The Good Peeping Tom

Topics

Former Member

CHAMPION OF THE WORKING CLASS?
SEPTEMBER 7, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES / COLUMNISTS, PEEPING TOM

So the workers of Guyana have something to look forward to this year. Public service workers have been assured that they will be granted an increase this year. There was of course never any need for any such assurance. Public servants have received increases each year since the PPP came to power, and that has been nineteen years ago.

But what has been the magnitude of these increases. Except in those years where the government was compelled by arbitration rulings, the public sector workers have been thrown crumbs in the forms of annual 5% increases. In most instances, this 5% is almost immediately eroded by inflation which averaged 3% and then taxes which was 33.3% of the difference. This means that the workers gained in real terms only about a 1% increase each year. This is the working class record of the PPP administration and the particularly the Jagdeo administration.

The increases for 2011 are going to be going to be imposed on the workers because there has been and is not likely to be any negotiations with the unions representing the workers. This may not be all that bad since many unions have been known to make unreasonable and unrealistic demands while others are driven by narrow political agendas. The government which emerged out of the People’s Progressive Party which has prided itself in being a workers’ party no longer has to be worried about the trade union movement. The glory days of labour are gone, not just in Guyana but all over the world. Workers’ power is not going to emerge through unions anymore. Capitalism has meant that workers are now subject to market forces and instead of banding together are now competing against each other for jobs, thereby driving the rate down.

The private sectors in many countries now have allies in government who constrain wages so that the private sector does not have to pay “uncompetitive wages”. And therefore public employees are reduced to pawns. Their wages cannot increase appreciably since this will drive up wages in the labour markets, and this is not considered in the interest of the private sector and these wages are deliberately constrained so as to support the private sector. When trade unions make demands such as a minimum wage of $80,000 per month, they cannot be taken seriously, since there is no way that either the public sector or the private sector can sustain such a wage increase. And therefore an unreasonable and unrealistic wage demand pushes employers to ignore labour to the extent that they can.

Public workers in Guyana have little choice but to accept arbitrary imposition of wages. The government has proven that it has the capacity, had it since 1989, to wait out strikes called by unions. The workers on the other hand cannot afford to be on strike indefinitely and so the workers are in a position where they do not have much power. Last year the sugar workers were told that the sugar corporation was unable to afford an increase because the company was in dire financial straits, so much so that it had to sell land.

This year, an election year, the sugar corporation has suddenly found itself in a situation whereby it can afford to pay a 5% increase in wages. But with inflation said to be tagged at 3%, and with any additional income above the income tax threshold having to be taxed at 33.3%, it means that the workers are not gaining anything at all from the 5%.

And the ruling PPP administration has become a 5% government, content every year to offer this percentage as an increase to workers. This suggests that little attempt is being made to address the issue of a living wage, a disgraceful situation for a party that claims to be working class in orientation.

Source

Replies sorted oldest to newest

Former Member

WILL THINGS GET BETTER FOR BUSINESS?
SEPTEMBER 12, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES/COLUMNISTS, PEEPING TOM

There are some persons who are hoping that the investment and business climate will improve for the better once President Jagdeo leaves office. While his policies have favoured businesses as a whole, they have also been heavily slanted in favour of particular interests and this has raised deep concerns within the local private sector and also among foreign investors.

Large investors, both domestic and foreign, want a level playing field. They want to have an equal opportunity at competing. They do not wish to make a large investment, only to find later than some company has negotiated far superior terms than they have that will force them out of business. Small investors in turn look for some sort of protection so that they would not be swamped. They are worried that large players can come onto the market and push them into extinction.

During the launching of the Guyana Times newspaper, one of Guyana leading investors congratulated the company for negotiating a good deal and expressed the hope that other local companies would enjoy the same concessions. This by all accounts seemed to have been a fair comment, implicit in which was a call for a level playing field and for all companies to be given the same possibility of enjoying generous concessions from the government. This simple comment led to a mouth-lashing of the person making the comment and an invitation for him to attend a seminar so that he could familiarize himself with the system governing tax holidays. As it turned out, it was the government that needed the lecture because certain tax holidays that were supposed to have been granted were in violation of the laws. Hasty steps had to be taken to pass legislation to put things right.

