Support Village Voice News With a Donation of Your Choice.
A few weeks ago, in the face of a questionable voters list, and other related concerns, the Minister of Local Government and Regional Development, Mr. Nigel Dharamlall announced June 12, 2023, as the day for Local Government Elections in Guyana.
Late last month, during a press conference, Vice President, Mr. Bharrat Jagdeo, General Secretary of the governing party- PPP/C- said that based on its track record of transparency and promises fulfilled the party is well- prepared for local elections. He said that the party has its eyes on traditional strongholds of the PNC/R. He singled out Georgetown as one of the strongholds the PPP/C is seeking to win. There might be a few reasons why the Vice President could have made such a boast.
Three possible reasons are:
- The incumbent has its hands on certain levers of the electoral machine, including the ability to appoint staff they favour even if those individuals do not meet the standards to be appointed to top posts, to keep the systems at a stage where the party is comfortable. They rejected the introduction and use of biometrics to secure the integrity of the electoral process but hurriedly signed a contract with a foreign company for a national electronic identification system and e- cards. This has staggering implications on politics and democracy in this country. Also, there will be serious unintended consequences resulting from the use of this system.
- The PPP/C is misusing the taxpayers’ oil money. They are using the people’s money to give out mini contracts to residents to do bits and pieces of work in their neighbourhoods. They are trying to bribe residents in the hope of averting attention of their discriminatory style of governance.
- The PPP/C is usurping the authority of the City Council.
During that press conference the Vice President accused the city authority of mismanagement of resources and failure to shoulder its responsibilities. Mr. Jagdeo should be the last person to lecture anyone about mismanagement when the US$250 million failed Skeldon Sugar Factory hangs as one of the many albatrosses around his neck. It is important that we distill the truth from political waffle.
It is common knowledge that the government has been blatantly and deliberately usurping the authority of the Georgetown City Council. Agents of the government have been doing works on council facilities without the appropriate notification and consultation. From roads, to avenues, to canals to playgrounds to Le Repentir Cemetery, the government has inappropriately attempted to be the knight in shining armour, to save the people.
The Irfaan Ali-led government has been awarding contracts to their friends, to do city works, without as much as a decent notice to the council. The recent award of a contract to replace the door at Princes Street sluice is a good case in point. The council only knew of that contract after parts of the city was flooded due to poor work by the contractor. There are other numerous examples of this usurpation of the authority of the council by the government. Last Sunday, the mayor of Georgetown was forced to make a statement after it was reported in some sections of the media that the minister of Local Government said that he was taking over works at municipal markets, in the city.
Yet, the government has been holding out itself as transparent and democratic; it is fooling no one.
The billions of dollars being spent on the city, from the public purse, by the PPP/C could have been put to other uses if the government pays its rates to the Georgetown municipality. Records show that the government owes, the council, over one billion in rates for its properties in different sections. It is therefore worrying that the government is not making any effort to settle its account with the council but spending tax dollars on city facilities that the council itself can fix if it is paid by government. The intent, on the part of the government, is to gain political advantage over the council.
In addition, it continues to deny the council the right and support to raise more revenue to improve its capacity to provide municipal services to citizens. The Minister’s refusal to sign the anti- litter by- laws is a good example of how the PPP/C is inhibiting the advancement of the council and by extension the city. The governing party is in an election campaign mode but they care very little for local democracy and democratic renewal, at the local level.
The idea of local government is really about bringing government “closer to the people”. It improves the opportunities for and frequency of citizens participation in the political system: It enhances democracy, participation and empowerment at the local level: It forms part of the discourse of “good governance”.
A vital component of local government is decentralisation; the redistribution of power from the center to other points in society to manage fiscal and other aspects of public affairs.
In the last two decades decentralisation has promoted itself as a political and institutional extraordinary occurrence in most countries around the world. These countries have local authorities, consisting of local assemblies elected by universal suffrage and an executive, both of which are expected, to different degrees, to respond to their citizens. As is shown by widespread legislative or constitutional reform, the global process has resulted in wider recognition of the role and position of local authorities as well as a significant increase in their powers and financing.
One of the most important aims of decentralisation is to provide an effective, appropriate response to the needs of local communities for municipal services. The density and efficiency of public services are among the most important indicators of the vigor of decentralisation, and provide a vital source of legitimacy for local governments. Indeed, sustainable development is made possible by “the effective decentralisation of responsibilities, policy management, decision-making authority and sufficient resources, including revenue collection authority, to local authorities, closest to, and most representative of, their constituencies.”
But for years, the PPP/C, in and out of power, had done its best to restrict the ability of the council to respond to the needs of local communities. Nowadays, the government is seeking to control financing and staff.
In the case of staff, strange interventions of the government controlled Local Government Commission (LGC) weaken the ability of the city authority to freely choose the ways it manages its services and administrative structures. The commission itself appears not to know what it is doing; its role and responsibilities. it is busy getting involved in areas where it has no jurisdiction. But by controlling staff and instructing them on the fringes of the council’s authority, the government, through the Local government Commission, is reducing the institutional capacity of the council to develop systems that are necessary to provide municipal services to local communities. Simultaneously, it has activated its propaganda machine to spread a false narrative about the council.
Thankfully, Guyanese are not gullible; they are wise. Many communities still have that collective consciousness that protects them from the cunning devices of those who seek to control and dominate them.