IT should not be a hard pick as to which moment in Guyana was both alarming and curious. It was Justice Sandil Kissoon’s decision that teachers must be paid while on strike.
It was a judgement that for me, I have never heard before. When I read the decision I thought of the horrible (I will stick with that adjective) consequences it has for both state and private employer. Please see my column on the decision in Sunday Chronicle of April 21, 2024, titled, “Judges are not intellectually impeccable.”

I haven’t read anything which points to a similar decision in another country. Why I used the word horrible because it opens the floodgates. If you are paid for the days, or weeks or months a strike is on, then you can drag on the strike because it gives you latitude to do other things while not working but still getting paid. If the other chores you do are lucrative then you have a strong temptation to prolong the strike. The strike is over but Justice Kissoon’s ruling should be tested in the Caribbean Court of Justice.

Last year, former President and Prime Minister, Sam Hinds, made a statement on the Freddie Kissoon Show that is a goldmine for sociologists. Mr. Hinds’ revelation was not referred to even in brief form before 2024.
Mr. Hinds said when he was an executive in the civil society group, GUARD, struggling for free and fair election in 1991, as the election appeared to be heading for a transparent and fair process, GUARD met to discuss the presidential candidate.

Mr. Hinds said that there was objection from a section of GUARD who were from the Mulatto/Creole class (MCC) to the presidential candidate coming from the PPP who they claim was not culturally suited to lead the Guyana Government. Could one imagine this was a view on Indian people by the MCC in 1991?

This was the MCC’s attitude from the 1940s and as we come up to the 21st century, these people still felt the same way about Indians. For more on the Sam Hinds’ revelation see my column of Friday, March 8, 2024 titled, “Shocking revelation by former Prime Minister, Sam Hinds.”
One of the stimulating moments in Guyana in 2024 was the publication of six books. All politicians must read these six books because they provide them with a portrait of the past and the present so they can better understand the future. I repeat, if you are going to officially enter politics, you need to read these six publications.

They are: “Forbes Burnham: The life and Times of the Comrade Leader” by Linden Lewis; “Dear Land of Guyana,” by Moses Nagamootoo (autobiography); “Janet Jagan: Freedom Fighter of Guyana” by Patricia Mohamed; “An Eventful Life,” by Maurice Odle (autobiography); “Cheddi Jagan and the Cold War, 1946-1992,” by Clem Seecharran; “Oil Darado,”by John Mair (editor), 6th edition.

Before moving on, I confess I was shocked on reading the Burnham biography. Mr. Burnham’s daughter, Roxanne, admitted that her father told her that he had eight outside children in addition to the five he had from two marriages. All 13 were daughters. Guyana knows about the five from his two wives but absolutely nothing is known about the other eight. Where are they today? Where do they live? What type of jobs they held and what type of education they had? Surely, at least one of them should come forward.

2024 was the year that Guyana saw a glimpse of its earlier independent foreign policy. Our Ambassador to the UN, Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett was outstanding in her condemnation of Israel’s genocidal killing of the Palestinian people. Mrs. Birkett’s passion, purpose and words were perhaps the best outpouring on the genocide from any ambassador at the United Nations.

In 2024, we saw how some who demanded that Guyana should get out of oil changed their mind without even an apology for the backward position they took. Ms. Vanda Radzik-Veira was one of the leading proponents of stopping oil production in Guyana. But when the BBC programme, HardTalk, came to Guyana to investigate the oil and gas industry last year, it interviewed Ms. Radzik. The BBC asked Ms. Radzik for her position on oil.

She chose not to stand by her previous position. She told her interviewer that there are two spectrums in Guyana. One advocates that the fossil fuel industry is bad for Guyana while the other spectrum insists that Guyana must get more from the contract. Ms. Radzik did not tell her interviewer what was her position. One wonders is she was afraid to tell the BBC that we should leave the oil in the ground and appear silly in the eyes of the world.

DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.