PRESIDENT David Granger addressed the National Assembly on Thursday last in what was his third presentation for 2016. Listening to him referring to themes that have come to mark the politics he proposes, it behooves examination of the state of affairs under which Guyanese are living.Arguably one of the most powerful statements made by the President was the charge given to the House that, “it must resolve to work together to reunite our nation [and Members], must take the first steps on the long road to social cohesion, to political inclusion, and to economic resilience.”

The House comprises members of Cabinet and the governing APNU+AFC parties, and members of the Opposition PPP/C. By addressing both sides in this forum, the President is reminding Honourable Members, and all Guyana, of Parliament’s responsibility, as the nation’s highest decision-making forum, to deliver leadership and guidance to the people.

The political system allows for any Member to take a proactive stance and bring issues to the House to be deliberated and/or voted on. The parliamentary committees which allow for collaboration and oversight of the nation’s business include members of the Government and Opposition.

There is no reason to question or doubt the President’s vision for Guyana and his charge to the House. Where ordinary citizens harbour reasonable doubts, those are in regard to whether politicians are committed to improving the management of the state’s business and whether they would honour the promises made during the campaigns.

It has not escaped attention that the present Opposition, which continues to make allegations of mistreatment by the Speaker and has called for more parliamentary sittings, had, when it held government, paid scant, if any regard, to the then Opposition, which presently forms the Government. That being said, there comes a time in a nation’s evolution when political praxis rises above being one of expediency in the interest of self or party to one of what is good and right for country.

If social cohesion is to be achieved, the zero-sum approach in politics is not the appropriate approach. People can cohere only when there is mutual respect and appropriate treatment. Where there exist isms that shut others out, treat them differently, or assume knowledge of what is right/best for them, cohesion will remain elusive. Yet these are the very practices that have come to characterise political discourses and decision-making, and have given rise to the disconcerting thought that unity matters to politicians only when in the opposition.

Where social cohesion is absent or efforts are being made to undermine it, the President’s next charge to Honourable Members to work for political inclusion is threatened. This society is not short of examples of apparent disinterest in political inclusion over the years. This gives rise to concern whether noble ideals are listened to, or seen as important to put into action. At all levels of Government (national, regional and local), inclusive of the Opposition, there are claims and perceptions that elected officials are disinterested in listening to those outside of their inner circles and involving them in decision-making.

A challenge is facing this nation, and it is not among ordinary citizens. In spite of daily aggravation by the other or within group, ordinary citizens have carved out space to get along and work with each other, independent of the politicians. It may be of interest to politicians to ascertain what is responsible for such camaraderie, and replicate same when making decisions that impact the people’s welfare.

Citizens are aware that elected representatives share cordial relations, as evident in social gatherings. Similarly, citizens realise that when it comes to attending to matters that affect the ordinary man and woman, cordiality is discarded and the landscape is transformed into one of acrimony.
Issues are sacrificed at the altar of what the other thinks must be done, and who is right or wrong. Support is refused to the other because the idea is not theirs, or they would be denied acknowledgment for being the initiators and executors. The finessing of this conduct has reached the level of professional craftsmanship that denies opportunity and ability to ensure economic resilience for the ordinary people.

This is the state of affairs under which average Guyanese have been living for years. Those who can flee have fled. Those who desire to stay and make the change from within sometimes feel it is a losing battle; while some have tuned out, and others have decided that, for their own survival, ‘if you can’t beat them, join them.’

President Granger continues, in his speeches, to sound the appropriate notes, and citizens expect the politicians to act accordingly. They dare to hope, harbour expectations, and continue to call for actions in keeping with those of the President’s.