Dear Editor,
In 2012, when a decision was made, without meaningful involvement of the people of Linden, more so, one that threatened our livelihood, residents resisted, and the State was forced to reverse course. What that moment taught us is that legitimacy flows from consent, not decree. Article 13 of the Constitution makes this point very clear, for the promotion of an inclusionary democracy, one makes meaningful engagement not optional but rather a constitutional duty.
A troubling pattern is clear. Major initiatives recently announced, such as the national E-ID programme, cash grants, tax changes, regional development plans, digitisation of government services, and community infrastructure are announced publicly without policy papers, implementation frameworks, costings, or enabling legislation laid before Parliament or the people, so that even technical experts may have a look. I noted in the past, “Fancy speeches cannot pass for good governance.”
The National Electronic Identification system is the clearest example. At its announcement, a proposed “eight-month rollout” of a system that touches privacy, data protection, national security, procurement, public service operations, will see every Guyanese having interaction with the State, for the providence of services. Where is the plan? Where is the legal framework? No parliamentary oversight. This is not a by the way request. It represents the essence of Article 13, and why a community like Linden in the past resisted decisions, made without their involvement.
We saw in the past that when contracts such as ExxonMobil were requested, they were presented, when projects and programmes were designed, public spaces were provided for their access. Major national programmes once came with white papers, pilots, public consultations, and laws. Today, to ask a question of the government, it is treated to fancy speeches. This cannot substitute for the many questions Guyanese would like to ask.
Cash grants and tax changes were announced a few weeks ago, outside of Parliament. Regional plans spoken about last week appear without frameworks. Community transformation initiatives, we heard of these last week without any costings or timelines. In the absence of a national census, none of this can credibly be called evidence-based policymaking.
Forgotten from these fancy speeches are our public servants, who are expected to make these disjointed policies work. Workers in the public service under this governments got very little and, in some cases, no service upgrades, weak incentive packages, stalled promotions, and inadequate training. Training, especially for these new policy announcements.
Guyana now earns billions in oil revenue. We are no longer “just trying to keep everybody alive.” At this stage, process matters. Institutions matter. Evidence matters. In line with Article 13, the people of Guyana are entitled to see the contracts, the plans, the timelines, and any other aspects of these policies before implementation, not after controversy.
President Ali should not see demanding accountability as an obstacle. So, for those policies announced and the ones to come, the public is asking him to point us to where we can find the contracts and plans.