AS THE nation continues the process of marking the 50th Anniversary of our Independence, truthful and honest examination is required of the journey, symbols and institutions that gave us our unique identify as Guyanese.At this juncture, where there exists an intensification of the calls for inclusivity, national unity and social cohesion — which I am inclined to think are premised on the desire to deepen and strengthen nationhood — such must take cognisance of what ought to be.

The existence of our National Motto, Coat of Arms, National Anthem, National Pledge and National Flag are significant to establishing, maintaining and defending who we are as a people.

When the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) was in opposition, its leadership walked around the country making the case that these national identifiers were symbols of the People’s National Congress government and that party’s supporters. This was a strategy to energise the PPP party faithful to influence non-support for national programmes and events.

It is instructive to note that when the PPP assumed office in October 1992, this nation suffered the embarrassment, for quite some time, of having ministers of government unable to recite the National Pledge and sing the National Anthem.
In our 50th year, it ought to be of national import and concern that discussions were recently held in the National Assembly by our elected representatives on the issue of the proliferation of the green and yellow colours in national projects and events. On one hand, a side of the House has expressed condemnation of this act. The other side of the House, in response to the issue, which is deserving of serious consideration, sought refuge in attributing the green and yellow colours to that of the National Flag. The discussion ended without a response and recognition by either side of the House as to the true colours of the National Flag.

The National Flag, which is named the Golden Arrowhead, comprises of green, white, gold, black and red colours. All of the colours have specific shades, given that they represent specific aspects of the nation’s resources, its people’s indomitable will, and their aspirations. These colours have been passed into law; and unless the law is changed, they remain the national colours and cannot be substituted by any other colour.

Inclusivity, national unity and social cohesion can be built only when the people of this nation unite around universal principles. In the instance of colours on matters relating to the State being involved in any event or activity, such must at all times conform to the legal colours. Doing otherwise would not only be an affront to the law, but would also be engaging in acts of division, setting a bad precedent, and creating opportunity for any successor government to lower the bar.

Subjecting this nation and its people to colour domination, inconsistent with what the law has enshrined, is counter-productive to the national motto.

The Guyana Constitution, Second Schedule, expressly makes known that the design and colour of the Guyana Flag are interpreted as follows: The GREEN background symbolises the agricultural and forested nature of Guyana; the WHITE symbolises its water and rivers’ potential; the GOLDEN ARROW symbolises Guyana’s mineral wealth and its forward thrust; the BLACK BORDER symbolizes the endurance that will sustain the golden arrow’s forward thrust; the RED TRIANGLE represents the zeal and dynamic nature of the nation building that lies before this young and independent country.”

Given its implication for the nation’s identity, the debate about colours is a serious issue. It should not have been trivialised in the nation’s highest decision-making forum, even moreso that this branch is tasked with law-making responsibility, and in the annals of our history has approved the colours of the National Flag.

Our elected representatives need to be mindful what they say in the National Assembly, and be more informed and respecting of our national symbols; for they have a greater responsibility to set an example that would positively influence the young in our midst.

The 50th Anniversary must see terms like inclusivity, national unity and social cohesion move beyond sloganeering and be put into reality. Make no mistake: this is reliant on saying and acting in concert with our national laws.