WHEN the National Assembly Speaker, with the support of the Government bench, saw it fitting to disallow the call of the Opposition PPP/C members to have the parliamentary Economic Services Committee engage in a fan-out exercise in Regions Three, Four, Five and Six on the future of sugar, it was tactically a political error.

This government, by its action, has given the PPP/C the life it needed to make a national economic issue one of ethnic mobilisation, energising the party into a national political campaign. The sugar industry, particularly the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo), is not the property of the APNU+AFC neither the PPP/C; it is the property of the people of this country. And it is time Guyanese stand up and say to the politicians, “enough is enough!”

The request for a fan-out can be seen within the context that citizens’ of the identified regions livelihoods will be directly affected, and as such, the call for engagement requires a bi-partisan approach, and if possible bringing on board other stakeholders. To say no to such a request without an alternative leaves one to conclude that both sides see the issue through narrow political lens, which will not and cannot help sugar or any issue that has national connotation.

One may ask, “What’s the alternative to the White Paper presented in the National Assembly, and where the reactions are expected to come from on its content? It is worthwhile noting that the best possible reactions can only come from the constituents affected and the wider society. Instead, the government has taken a stance that it has prepared its White Paper and there would be no black, grey, or any other shade that can be read into and discussed from it.

As for the opposition, it is being reminded the decline and plight of sugar did not start today, and it is for this reason that the nation had the Diversification Programme during the Forbes Burnham Government that it helped to politically undermine. Successive PPP/C governments have grossly mismanaged GuySuCo and finally brought it to its knees.

The nation has also experienced during the Desmond Hoyte Government Booker Tate playing a role in the management of GuySuCo to prepare the corporation for privatisation and MINPROC was put into LINMINE to carry out the same responsibility. The PPP/C Government stuck to the original intent of the management contract in LINMINE, but took a position that GuySuCo will not be privatised.

Over recent weeks, the Opposition has been arguing that there needs to be a Social Impact Study, which rightly so is required to inform decisions of this nature. But one needs to ask, “What has the PPP/C done over the years in putting studies in place in the bauxite and sugar industries before it moved to make decisions that impacted the affected communities’ well-being? Bauxite was privatised, the government’s shares in GT&T were sold, and other privatisation deals took place under the PPP/C and will happen now under the APNU+AFC Government.

All those sitting in the National Assembly, and I hold primarily accountable Moses Nagamootoo, Bharrat Jagdeo, Clement Rohee and Gail Teixeira, are abrogating an important responsibility to society and the workers of this country. The National Assembly, under the Cheddi Jagan Government, had debated and passed a policy paper on privatisation, which says that 10 per cent of the shares of every company to be privatised will be put aside for workers.

The passage of this paper, unless a contrary decision by the Assembly is taken, becomes the nation’s policy position on privatisation and should be respected and enforced. That the politicians are choosing to do otherwise is indicative that the governance of this country is not being driven by interest in the collective, agreements and laws, but sectional and self-serving.

When government took the decision to close the Wales factory, in Region Three without any consultation with stakeholders, it was emboldened, feeling it can do likewise with the other factories. It misinterpreted those meetings held at Wales as a one-shot exercise, and people would get tired and retreat. Its miscalculated action towards Wales was tantamount to lighting its own pyre, and has since continued to add a few more logs by moving to close estates in Regions Four and Six without stakeholders’ involvement.

In the closure of Diamond and the re-organising of the East Coast estates, the Jagdeo Government refused to engage stakeholders and sugar workers were only paid their redundancy packages when they took GuySuCo to court. These acts caused the PPP/C to pay the price in the 2011 and 2015 Elections. The party is mindful of its past contempt for stakeholders in decision-making and the price it paid, and is working assiduously in the sugar belt to redeem itself.

Given human nature, the PPP/C traditional supporters who stayed away or voted for another party/group in 2011 and 2015 will be prepared to give them a second chance in 2020, especially when they are calling for this government’s ears and they feel they are being ignored or disrespected. This is political fodder no cunning politician will avoid exploiting.

Cheddi Jagan, Forbes Burnham or Desmond Hoyte would not have ignored the opportunity to engage in a fan-out exercise, particularly in its rival’s stronghold and in the company of their leadership. While they would have been mindful that the exercise would take them into adversarial territory, they would have done the necessary ground- work to make a strong a case, including interacting with the people, with the intent to listen, incorporate ideas where necessary, and ensure that they could establish a working relationship thereafter. This is how shrewd politics is played and shrewd politicians think and act.

As a trade unionist, I’m in full solidarity with the sugar workers’ struggle for inclusion and involvement in the management and decision-making processes about GuySuCo, which are and will be affecting their well-being. At the same time, I cannot ignore the environment within which I am operating and the feedback around me. The division in the society as it relates to the future of sugar and support for sugar workers is also informed by partisan political interests and past experiences.

People remember the PPP/C’s mistreatment of public servants and bauxite workers, the industrial conflicts between GuySuCo and the sugar unions during the PNC’s tenure in government, and the absence of solidarity between the sugar unions and other unions during the tenure of the PPP/C government.

This society is so fractured that it requires a vision that embraces the commonality of interests as human beings and recognition that whereas today it may be me, tomorrow it could be you. Where this government fails to realise it is lighting its pyre and inflicting further injury in the society, it is doing so at its own peril.