HAVING read the daily newspapers I am quite happy to see that the Office of Climate Change (OCC) has responded and cleared the air on the criticisms that have surfaced about the consultative process of the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS).
It is disconcerting to note that so many months have elapsed before the Amerindian Peoples’ Association (APA) decided to voice concerns over the LCDS and the rights of the Amerindian People. This only means one thing, there is something sinister afoot.
I say this because there have been numerous and extensive consultations across the country targeting areas which would be most affected by the conditions of the LCDS and the participation had been in the media throughout that time. Government officials and those responsible for the crafting of the LCDS took the time to go to all these places and discuss the issues with the people, get their concerns and address them.
Even international personnel attended to ensure that the criteria were adhered to and that the process was free and transparent. This was later reported to be in keeping with the stipulations and that the process was well executed.
When the APA was given the opportunity to get involved and actually represent the people it purports to represent, it refused to do so. But work went ahead so that every Amerindian was aware of what this Strategy would mean for him and was able to ask questions and clarifications where he felt he needed them. The entire process was given much publicity and information was disseminated across the country.
When the APA has had all this time to come forward and say what its concerns were, it did not. Other groups representing the interests of the indigenous community were active in their participation which influenced the second draft of the document. And yet here we have a group saying that it was not given enough information, and tries to put down the strategy.
The APA cannot possibly speak for the rest of the Amerindian community since it refused to get involved from the inception and took a hands-off approach to the entire process. The Association did not do what it should have done, represent the people.
Having read the articles on the issue, I am sure that there is certainly something sinister about the comments coming so many months after the consultative process and after Copenhagen.