AS a young Guyanese professional, I am disheartened and somewhat insulted to read an article by three individuals who one might expect to engage in honest and unbiased debate. I refer to the article in Kaieteur news titled, “The PPP has not done enough to fight crime”, by Dr. Asquith Rose, Chandra Deolall and Dr. Merle Spencer-Marks published on the said newspaper’s website on March 10, 2015.

The claim that the PPP has not done enough to fight crime in itself was the shock; but it was the evidence and suggested cause of the issues of criminal activities, their links to the economy, and addressing the problem is what dealt the disappointing blow and convinced me that the content of the article was either convenient dishonesty or academic ignorance of the subject matter on the part of the authors.
Without doubt, crime in all its versions does not support economic, financial and social prosperity at the household level, nor at the country level. For this reason, it must be fought with intelligence, strategy and brute force when necessary to abate all forms of it.
Crime in Guyana today is at its lowest in our history; and this did not happen because the PPP Government ignored the problem. It is because significant attention was paid to it. Unlike the PNC administration, which supports criminal activities, the PPP has a record of anti-crime strategy backed by evidence.
Twenty-one murders in the first two months of 2015 is indeed bad; after all, a life is a life. But one cannot talk about the issue of crime without asking the question of whether this is an increase from last year and the year before during the same period? What are the likely motives behind these murders? And whether these murders are linked to the fact that there is an election coming up? Is this a strategy of intimidation and scaring of the population that the PNC administration has a record of?
Criminal activities are ever changing; globalisation, deeper integration, increased tourism and general economic development all have significant influence on the nature, frequency, type, and severity of crime. With all the technology and financing in the United States, random shooting in theatres and schools have not been abated. If anything, it seems that criminals are always ahead of the game. I draw this comparison to convey clearly to the Guyanese people that even for a country like Guyana, fighting crime will and always will be a continuous and evolving challenge for the Government.
The suggestion from the authors that some effective multi-pronged approach to fighting crime that APNU+AFC would implement would make Guyana safer is nothing more than a gimmick, considering the fact that the leader of the coalition, Mr. Granger was Brigadier when crime was at the highest level in Guyana. So bad was it that today, we are still struggling to deal with murder cases under the PNC administration. Do these people think that Guyanese are stupid? Or is it a convenient dishonesty aimed at instilling fear and panic in society, as is the signature of the PNC.
It is an insult to the Guyanese people to use words like “democracy”, “dignity”, “economic progress”, and “the PNC” in the same sentence. History is always there for us to look back at for the evidence, and none of this makes any sense to us.
It is true that addressing crime will take more than just increased budgetary allocations, BUT it is also true and even more important than the skills, talent, technologies, intelligence and human capital necessary for combating crime has to be invested in by the State, and therefore necessitate more budgetary allocation.
APNU and AFC slashed the very budgetary allocation that the PPP/C made for the Ministry of Home Affairs, but here these authors are telling Guyanese that the PPP/C didn’t do enough. This is outright hypocritical, and again, disappointing.
I am not sure how the authors measured majority versus minority, but claiming that the majority of Guyanese have had it hard because of bad economic policies of the PPP/C is yet another statement that demonstrated the ignorance and wicked intentions of the authors.
People always tend to think that they can do something better, and therefore always ready to blindly and widely condemn. Every report on Guyana’s economic performance, including the IMF and World Bank reports that have been published since 1992, have provided evidence, and concluded that there are improvements in Guyana’s macroeconomic environment and overall economic management of the country’s affairs, even during the worst economic crises in modern history.
How we interpret these results is as important as the results themselves. This does not mean that because the economy is improving, everyone will suddenly get rich. That is not how economic prosperity meets everyone; the process takes time, and it will reach some before others. Nevertheless, one can still look and see what the evidences are showing thus far. Not so long ago, one could have counted the number of cars there were in Guyana; today, you can’t even count how many are passing you on the streets every 30 minutes. More Guyanese today have affordable housing than ever before; more Guyanese are in school today than ever before; more Guyanese have access to healthcare today than ever before; there are more paved roads than any time in our history; and this list can go on and on.
Clearly this is evidence of economic growth; and with this opportunities for further growth. But none of this means that tomorrow everyone can wake up and find wealth falling in front of their doors; it doesn’t mean that acquiring at least a decent and happy and prosperous life would require little or no work. And it certainly doesn’t mean that you don’t have to work, but will have a salary (only Opposition politicians get this privilege). What it does mean is that Guyana is becoming a better place for families to live and pursue their individual happiness and prosperity, one day at a time. Every one of us still has to get up each day and work for the future we want for ourselves and family.
I dare the members of the Opposition, including the aforementioned authors, to declare to the people of Guyana whether their individual wealth would have grown from 1992, and by how much. I am sure they wouldn’t, because it would be evident that they probably got richer than anyone else in Guyana under the same PPP/C-led Government. They wake up and realise that they have done so well, and suddenly feel that they can manage the economy better that the PPP/C.
When people do not understand the true cause of things, it is very easy for them to blame it on corruption and mismanagement, since these words sound intelligent, and as if they know what they are saying. If the authors got one thing correct it was the fact that the PPP/C has always embraced the notion that “political, economic, social and technological success requires the safety and security on our country,” as was clearly articulated in the PPP/C manifesto in 2011, and will remain there for as long as the PPP/C exists.
Every day leading up to an election always tests our level of awareness, and how informed we are of the present as well as the past. For every good story told, there will be ten to discourage and destroy us as a people; it is a typical divide-and-conqueror strategy that has always been used by the Opposition. I will do my part in trying to ensure that the lies, fabrications, dishonesty and malfeasance of those who devote their lives to destroy this country do not go unnoticed and unquestioned. Sometimes these come from people who we least expect it from, and from persons who feel they can deliberately misrepresent the reality to pursue their own cause.
APNU and the AFC believe that Guyanese are cynical (stupid), for it is the only way they can gain control of the State. We all deserve to live without fear for our lives and in a society where we can pursue our own happiness.
The PPP/C has it strengths and weaknesses like every single organisation that exists on this planet, but from 1992 to now, in every walk of life, there has been significant and notable improvement. This is as a result of the choices our grandparents and some parents have made. What will be the story of our generation, and what will be the story of our children?

DHANRAJ SINGH AND STEPHEN KISSOON