PPP General Secretary Clement Rohee

STATEMENT BY THE PEOPLE'S PROGRESSIVE PARTY

The People's Progressive Party (PPP) is dismayed by attempts by a number of born again democrats who seek to create the impression that the PPP has departed from the core values and principles of its Founder Leader the late Dr. Cheddi Jagan. Nothing could be further from the truth. Indeed the Jagan legacy continues to be and remains the bedrock on which all major decisions on programmes and policies are being made both at the level of the Party and Government.

What is particularly disturbing is the selective and skewed application of the Jagan legacy and tendency to project a view that members and supporters of the PPP are not entitled to the benefits of a strong and prosperous economy.

It was Dr. Jagan who led the assault against the colonial administration to lift sugar workers out of logie and slum conditions to which they were condemned by the planter class.

The same could be said for all the other categories of workers including those in the bauxite industry, rice farmers, those in the saw milling industry, waterfront workers, farmers, fishermen and public servants all of whom benefited from the militant and relentless struggles waged by the Jagans during the colonial era and later on following the rupture of the democratic processes by the PNC for the restoration of democratic rule and a dignified and worthy life.

Every single Guyanese be they supportive or not of the PPP/C administration stand to benefit from an economy that is growing and delivering more and more prosperity across our country.

The benefits from a prosperous economy cannot and must not be from one class and social starta of the population. All must benefit and they must be free to dispose of their wealth as they deem fit provided it is done within the meaning of the laws of Guyana.

The rising tide of prosperity has lifted all boats and Guyanese today enjoy a much better quality of life as is evident today from the number of persons who are the proud owners of their own homes, vehicles and consumer durables which was simply not possible under the incompetent and authoritarian PNC regime.

There is a common thread that has linked all the administrations since the post- Jagan presidency and that is the emphasis placed on the social sectors, in particular education, health, housing and water.

The current leaders of the PPP have not deviated from his legacy which is fully consistent with the development model laid down by Dr. Jagan in which he [placed people at the centre of all development initiatives as opposed to what obtained under the PNC administration where emphasis was on regime survival through the use of force and fraud.

Those who say that the PPP has drifted from the values and principles of the late Dr. Jagan are deliberately playing up to a political agenda which is aimed at undermining the very institution which Dr. Jagan created and the lofty ideals to which he stood for.

1. Did Jagdeo attack Dr Jagan’s ideology? No!

2. Did Jagdeo attack Dr. Jagan’s politics? No!

3. Did Jagdeo attack Dr. Jagan’s economic policies? No!

4. Did Jagdeo attack Dr. Jagan’s International policies? No!

5. Did Jagdeo attack Dr. Jagan’s children? No!

What did he attack/criticize?

He countered the political opposition and sections of the Media for attacking him for using his personally accumulated wealth/savings to build something to his liking.

By doing that does it mean going against what Dr Jagan stood for?

In the 1957-1964 Government Dr Jagan had many “well to do” personalities with him who were PPP Members of Parliament and Ministers of Government. The same can be said about the 1992 Government. So why should it be ok for some in a PPP/C Government to be prosperous and to accumulate and spend their savings the way they want to while for others it must be different?

What if Jagdeo lived in an apartment building and was a collector of rare paintings and had gone to one of the auctions hosted by Sotheby’s and used the savings he had accumulated to buy a famous piece of art? Would he have been criticized for that? Would that have been a departure from Dr.Jagan’s beliefs.

Some keep saying that “dissenting voices have been effective stilled in the PPP” well if this is the case how do you explain the PPP allowing Jagdeo to speak out on those matters of interest to him and the Party. Nagamootoo was given every opportunity to express his views internally and externally until he himself decided to walk with infamous “ah dun wid allyuh”.

Jagdeo’s expressed his views as he saw it on the matters to which he spoke those views were not expressed by the General Secretary the official spokesperson of the Party.

So it is grossly unfair, unprofessional and unbalanced to attribute Mr. Jagdeo’s statements to what the Party stands for.

So when a member of the PPP expresses a viewpoint is perceived by the newly found Jagan lovers to be “against what Dr. Jagan stood for” we have to be suspicious of their intentions and pretentions.

It is best left to the Leadership of the PPP to pronounce authoritatively on such matters.

So in my view what this boils down to is a matter of polemics which is good for the country. We need to get these views out in the course of healthy and robust debates and that is precisely what Jagdeo’s views triggered.

Jagdeo’s pronouncements like a good cartoon or caricature have stirred controversy.

But why the synchronized outrage to his comments?

extracted from http://www.newguymedia.com