr. Seecharran wrote inter alia, “this was a Marxist party that garnered every crumb that spilled off the Hindu’s table in a cynical exploitation of religion and race. Rai had no right to challenge the great leader (Jagan). He (Rai) had deserted the race; he was on the side of the Rakshas, the blacks-Rawan’s people, the enemy of Lord Rama.”

Dr. Gampat was quoted as follows, “the PPP has developed an elaborate machinery of control, including religion, to enslave the bodies and minds of Indians; because Indians are Afraid of another African Government, a sentiment drilled into their psyche by the PPP; because the PPP ruthlessly strikes down any Indian opposition, is hostile to new ideas and innovations. Because it ruthlessly and relentlessly victimises any Indian who dissents; because the PPP behaves as if it owns Indians.”

Dr. Harold Persaud, a NY Clinical Psychologist, opined that the current psychological make up of the Indian is symptomatic of Post Traumatic Stress Disorder that was triggered by the violence of the 1960’s, especially the Wismar Massacre in May 1966 when hundreds of Indians were either killed, raped, mutilated, burnt or beaten by PNC inspired Africans.

The Indian condition was further aggravated by the violence inflicted on them during Burnham’s reign. Their plight has been also exacerbated by continued violence in the form of street beatings and crime waves that has been experienced under the PPP Government since 1992.

Scores of Indians have been gunned down and many have been kidnapped and disappeared on the East Coast. Hundreds were forced to flee from Annandale and near by villages. Dr. Persaud further stated that the PPP, instead of removing the factors that causes violence to be unleashed on its supporters, and implement measures to secure Indians, have deliberately kept the situation volatile so that it could continue to manipulate the racial fears and insecurities of Indians. Other persons also alluded to continued manipulation of religion by the PPP to strengthen its hold on Indians.

I was told that when Mrs. Jagan became president she was hosted at various Mandirs in New York and Toronto where analogies were made between her and Mother Sita. President Jagdeo was declared an Avatar, someone who God sends to help the poor and oppressed. President Jagdeo, who is an atheist and communist, has certainly not shied away from visiting Mandirs in Guyana. This probably explains why in the March 2005 flood of Mahaicony Creek he was greeted by the victims with Malas and Arti as seen on GTV. According to a report posted by Bryan Max on the Discussion Forum of the Guyana Gazette on 01-07-06, President Jagdeo received a tumultuous welcome by flood victims of another area, this time of the December 2005 flood as seen on Prime News.

It is apposite to view Bryan Max’s report, which follows, “Hundreds of flooded residents turned up with huge portraits of him and there was even a Tassa drum team beating up sweet tassa music to give the occasion a very festive spirit. One woman was heard saying, “we naaa kay haw flood deh place bee, wance you cum aww visit aweee, aawe happy” The president was immediately hugged by hundreds and in a short five minutes he had more garlands placed over his head than even the great Cheddi could ever dream of.”

The behaviour displayed by people who had their crops and livestock destroyed does not seem to be based on good reason. Imagine the Katrina victims in New Orleans in such revelry to greet President Bush. It could not be merely party nor presidential loyalty that led them to engage in such festivity to greet President Jagdeo. It certainly is the manner in which an Avatar would be heralded. But more importantly it demonstrates glaringly that in this age of information technology the PPP has succeeded in keeping Indian political development at the level of children.

Now Gandhi might have seen the Indian masses as children fifty years ago but they at least have since been sufficiently politically developed to know when to vote out politicians who do not serve their interests. Has the Indo-Guyanese masses undergone any political development since then? It does not appear so. They still seemed “impervious to reason.”

I argue then that unless the AFC and GTF can in the few months available before elections 2006 erode the twin columns of racial fear and religious manipulation on which the “Jagan Wall” is anchored then we will once again witness Indians rededicate themselves as obedient children of the PPP. I close with the observation that since taking office in 1992 the PPP has failed to address Indian security concerns and African fears of continuous exclusion from political office in the current electoral and political systems given the majority Indian vote bloc that the PPP owns. The election, whenever it is held, as was the case in 1997 and 2001, is a sure recipe for social unrest. As always, Indians will be the victims and the PPP the benefactor.

Now I know many Indians will be quick to point out that Africans have also supported the PNC as a bloc but this is not quite true. A significant section of Africans rebelled against Burnham’s dictatorship in the late 1970’s and fifteen of them were mercilessly cut down by a death squad in 1979 and Walter Rodney was assassinated in 1980. The same PPP that commands the Indian vote bloc was at the time trying to persuade Mr. Burnham to form a National Patriotic Front Government with the PPP! By 1984 the PPP entered into power sharing talks with the PNC to save the Mr. Burnham from a possible US invasion, which if it had happened would have freed Indians from PNC oppression. So I say to Indians, explain that to me.

