FIRSTLY, I must express thanks to Mr. Tony Vieira for granting my letter his focal attention. On November 6th, 2013 the Kaieteur newspaper featured a letter of mine commenting on the Mr. David Granger’s explicit intent to cut the 2014 budgetary allocations to the National Communications Network (NCN) and Government Information Agency (GINA).  

Mr. Granger urged that changes were necessary in these two public entities and he was prepared to cut funding.  The point I raised was for Mr. Granger to clearly outline the changes needed and how he would implement them to better serve the national interest.
My letter highlighted that it is not only unconstitutional and unlawful for the Opposition parties to utter views of cutting the budget that is yet to be seen but it is also presumptuous and premature.  In doing so, I also indicated the constitutional entitlements of the Opposition which are to approve or withhold approval of such allocations through valid deliberations in the National Assembly.
This fundamental premise can simply be ascertained from Article 218 paragraphs 1 and 2 of our Constitution.  It appears that Mr. Tony Vieira missed that part of my letter. As a citizen of Guyana, I believe I am entitled to the same constitutional rights as Mr. Vieira to the freedom of expression.  Mr. Vieira coined in his reply, “sometimes it’s not possible” which drove me to respond to his vapid criticisms. It is to my amazement that Mr. Vieira spoke about self-respect and attempted to lecture me on the topic. Meanwhile, an examination of his character does not emulate what he purports to teach.
I argued that the incumbent ruling government should be allowed precedence in these media outlets. After all, they are government media houses. At no point in my letter did I mention that the combined Opposition (APNU and AFC) is not entitled to fair media time and involvement.  Hence, my reasons for asking what changes would be proposed to facilitate this equitable media distribution, irrespective of our political positions.  But it would appear that Mr. Vieira is saying these media entities have to operate exclusively in favour of a one-seat majority and totally ignore the ruling government because they are the minority.  Perhaps, those are the changes Mr. Vieira finds equitable and impartial. I strongly agree that taxpayers’ revenues should be utilised for the national well-being, but not to sanction unlegislated cuts on taxpayers’ monies.
Editor, it is evident that Mr. Vieira is on board to cut the budget and disregard the laws as well. Mr. Vieira dissected my letter well which even brought him to a point of regurgitating. Furthermore, he failed to comment on the basic fact that the Oppositions’ intent to cut the budget is in violation of our Constitution. When would Guyanese at large recollect Chief Justice Ian Chang’s ruling that cutting the budget is both unconstitutional and unlawful? The Honourable Attorney General Anil Nandlall also made it clear in the National Assembly the constitutional grounds of the Government and Opposition on budgetary affairs. Moreover, the question I raised, should the ordinary Guyanese also disregard the judicial system?  Should we flout the document that governs our nation?  I can only surmise by paying a blind eye to the constitution and laws will have severe consequences to any nation. Mr. Vieira added that the Opposition almost never gets to express their views on these two public entities, but that’s simply not the case. For instance, the debate series aired on NCN, invited the Opposition for dialogues but they selectively ‘absented’ themselves. My critique also mentioned that the Opposition is often ridiculed and criticised on these public domains. Are these comments ridiculing because it is in contravention of his political views? If Mr. Vieira is so versatile in the media, why not comment on the broadcasting networks that the Opposition APNU and AFC exclusively have that ridicules the government? Why not point out that the government has no say in that as well?
Editor, Mr. Vieira’s letter emphatically embraced cutting of the budget as he reaffirmed, “Exactly, cut, regardless of the circumstances.”  Now the majority of Guyanese that he spoke of should be alarmed with a statement of such magnitude. With simple logic, one can conclude from his statement, that the interest of this majority of people is also not important, so cut despite the outcomes.  According to Mr. Vieira, we should cut at whatever cost without factoring in the repercussions.  I hope the majority of Guyanese can see the recklessness in that statement. By the Opposition placing cuts on the budget without evaluating the aftermaths, doesn’t that weigh more heavily and affect the majority people that Mr. Vieira seems to advocate? Editor, Mr. Vieira then ended his diatribe with these lines: “what is dividing us, is the total disregard of the people in this nation…”  I find that very contradictory. I mean if my memory serves me well, he exclaimed, “Cut, regardless of the circumstances” isn’t that a total disregard for the majority people as well? Is this a decision to be taken based on political stance or the best interest of Guyanese? The people of Guyana should not allow the label of being majority and minority, but as one people – Guyanese. Mr. Vieira catapulted himself speaking about NCN and GINA saturating young peoples’ minds with propaganda, but right there his categorisation of minority and majority reveals division within his own. As Abraham Lincoln famously noted, “A house divided against itself cannot stand.” Furthermore, I firmly believe that working together as Guyanese and embracing a constitutional driven government is our way forward.

Persons of Tony Vieira’s ilk are from a bygone era. Their usefulness is no more. The quicker they are ignored the better for Guyana.

MAHENDRA HARIRAJ