– “No-show” of regional chairman contradicts consensualism 

Dear Editor
ACCORDING to a media report, David Armogan, Regional Chairman of East Berbice-Corentyne, Region Six, was a “’no-show”’at the recent  commissioning of two new GECOM offices at Whim and at Corriverton, respectively.
Gracing the occasion was the newly appointed chairperson of this all-important constitutional electoral body, who reminded Berbicians that registration was the first step in being able to vote, irrespective of which party or candidate they choose. Call it a timely reminder as the procedure of house-to-house registration continues apace.

Unless Armogan had fallen ill or had to contend with some extreme circumstance beyond his control, he should have been present to deliver an address. In the absence of any publicly given reason by Armogan, or on his behalf, his “no-show” is concluded as deliberate and in keeping with his political party, the PPP/C’s strategy of non-cooperation with President David Granger’s administration. But then, one must ask this question: how can he boycott an important occasion which was graced by the Madame chairperson of GECOM, Ret’d Justice Claudette Singh, a consensually agreed nomination between his party boss Bharrat Jagdeo and President David Granger, for the GECOM premier office? What signal does this emit? It would seem to contradict the spirit of working together for positive outcomes of the many prevailing issues at the moment.

Armogan should be aware that his office carries certain functions that he is obligated to carry out, since he is a public official, of seniority, and receiving a salary funded by the taxpayers of this country, inclusive of the public servants of his region, for such duties. For that matter, regional chairpersons and regional executive officers are all paid public servants. Therefore, as the top regional official, he is expected to be present at such public functions, inclusive of the important protocol of greeting and welcoming the president, the prime minister, ministers of the government and other dignitaries.
Further, the occasion of the commissioning of the two new GECOM offices was not a political party moment, or for reasons of  partisan politics. Instead, it was about bringing further public services to the citizens of the region, in this case, the important GECOM services of registration. And this is in keeping with the broader vision of capital towns, where other public services are already being made available in regions across Guyana, removing the need for travel to the city. One must therefore ask, how can a “no-show’’ be justified in such circumstances, or any other that is relevant to bringing vital services to citizens?

The Armogans of the administrative regions are here reminded that their continued tether to a political party of the nature of the PPP/C, though it is their right of political affiliation, continues to erode their independence of action, which is what should be guiding their very action, but in the sole interest and welfare of the region and citizens which they administrate. His “no-show’’ calls into question his relevance to a new dispensation that seeks to evolve the new dynamic of what is good for region and citizens.

Regards
Mark Dacosta