Can Guyana benefit from a Caricom Single Market Economy?

by Dr. Christopher A. Johnson

As 2006 ushered in the Caricom Single Market Economy (CSME), the debate has centred on the readiness of national economies to move to the path of convergence for a sounder and viable regional economy. More than 40 years ago, the Carifta experiment proved fatal in terms of ambitions for a regional economic union. Of course, the political federation that preceded that also failed after four years in 1962. The question is, how can Guyana, which is considered a low to middle-income economy globally speaking, benefit from a regional market economy such as the CSME? What are the challenges and prospects, and what affect this new reality will be for various sectors of the economy?

In 2002, Dr. David Lewis, Chief of Party Caribbean Policy Project, published a paper on preparations necessary to facilitate free trade in the Americas. He argued that Caricom should make rapid progress in deepening integration even while seeking to broaden membership of the Free Trade Area. Yet, it was this punch line by Dr. Lewis that reflected the gravity of a real economic convergence necessary to facilitate a dynamic regional market economy in the Caribbean.

According to him, “Herein lies the importance of making progress towards the Caricom Single Market & Economy (CSM&E) as a foundation upon which to then enter into extra-regional Free Trade Agreements (FTA’S). Similarly, the regional private sector can only really contribute to such FTA negotiations when it has successfully been able to effectively negotiate an intra-regional CSM&E based on a set of private sector interests. To the degree that the regional private sector is able to engage the public sector and social partners in this process, both domestic/regional and extra-regional, then to that degree the role of the private sector in FTA negotiations will be important to Caribbean economic Development and integration.”

The fact, is Guyana, like Trinidad and Tobago, Barbados and Jamaica, has been in the forefront of campaigning for a one-tier regional economy with national economies working towards a gradual conversion of currency, stocks and shares, traditional goods and services, as well as the wider commodities market sector. The drawback here, is that the narrower the economic base, the more difficult it is for developing economies such as Guyana, to benefit adequately from the CSME instrument.

It was interesting to observe the cautionary note by Grenada on the timing of `joining’ the CSME. Her case is understandable judging from the recovery of Hurricane Ivan, which devastated more than 90 percent of that country’s infrastructure. It was the way Prime Minister Dr. Keith Mitchell put his country’s point over that made interesting reading. “While we are committed to the CSME we will not do so until sometime in 2006. We believe that this is necessary to allow us the time to finalise a number of outstanding legal matters, in addition to providing a much-needed window to complete our public education programme,” Mitchell said in a radio and television broadcast recently.

Six member states have signalled their readiness to be part of the CSME, which will allow for the free movement of goods, services, capital and labour across the region. Guyana has been working with other Caricom states, to work out the modalities for a freer movement of people through the region. However, there are challenges for Guyana in her quest to be an active participant in a regional market economy, as there are prospects or opportunities.

Challenges for the CSME

Reading from the economic indicators so far, Guyana has enjoyed appreciable growth in agriculture, bauxite, rice and sugar, along with timber exports in the past five years, but this alone cannot guarantee economic stability, nationally. Guyana’s trade with Caricom neighbours is yet to reach levels of 30-40 percent – this is vital to generate greater confidence among national producers and a strong boost for consumer confidence.

In the 1980s, Guyana, out of economic necessity, pursued a partial import replacement policy as rising cost of production for goods and services took their toll on the economy, allied to an ever-increasing foreign debt situation. The need to stimulate greater production in manufactured goods via the cottage industry and the traditional three-some (bauxite, rice and sugar) is vital if Guyana is to benefit from a Caricom Single Market Economy.

The fluctuating Guyana Dollar remains a problem for the country’s Exchange Rate Mechanism, and while Guyanese benefit from attractive rates of exchange from foreign currencies, traded through formal and informal channels, the economy suffers since the return on traditional exports is not sustainable for real economic growth per capita. The need to strengthen national currencies is an acid test for Guyana and Jamaica, but more so, the former. Jamaica enjoys a relatively strong stock exchange change market and tourism has propelled economic growth on the island.

The manufacturing sector in Guyana needs technology improvement in areas such as materials, equipment and information. Quality skills in technical supervision, project management and corporate leadership at the level of international corporate culture, are essential ingredients for a more vibrant private sector.

