Editorial Lead from the front

Just before the 2015 general election, then Opposition Leader David Granger made a speech about changing the political culture in the country noting that the coalition had come together because the nation was at breaking point. “Guyanese have been fatigued by…two decades of fickle promises, of fatuous platitudes and failed projects,” he said.

The citizenry was tired of the former regime’s stewardship of the country and on May 15, 2015 the people voted for change. President Granger then swept into office, a political novice in some respects, with less baggage than most active political players.

Throughout the campaign, Mr Granger talked about building a consensus democracy and working with the people on matters that affect them. The rallying cry was a good life for all in this the land of their birth, should the coalition win power.

With nearly two years since the people elevated the coalition APNU+AFC from political experiment to government, the positive change that was promised appears less likely to be a reality during the coalition’s first term in office. The President continues to practice a guarded kind of leadership, emerging from time to time to placate the people only after a series of ministerial faux pas, but more importantly, failing to address the nation on the many critical issues facing the populace.

Since their assumption to office, we have had government ministers showing scant regard for the citizenry and with no sense of accountability for the pre-election promises that they made. In October 2015, Minister of State Joseph Harmon uttered his infamous “no apology” line when addressing the matter of salary hikes for ministers and parliamentarians. In July 2016, Finance Minister Winston Jordan while discussing the issue of loan defaulters at the University of Guyana spoke forcefully of barring persons with outstanding debt to the university from leaving the country.

Shortly after in August 2016, then Minister of Health Dr. George Norton misled Parliament and the nation regarding the controversial storage bond. More recently, Minister Jordan announcing that VAT would be charged on private education services, triggered a public furore by this seemingly uncaring comment: “There is no VAT on public

education; it remains a choice of the parent. Government is not making that choice for them.” Minister Jordan did seek to correct possible misconceptions by way of a lengthy response in the letters column to a Stabroek News editorial on the issue.

Nevertheless, incidents such as these contribute to a negative perception of the government machinery and they certainly erode any confidence in the government’s promises to fashion a better life for all.

The looming question in all this, of course, relates to the opinion and position of the President on the various controversies that keep cropping up with such regularity. Brief comments during his guarded appearance on the weekly state controlled programme, “The Public Interest” do not provide the public and stakeholders with the depth or detail with which to properly judge the President’s stance on any matter.

Clearly, his public engagement strategy needs to change, moving away from the controlled setting where he talks to government staffers and a few journalists taking the questions on a few subjects, to a wider interaction with the public. In fact, he has shied away from holding regular press conferences and has instead retreated to the public interest show.

Given the mood in the country with frustration growing over the slow pace at which government is implementing beneficial policies, and with increased advocacy, for instance as with the Movement Against the Parking Meters, President Granger needs to step out of the shadows and lead from the front.

His hands- off approach to the Presidency would probably work if the government was functioning like a fine-tuned machine. More worryingly still, Mr Granger’s strategy makes a lack of cohesion between the President and his ministers publicly apparent resulting in varying messages being communicated on a particular issue with the coalition administration not able to speak with one voice on important matters wherein the public must have expectations of carefully considered collaborations at the level of cabinet.

As the Parking Meter controversy spirals out of control, potentially irreparably damaging the relationship between the Georgetown Municipality and its citizens, the President seems more comfortable in the intellectual and rarefied settings of his international engagements, than in the unceasing rough and tumble political turmoil ensuing at home.

As the chief executive of his cabinet of ministers, President Granger is directly responsible for the cluttered mismatch of individual viewpoints which are sometimes disseminated as official positions of the government – positions which are then changed and re-arranged in a most ad hoc manner in response to public outcry and media exposés. The ongoing parking meter saga and the position of central government on the contract entered into by the City appear to be a work in progress, with the AFC’s belated entrance to the fray only adding to the public’s consternation as to whether such important matters are indeed discussed at the highest levels.

Perhaps President Granger was right when he said that the people had had enough of the previous government’s fickle promises and failed projects. But now it is time for him to manage and to lead, and to move away from the shielded politics that has defined his term in office up to now. The country now looks to him for inspired leadership which can start with an address to the people along the lines of a report on the State of the Nation.