Dear Editor,

I HAVE read, in the Stabroek News of Thursday, September 1, 2016, on page 17, an article bearing the caption “REO, APNU+AFC councillors walked out from Region Three meeting”, and I am deeply disturbed by it.It is my humble opinion that the reporter erroneously carried a story without engaging in investigative journalism. Had he or she done that, then the story would have been written differently; but since the reporter didn’t do that, permit me to offer my rebuttal on what was reported, because I was there from the beginning.

To begin with, the first paragraph stated that the REO walked out of the council’s statutory meeting along with nine councillors of the APNU+AFC coalition after the Regional Chairman asked for a report. Editor, the reporter was inaccurate. Present at the meeting were seven councillors of the APNU+AFC, and when the Regional Chairman was under the Agenda Item “Matters Arising”, he turned to the REO, and in a loud tone aggressively asked what is the update from the minister. The REO, in his attempt to answer, was disrupted and spoken to again by the chairman in an even louder tone of voice.

At that point, like any right-minded individual, the REO packed up his books and said boldly that he was excusing himself from the meeting. As he walked out, nine councillors followed him, of which seven were APNU+AFC. I don’t need to say which side the other two are from.

Editor, at no time did the REO ever say he had no report to give to anybody.

Secondly, it was reported in the fourth paragraph of the article that Faerber told Stabroek News that as Clerk of council, Jaikarran was supposed to produce the report at the meeting. Editor, this particular part of the article I cannot comprehend, since the minister not only wrote, but spoke ad nauseam on the reasons why the plantain chip factory at Wakenaam cannot come into operation, and councillors of the PPP would have acknowledged receipt of the minister’s address on the matter. But as outlined above, the REO was not given a proper chance to answer.

Thirdly, in the fifth paragraph, SN reported that Faerber is contending that Jaikaran’s behaviour cannot be accepted, and he has to apologise before he returns to the next meeting. This I consider extremely unscrupulous, since the REO is the Head of the Regional Administration, and excluding him is excluding all programme heads, and even the minute taker. Given what has been reported, and considering what I would have observed, it is the Regional Chairman who wants to create mayhem in Region 3, and this should not be allowed.

Notwithstanding the above, I firmly do not believe the REO has to apologise for anything. It was grossly unethical, unprofessional, and by far uncouth of the Regional Chairman to believe that he can speak to the Regional Executive Officer the way he did; and further, if at any time an apology should be offered, it should come from the Regional Chairman.

Lastly, I would have recognised that in the said article a councillor reported that the REO said no money is available to clean the school compounds. Editor, the best way to dispel public misperception is to deal with it directly. The Education Committee informed council on that very day that school compounds would be clean before school reopens. At the time of writing this missive, 95 percent of schools are clean, and the NDCs and the REO were instrumental in getting the schools up and ready.

Editor, in closing, let me, like others, say that the REO is a noble gentleman who is seen as a god in this region. He is a disciplined and courteous young man who has an open door policy of which the poorest of individuals can meet. Denis Jaikaran is working for the development of this region; and if the Regional Chairman does not recognise that the tide has changed and that he needs to respect and operate within the confines of the law, he and the REO will always be at loggerheads. The REO is a law-abiding citizen; Julius Faerber should get on board.
Yours faithfully,
PARMESHWAR RAMDIOL,
Citizen of Region 3 – La Jalousie