Having a competitive advantage is a powerful instrument for Guyana to bargain in the regional trading space in her quest to improve market advantage both inter-regionally and extra-regionally. Negotiating her way though, will demand a high degree of sophistication borne of market intelligence and the cultural understanding such as language, values, customs and related social contexts of other Caribbean states.

Another perceived challenge is that of political will. Would a lack of this strategic input place Guyana in a quandary? Can the country really challenge its collective might to achieve this objective? Can it use its history and present set of circumstances to be what is commonly described as the `Best of the Best’? Undoubtedly, the CSME will test Guyana’s pride in its ethnic and cultural mix, a somewhat great advantage if utilised effectively, and in the process, help shed its skin of the racial impurities that has dogged the Republic for nearly 50 years. Guyana has the ideological experience and political maturity to help shape a Caricom Single Market Economy, but all political parties will have to examine their own position in the wider context of a progressive agenda and this will be the real crunch.

Interesting Prospects

From the above challenges, there seems to varying prospects in which Guyana can truly benefit from the CSME in 2006 and beyond. The current administration, along with the opposition and other political organizations, will need to institutionalize the importance of a CSME, showing its value to a future strong and vibrant economy. The importance of increased regional co-operation should also be stressed, since this will cement links with Guyana and her counterparts in the smaller Caricom or Eastern Caribbean states whose economies, though varied in type, can relatively converge because of the ties that has been fostered by the OECS since 1981.

Guyana stands to benefit from a regional single market by maximising production in goods and services, as well its overall commodities market. Through bilateral ventures – commercially and industrially – this aim could be realised. Twin energy projects involving Guyana and Trinidad are possible, and so are similar projects involving Barbados and Jamaica in the area of tourism, even tough eco-tourism for Guyana, may have greater economic and financial spin-offs than cruiser-line tourism for instance.

Other joint ventures with Eastern Caribbean states such as the Bahamas, the Virgin Islands and St. Croix in the area of stock market (exchange) support, among other financial sector ventures, are equally crucial, as Guyana endeavours to have an impact on the opportunities afforded by the CSME.

The prospect of a greater social benefit should not be ruled out. As a multi-racial country, Guyana has blended a range of cultures with the history of various civilisations the world over. This can be shared and commercialised in the form of national and regional artistic and cultural events such as Carifesta and possibly an extra-regional extravaganza, linking the cultures of the Americas where similarities and differences reside alongside each other. The fusion of culture and sports can create innumerable economic benefits and other trade-offs for Guyana and her Caribbean counterparts.

Since the CSME is not only about economics, but is also about the social value system of each nation-state in the Caribbean and its role in the modern world, Guyana’s best chance of benefiting from this machinery, will hinge on its desire to fix what needs fixing and open the floodgates of opportunity so that the nation can not only see sparks of regionalisation, but also breathe the fire of true globalisation, with a healing effect of course!

Next time, I will examine the role of the private sector in the Free Trade of the Americas (FTA) from a Guyana-Caribbean perspective.

Let Freedom Ring

by Keith R. Williams

As America and the world prepare to celebrate the 75th birth anniversary of a treasured offspring of human kind, the inhabitants of a little niche of territory sandwiched between giant Brazil and resource rich Venezuela can learn some valuable and beneficial lessons from the life of this Noble Laureate.

Martin Luther King Jr., born in a little house on Auburn Avenue Atlanta on January 15, 1929 at a time when the sweltering heat of racism, Jim Crow Laws and practices and intolerance were the order of the day, rose above what most would naturally have succumbed to, and ventured forth with a message of peace, a message of love, a message of hope and forgiveness and graciousness.

King confronted the hate directed towards him with an armour of faith in the constitutional doctrine that all Americans were equal -whether by creation or natural assignment – and were thus entitled to all the rights and privileges held and enjoyed by others.

His was a message that resonated throughout the United States of America and indeed the world. For it was premised on the notion that hate begets hate, and the act of strapping a chain to a captives’ legs invariably result in the other end attaching itself around the holder’s neck.

In Martin Luther Kings’ America, equality as proposed by the Declaration of Independence was not a privilege enjoyed by those of his hue and hair texture. Entering a building other than through the door designated for his kind, or drinking from a water fountain with the sign “whites only” was enough to land someone like him in jail, or at least subjected to a severe and embarrassing reprimand.

