The 1985 Jagan/Burnham talks on shared governance
January 21, 2009 | By knews | Filed Under Letters
Dear Editor,
I read Mr. Emile Mervin’s well constructed and incisive letter in Monday’s Kaieteur News (January 19) dealing with shared governance.
His grasp of this issue is such that I commend every leader and citizen, irrespective of political affiliation, to read.
In his final paragraph, he posed a tester to me about the 1985 Jagan/Burnham talks on shared governance.
First, the talks were not aborted. There were some interesting moments. But I need now speak, and Elvin Mc David can support me on this. The two leaders had agreed on a menu of measures in the interest of Guyana and to fulfill a dream they both shared for the young people.
This agreement was also to satisfy the enthusiasm of many young people, like myself, who gave up a personal path to progress and joined in the political struggle after the British suspended the Constitution in 1953.
They agreed to the provisions for shared governance that would have brought an end to the unhappy divisions which still, like a cancer, consume our society. Burnham had planned to present the proposals to the PNC Congress of August 1985.
Unhappily, Burnham’s sudden demise and the accession of Desmond Hoyte brought an end to this laudable initiative. I believe that because Hoyte was not intimately involved in the details of those talks, he did
not share an enthusiasm for further dialogue.
It is public knowledge that in my own way I sought to revive this process, but Mr. Hoyte seemed not interested.
In fact, Dr. Joey Jagan can confirm that he and Cheddi came to my home in Lodge one evening; the idea was to privately find a way to revive the discussions. One gained the impression from certain elements within both parties that this was not a top priority at the time.
When I set about my autobiography, there is more I can say on this and related matters. For now, suffice to say that I learnt from certain sources that Mr. Hoyte was very unhappy about the Jagans’ visit to my home.
Suffice to say to Mr. Emile Mervin that the talks Jagan and Burnham had died suddenly when the latter passed away; and for many of us who were in the early struggle, it was a sad day when those two leaders — patriots in their own right – came to the end of their lives before they could have both been reunited.
On the question of Local Governance, I restate my view that the only feasible step in extant conditions, if we are to achieve that utopia, is to agree to substantial reform of the Local Government system, so that the people can feel empowered through their local representatives, and not strangled and choked from the top.
Hamilton Green J. P.
January 21, 2009 | By knews | Filed Under Letters
Dear Editor,
I read Mr. Emile Mervin’s well constructed and incisive letter in Monday’s Kaieteur News (January 19) dealing with shared governance.
His grasp of this issue is such that I commend every leader and citizen, irrespective of political affiliation, to read.
In his final paragraph, he posed a tester to me about the 1985 Jagan/Burnham talks on shared governance.
First, the talks were not aborted. There were some interesting moments. But I need now speak, and Elvin Mc David can support me on this. The two leaders had agreed on a menu of measures in the interest of Guyana and to fulfill a dream they both shared for the young people.
This agreement was also to satisfy the enthusiasm of many young people, like myself, who gave up a personal path to progress and joined in the political struggle after the British suspended the Constitution in 1953.
They agreed to the provisions for shared governance that would have brought an end to the unhappy divisions which still, like a cancer, consume our society. Burnham had planned to present the proposals to the PNC Congress of August 1985.
Unhappily, Burnham’s sudden demise and the accession of Desmond Hoyte brought an end to this laudable initiative. I believe that because Hoyte was not intimately involved in the details of those talks, he did
not share an enthusiasm for further dialogue.
It is public knowledge that in my own way I sought to revive this process, but Mr. Hoyte seemed not interested.
In fact, Dr. Joey Jagan can confirm that he and Cheddi came to my home in Lodge one evening; the idea was to privately find a way to revive the discussions. One gained the impression from certain elements within both parties that this was not a top priority at the time.
When I set about my autobiography, there is more I can say on this and related matters. For now, suffice to say that I learnt from certain sources that Mr. Hoyte was very unhappy about the Jagans’ visit to my home.
Suffice to say to Mr. Emile Mervin that the talks Jagan and Burnham had died suddenly when the latter passed away; and for many of us who were in the early struggle, it was a sad day when those two leaders — patriots in their own right – came to the end of their lives before they could have both been reunited.
On the question of Local Governance, I restate my view that the only feasible step in extant conditions, if we are to achieve that utopia, is to agree to substantial reform of the Local Government system, so that the people can feel empowered through their local representatives, and not strangled and choked from the top.
Hamilton Green J. P.
