LEADER of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo, was in New York recently and addressed a gathering in what he probably thought were matters relating to what is happening in Guyana.

Before Jagdeo was elected to his present position in this 12th Parliament, he was President of the Cooperative Republic, junior and senior Minister of Finance, and worked during the People’s National Congress (PNC) Government in the State Planning Secretariat. Growing up, he was exposed to free education from nursery to university, and attended the co-education, multi-racial Bladen Hall Multilateral School. Academically he pursued education to the Master’s level.

Jagdeo was among the Heads of Government in the Caribbean Community who held the position as its Chairman, and represented Guyana and CARICOM on the regional and international stages. During and after his presidency, in addition to acquiring honorary doctorates, he participated in leadership at various international fora.

Given the aforementioned, it is not unreasonable for society to expect public discourses by him would be of repute to his profile and the positions/institutions he served or is serving. Some may be quick, and dare it be said rightly so, to point out that his is a character known to display what can be considered less than acceptable conduct.

Persons can point to instances of offensive references to the elderly, allegations made by his wife, features of corruption, division and nepotism during his presidency, treatment of citizens and workers, his libel case on race brought against Kaieteur News, the 2015 charged campaign rhetoric, and attorney-at-law Christopher Ram bringing charges against him for racial, incendiary remarks.

Thus, it is fair to say that his is a personality and leadership style not without its fair share of criticisms, inflammatory conduct, and the discomfiture such bring to society. Simultaneously, it is not unexpected in a society such as ours to offer the most recalcitrant a second chance, that hope was held Jagdeo could have departed from a less than stellar past.

When in addressing a pre-dominantly Indian crowd in New York-one of the USA’s most diverse states, where continuing efforts are made by its political leadership to improve race relations- he sought to invoke man’s most basic instinct it not only reflected poorly on him but insults the society that welcomed him.

None can pretend race relations would improve automatically, since such requires continuous work, including frank, honest and open conversations, accompanied by institutional strengthening and wholehearted application of policies, programmes and laws.

When a crowd was told that presently in Guyana the APNU+AFC coalition government has been “snatching people’s land that has transport,” decency and respect for the audience would inform that the allegation be supported with proof. This should not be construed to mean  governments are not inclined to engage in discriminatory practices, which Jagdeo during his presidency was no stranger to.

But it points to the fact that fixing problems, real or perceived, require evidence. Where evidence is provided and the authorities fail to act by verifying the claim, and where an injustice occurred not move to correct same, then the claim of marginalisation /discrimination can be substantiated.

Where the Opposition Leader said there has been an increase in new taxes under this Government that targets mostly the rural poor, whom he considered are People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) supporters, bringing integrity to this allegation would be aided by the supporting evidence.

Jagdeo holds a constitutional office, and is among liked persons who have great responsibility to ensure they deliver leadership by example, and uphold universally acceptable practices and laws to ensure the races co-exist in peace and harmony. And with a financial background, having presided over national budgets and held the nation’s highest office, these exposures carry corresponding responsibility his public utterances will be supported by evidence.

Consequently, it is reasonable to expect the public will be provided the evidence to support the allegations made in New York. And where these are not provided, the society is free to conclude that the New York speech was mere debauchery.

In the 21st century, Guyana has to move beyond the divisive and political rancidity of the 20th century. Given that this nation’s population comprises approximately two-thirds of persons 40 years and under, those determined to live in the past ought to reflect on their unfairness to this group’s development being held hostage to a period when they were either not born or were mere toddlers.

A significant percentage of the stated demographic was born or became adults during the presidencies of Jagdeo, Donald Ramotar and David Granger. And where many were either of school age or in the work force during the Jagdeo presidency, on race relations and their development the society finds a presidency that fell short of expectations, by standards set domestically and internationally.

Finally, Guyana belongs to all Guyanese. Contrary to the Opposition Leader’s view Guyana is not the private property of the PPP/C to “take back,” but the property of every Guyanese to enjoy its patrimony. Any and every political party, individual, or group contesting an election, and having secured the majority, must be allowed to govern within the confines of the Guyana Constitution and Laws.