However, despite water canons, ferocious police dogs, numerous arrests, beatings and periods in jail, he marched himself down to the Lincoln Memorial at the head of hundreds of thousands of inspired supporters, and once there, poured out his heart, his hopes, his aspirations and his dream in a speech that stirred and fatigued the conscience of his nation.

Today, as we celebrate the official recognition of his advent into this world, I think of my nation Guyana and harbour sentiments similar to those expressed by Martin Luther King on August 28, 1963. And I doubt he would be offended if I borrowed the template of his expressed thoughts in order to fashion a format for mine.

It should be obvious to all of us, Guyanese, that our leaders of decades past have defaulted on their expressed and implied promises to us, the masses, the rank and file of the nation. The architects of our destiny, rather than honouring their obligation to design a political, social and economic structure that was beneficial and conducive to the well-being of the people and the nation, instead have written for us a check that when cashed delivers hatred, violence, crime, poverty and every other social ill known and experienced by human kind.

We can tarry no longer and allow this malady to fester while our children hunger for hope and a reachable target for their budding aspirations. We can tarry no longer while discontent and frustration function to widen the chasm that has been created between race and race, neighbour and neighbour, villager and villager. The time has come for we the people to launch an invigorating struggle that will reach back and grab and bring forward that which has been taken away and denied to us.

Now is the appropriate time to lift our nation, our Guyana from the depths of corruption, and crime, and intolerance. Now is the appropriate time to begin to take our nation back from the hands of those who continue to defile her and use her as a means for their personal enrichment and aggrandisement.

Ours must be a struggle founded on a pledge of non-violence. Founded on the principle of never usurping or transgressing the dignity of those with whom we might find ourselves in disagreement. We must not allow our hunger for freedom, our craving for true democracy and respectable equality to coerce us into responding tit for tat, but rather should become creative in developing a message strong and influencing enough to change the minds of those at the other end of our struggle.

And as we begin this struggle to bring Guyana back from the precipice of destruction, our thoughts will frequently be filled by the query of “how long will this take”? The answer is not too long. Because since we have spent five decades too long waiting for something good to happen for us, the time spent making it happen ourselves can never seem as long as that.

My Guyanese brothers and sisters, it would be naïve to think that the days ahead of us will not be difficult and fraught with turpitude and anguish. But we share a collective dream that was rooted in the breasts of our ancestors who toiled from sun up to sun down in the cotton fields, on the sugar plantations and in the rice fields of Guyana.

We share a collective dream that one day our beautiful Guyanese nation will rise up and live out the true meaning of the creed that we are all equal under the sun of who or what made us. We all must share that dream.

We share a collective dream that not too long from now we will become confident in the awareness that we and our offspring are being regarded based on content of character rather than colour of skin or texture of hair. We all must share that dream.

We share a collective dream that very soon in Buxton and Tain, Demerara and Berbice, the East Bank and the Essequibo Islands, the sons and daughters of former slaves and the sons and daughters of former indentured servants, will voluntarily and without coercion move together towards the circle of brotherhood and sisterhood. We all must share this dream.

This must be our faith. This must be our hope. This is what it will take to transform the frightening cycle of racial discord in Guyana into a wonderful symphony of national unity. This will be the day when our collective voices will rise in crescendo as we patriotically sing “Oh I care not what others rave o’er fair lands afar, just let me rest within thy breast where they sweet flowers bloom”.

This will be the day when we recognize that, “My Guyana Eldorado is the best of all the world to me, in my heart wher’re I wander memories enshrineth thee.” This will be day when the voices of Guyanese will be rise stridently proclaiming “Let freedom ring”. “From the Pakaraima peaks of power to the Corentyne lush sands, let freedom ring.”

“From the mighty Kaieteur, its rumble being fed by the coal black waters of the potato river, to the Demerara Harbor Bridge, let freedom ring” Let freedom ring from every creek in the Mazaruni and every Island in the Essequibo. Let it ring from the top of the mighty Roraima across the lush grasslands of the Rupununi.

And when we allow freedom and tolerance to ring from every village on the East Coast and the West coast, when we allow freedom and tolerance to ring from every hamlet on the Corentyne and every thatched roof hut in the Upper Mazuruni, when we allow freedom and tolerance to ring from Pradoville to Kurutuku, then we will be able to look forward to that day when all of Guyana’s children, Indian and African, Portuguese and Amerindian, Chinese and Dougla will be able to join hands across the mountains, plains and rivers and sing in that old African Spiritual, “Free at last, free at last, thanks to all that’s worthy, Guyana is free at last.”

God bless you Martin Luther King, and God bless you my Guyanese brothers and sisters.