By Alva Solomon

“IF YOUTHS are not involved in development, then why are we here?” asked Sherina Mayers as youths from the ‘Government’ and the ‘Opposition’ representing various secondary schools squared off Monday at a special sitting of the Youth Parliament.

The youth MPs were locked in debate over their involvement in building peaceful and inclusive societies in the Commonwealth.
The event was held in observance of Commonwealth Day 2016, which was celebrated on Monday and was organised by the Guyana Branch of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association.
The youths debated a Motion which was proposed by Arian Richmond, who took the role of Leader of the Opposition. The debate saw a host of countering arguments on various aspects of society, relative to the subject of youth inclusivity.
The proposed Motion contended that youth cohesion in building peaceful and inclusive societies in the Commonwealth was lacking.
The students touched on several topical issues, including the recent fiery deaths at the Camp Street Prison, infrastructural matters across the country, the Guyana/Venezuela border controversy and the Disciplined Services, among other matters.

DEBATE WINNER

In the end, after more than five hours of debating the Motion, the Opposition was announced by Chief Judge, Education Minister Dr Rupert Roopnaraine as the winners of the debate. George McFerlen, who debated in the role of Shadow Minister of Social Cohesion, was adjudged the Best Speaker.
Other judges were PPP/C MP Joseph Hamilton and Aleema Nazir of the Rights of the Child Commission.
Earlier, Minister of Tourism and Telecommunications, Cathy Hughes, and Canadian High Commissioner Pierre Giroux sat in for the opening proceedings.
The students, who were drawn from schools across the 10 administrative regions, made spirited contributions to the debate. However, it was evident that the Opposition members were more organised and assertive in the presentations.

YOUTHS UNDER SIEGE

Richmond, in her opening arguments, said that 605 of Commonwealth youth are under 25 years and are not centrally involved in the decision-making process.
She said that the youths are “under siege”, noting that the youths must illustrate strong leadership qualities to exist in today’s world.
She said that youth involvement in today’s society is either stifled or least considered.
Dominique Clarke, who represented the government in her capacity as Prime Minister, told the young parliamentarians that the youths in Guyana are being catered for. She asked “How involved can a youth be in the governance of his/her country?” She said that like everything else, there is a limit, and informed the Opposition that the government has been engaging youths continually in the decision-making process of the country.
She said the Motion before the House serves as an “apparent depiction of the oblivion in which the Opposition is in.”
Clarke spoke on the issue of democracy, and the role citizens in a democratic nation play. She said that citizens participate in public affairs, noting that participation is key to nation-building. She added that this participation includes being able to vote at elections, debate issues publicly, attend community meetings, and being free to gather or protest publicly.
Orvin Russell, of the Opposition, spoke with flair when he addressed several topical issues, including the conditions at the prisons.
According to him, the government should channel its attention towards improving existing facilities, as well as expending monies on youth programmes.
Russell was singled out by the judges for his style of debate, while two other students — Shawn Shewram and Ave Toney, all of whom spoke on behalf of the Opposition — were singled out for their contributions to the debate.
Dr Roopnarine, in his remarks, told the students that he was struck by their thoroughness and commitment.
“This was very, very impressive,” he said. He noted that for the first time in his parliamentary life, he had observed such an occurrence, whereby students were pacing and walking while preparing for their presentations. “This also happened in the bathroom; and it also took my breath away, there was a young man pacing,” he said.

He congratulated the students for their hard work, but the Education Minister observed that the debate could have benefitted from “a little more energy or waywardness.” He said it was one of the most ‘correct’ parliaments he had ever experienced. “So, I hope that parliamentarians watching your debate today will take something from it,” he said.
Parliament is not only about making nice speeches but also about being convinced and passionate about what one wants to say, the Education Minister declared.

LIVE STREAM
Nazir, in her remarks, told the students that she will be looking forward to seeing some of the faces in politics in the future of the country. MP Hamilton told the students it took courage and the concise use of words to speak in the National Assembly. He said the discussion was being streamed live and he noted that their parents and relatives would have been listening in.
He said that the persons who spoke on behalf of the Government were well researched, made good speeches but he noted that the group should have indicated in their remit where the government has established policies. He said the motion debated speaks to how they are including youth in decision-making.
Hamilton said as politician he knows that persons in the public domain know who is serious and “who is gaffing”, and to this end he noted some of the speakers brought passion to their presentations.
The students gathered over a three-day period to prepare for the debate, the second following last year’s debate. They were expected to be treated to a special dinner at the Pegasus Hotel last evening where some students were to be given awards for their contributions.