By Marlon Bristol

MUCH of what is required for Guyana’s development going forward is the right mindset, attitudes, and will of the people to graduate to ‘higher ground’. This will not and cannot be achieved without missteps. Show me countries that avoided mishaps, those that quickly mitigated them, and leapfrog the Kuznets’ curve principle in going Green, and we have some examples to be followed, at least in theory. We need to begin to balance the information, facts and evidence in the public domain.

To give the public the knowledge on what Guyana can do and be (capabilities realised), and begin to manage expectations on results we would like to achieve. This is important because the court of public opinion always makes it appear like the judge and jury of Guyanese existence are those that sit in Parliament. Even in Parliament, they make it seem as though the government ‘the governing’ is a political party who is solely responsible for the results this country achieves. This demonstrates a clear lack of understanding by the citizenry of what their citizenship potential is and could be realised.

In some circles of Guyanese communities home and abroad this is constantly repeated: the pessimism. Overwhelmingly, the quantum of unhelpful rhetoric dovetails into making anyone that speaks of them seem like they know what they are talking about. But essentially, in my view, many such commentators and comments find a problem to every solution. How can a country end up sustainable if you are crowning people who problematise solutions as pundits, rather than heralding proposals of solutions to problems? This situation is so normalised that a gloomy conversation is easy to come by. I acknowledge putting the evidence on the table, facts and conjecture, but also solutions! Recently I saw a researched article written to indicate why for Guyana, ‘the cards are stacked in favour of the resource curse’. Continuously, this is inundating the space and debate on what and how we can be better, more importantly avoid the resource curse. Quite naturally, the next piece of information is to respond as to how the resource curse can be avoided by using examples where they exist.

It appears as though even when we think of solutions we want everything to be so ‘perfect’ that imperfection seems like the quintessential faux pas, itself deemed to be a failure, the ultimate depravity. This leads to the logical fallacy circular argument most times never-ending because of our egos and persistence to be right and relevant. If not we then gravitate to the all too familiar historical reasons why our destiny is to suffer the same faith. More currently, we debunk Green State Sustainable Development on this new discovery of oil rather than embrace it. We try to make the case that oil and Green development don’t mix, moving to a kind of non-sequitur.

Resources
Most of our debate on the new-found resources is heavily skewed toward all the things that can go wrong, and not about how we may overcome. This is so much trending that all opposition forces see it fit to motivate public interest into a clear-cut divide or on the slippery slope of the relativity of good and evil. The kind of nonstop arguments about the positive and normative, what is versus what ought to be. But believe it or not, with the quantum of resources projected, race, gender, age, and all the socio-cultural difference will be mutated or amplified almost immediately.

The reality is that we have as many challenges to tackle in building our capacity, as we have in dealing with our mentality. Both are inimical to our future. Guyana is quickly pressed to recognise that it is our approach to the cup as half empty or half full that will take its toll. The country has popped up on the world map with the growth projections and big business interested; not due to a Jim Jones tragedy, a wharf floating away and the like, or our perceived and real race issues, etc. The notification is now due to potential about to be realised, and so the results we want, cannot for the next three to four decades, be subject to the ever-present ‘money problems’. It is in this context that using our time to think negatively than positively becomes a concern. The constant banging of an unenthusiastic conversation drowning the space for constructive discourse. A similar point noted recently by the chief executive fficer for DDL, at the recently held GCCI dinner. When the current space is not used to construct a bright future, because we have never really experienced and sustained opportunities, then we are really …curse!

The problem culture of destructive thoughts equip our minds to articulate failure, and have it land smoothly, a kind of acceptable livable self-discontent. People are coming up with a problem to every possible solution, and can tell you why a remedy can’t work, rather than the other way around. I remembered listening to the Parliament of Barbados years ago debating climate change, talking about in 15 to 20 years what is going to be happening to sea level rise, how it will affect their tourist economy etc. Returned to Guyana in that same week, only to listen to a political debate looking backward in the 1960s and 1970s. There is always a history lesson in Guyana that should help us, especially young people to decide on the future by engendering the past.

Today, in similar fashion, we debate why the economy in 2018 will close out at less than four per cent growth versus the impending potential of the economy growing as much as 40 per cent beyond 2020. We bicker on such issues while it has been established that since independence Guyana’s long-term growth has been volatile and characterised by short periods of high growth and long periods of stagnation, Armendariz et al (2007). Here is an opportunity to leapfrog this, presenting the resources from oil. But, it seems as though we debate oil to note why Guyana will remain the same in terms of rich and poor, or will worsen – the wealth gap, inequality etc. The doubting game, if other countries experienced this, who is Guyana to not do the same. We are inputting and imputing our mindset and attitudes into the production and distribution functions, the gaps are already given as the constant, thus the result from the equation is ‘doom-ery’.

Public conversation
The content of most public conversation is so unhelpful; I read of a commentator trying to make the case of a criticism against the government borrowing today, in spite of projected revenues tomorrow. The case was made that in 2018 Guyana’s debt was similar to that of 2014, totaling USD 1.6 billion at the end of 2017. Mind you, part of this debt had to be incurred because of capital flight, some folks vex that their party not in power, others vex because they are finally being asked to pay their tax liability. This debt to GDP is expected to climb to 49 per cent and is propagated as bad because it leaves little room for investment in new projects, this analysis when oil is imminent, could you imagine! This is like saying, when you earn your income if you have to service debt to the tune of almost half of it, then you are not likely to be able to do anything additional or new! Imagine arguing this point with public servants or most working domicile Guyanese, for whom this is not only worse but standard. Further, imagine trying to make this a substantive point and criticism of the household member in the face of a great windfall only shortly away. Now further contemplate that the IMF 2018 Article IV Mission indicated that debt will be attenuated by oil revenues, and also earlier reported that Guyana will move to an immediate current account surplus from oil exports in 2020. Now tell me for crying out loud, if you have a family to feed as a poor person, with a pittance of income and starving children, what would you do knowing your salary is guaranteed to increase shortly? Borrow so that your family can eat and repay later when your salary increases, knowing that you are creating debt which will be a claim on your future income; or starve your family asking them to ‘bare deh chafe’ until later when your salary increases? This is not rocket science; at least I don’t think so!

Our unique way of learning ‘by doing’, in a nutshell, is to discuss the negative first. In fact, I saw a conference on ‘Public Corruption and the Oil Curse: Lessons from Developing Countries’ and as mentioned before, an article on why the cards are stacked ‘in favour’ of Guyana experiencing the oil curse. Folks are probably laughing at my thinking that I am living in a dream world to see oil as a blessing, and positive for the transformation of Guyana, challenges included. But the oil and gas find, contextualised in the poverty I have lived through is indeed that, allowing me to dream. Of course, under the watchful eyes of the citizenry who have had many instances and evidence perceived or real that shook their resolve and hence their doubts about whether or not oil and gas is really a benefit. I am aware like everyone else we got 99 problems but..!