SUICIDE in Guyana is an all-too-familiar term, and remains one of the leading causes of death. So common is it that, in 2012 and 2014, we were reported as having the highest suicide rate in the world; a record I believe we still hold.As the deaths continue, there have been many lectures, roadside talks, advertisements, testimonials, and movements against suicide; yet the numbers have not decreased significantly, because as much as those things help, they often are not enough to deal with the problem in its entirety.

This is where the government and other officials representing the interests of the people come in; as, often, they are the ones we look to to pass motions and laws which can affect us positively. We saw last Thursday an attempt to pass such a motion by Opposition member Dr. Vindhya Persaud, who had opportunity to take her motion — which from all indications is a good one — and show the government the steps that need to be taken now and what needs to be taken in the future to lessen the scourge of suicide in our country.

However, for reasons largely remaining speculative, Persaud chose instead to trivialise suicide by laying claims that “suicide cases in Guyana are linked to the loss and lack of jobs under the new government, the decline of rice and sugar production, and even the proposed introduction of parking meters in Georgetown.”

Persaud’s exploitation of a tragedy that festered and reached a worldwide record under her party’s rule served to remind me that officials who are there to represent our interests are not above politicising issues to further their respective agendas.
While I would like to see Persaud’s motion passed, I cannot help but wonder at the authenticity of it all. Her comments have me wondering whether she really cared about the motion; and if so, why did she resort to cheap, unsubstantiated rhetoric when the best thing she could have done was not only establish solutions, but seek to work with those in government if the people’s interests were indeed paramount?

Was her motive merely instigation? And if so, why do we have someone like that representing our interests on something as important as suicide? The unfortunate thing is that there are many who view their leaders as demigods, and as a result take every word they say as law, without questioning their claims or asking for proof to substantiate faulty and largely divisive rhetoric, such as Persaud’s.

Persaud aside, the ruling coalition is not without blame in all of this. Without giving any clear reason for the knee-jerk disregard for Persaud’s motion, Public Security Minister Khemraj Ramjattan just stated that the motion could not be accepted in that form; even adding that “the Opposition never saw it fit to do many of the things it proposed in its motion”, and suggesting that the Opposition was merely trying to steal the coalition’s “thunder”.

Why the coalition government and its supporters still resort to that one phrase which states that the PPP/C did nothing — as if that is a plausible excuse for inactivity — is something which no fair mind can explain. What the government’s response showed us is the infantile nature of our country’s leaders on both sides of the divide, and how they are not above throwing the idea of bi-partisanship out to instead attack each other.

The motion is not a ridiculous one; and the government must be careful it does not shoot down every one of the Opposition’s contributions merely because they are coming from the Opposition. The public is owed an explanation as to why the motion was not passed, and the suitable plans the government itself has in place to further address suicide in the country.