There are other concerns which face the business community in Guyana. One of these has to do with the fact that a small group of businessmen, all of whom have very close ties with persons within the government, seems to doing extremely well and in fact are cornering large sections of the economy, pushing out traditional suppliers. There are concerns that this oligarchy can attain such a stranglehold on business as to cripple all competition.

Another concern has to do with the competition faced by local businesses from retailers owned by foreign nationals. The foreign companies are taking over local commerce and many existing businesses are saying that they simply cannot compete against these new arrivals. From the perspective of the consumers, the cheap items are welcome. Over the past month, for example, many families were able to source their school supplies very cheaply from these shops owned by foreign nationals. Families are glad for the low prices.

Questions are also being asked as to why all along the existing businesses could not be selling so cheaply. In response, the local retailers and wholesalers are baffled by how cheaply these new firms are selling some items. The local businessmen are complaining that there is really no competition between the businesses owned by foreign nationals and those owned by locals. They contend that the locals simply cannot compete. There needs to be some evaluation of this situation to determine whether there is fair competition between business owned by foreign nationals and those owned by locals. There is also a need for improved fair competition legislation to ensure that within the private sector itself some firms do not monopolize small markets. The private sector needs to have fair competition amongst its members.

Another concern is just who benefits the most from government procurement, especially when it comes to large contracts. There needs to be an evaluation as to whether there is a greater need for improvement in the system of competitive bidding, in particular whether large contracts are being dominated by a few firms and whether this is hindering opportunities for small firms to grow.

Many of these concerns have been privately expressed by members of the private sector who are always prepared to quietly make representation to the authorities. These representations have not, however, erased some of the major concerns that have been expressed. As such, it is time for the private sector to speak out publicly just as how they have been doing privately. The private sector may be hoping that with the Jagdeo administration coming to an end, that a new President will make changes for the better. But they had better be careful because a small group of businessmen has been exercising such powerful influence on official policy that it may be hard to reduce their power overnight unless there is a groundswell of pressure. And the more powerful the oligarchy becomes, the more money they make, the harder it will be to constrain their influence.

Whatever happens in the next elections, if Guyana is to progress, if the private sector is to play a more important role in national development, many of the business policies of the Jagdeo administration will have to be dumped. Will the new President be willing to do this?

Source

9/16/1112:21 AM

Former Member

THE CASE AGAINST ‘PRAKS’ SHOULD BE REOPENED
SEPTEMBER 16, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES/COLUMNISTS, PEEPING TOM

During the disciplinary hearings by the ruling party against Khemraj Ramjattan there were reports that he had been accused of taking information to the United States embassy. Mrs. Jagan was reportedly fed this lie.
A number of leaders of the party subsequently signed a statement denying that the accusation was ever made at a meeting of the party’s Central Committee. But the damage had already been done.

Jimmy Carter came to Guyana not long after the expulsion and he was given another reason why Ramjattan was expelled, one that was at odds with the official position of the party. And therefore the situation became all the more confusing since the official reason of the party why Ramjattan was expelled was contradicted by what was told to Jimmy Carter. WikiLeaks has now confirmed that Ramjattan was never an interlocutor with the United States embassy. He was not named as someone carrying party business or government business to the United States embassy and in these circumstances, the case against him needs to be reopened, because even though the party denies that he was disciplined for any such charge, this was one of the many accusations that hung over the entire disciplinary process.

Mrs. Jagan was fed a pack of lies about Khemraj and she may have fallen for those lies. So while he may not have been expelled on a charge of giving information to any foreign nation, the die was cast against him because of the rumours that were circulating, to the extent that they caused the party to issue a disclaimer as to what was said at an important Central Committee meeting. The WikiLeaks cables confirm that the United States did not receive any information from any of the leader of the Alliance for Change. In fact, the cables also debunk the theory that the United States embassy was supportive of the Alliance for Change.

This does not mean that the United States government was not supportive of a third party holding the balance of power between the PPP and the PNCR. In fact the cables confirm that the local embassy here was very much keen on this, but the local embassy were not directly in bed with the Alliance for Change and in fact, one leader of the Alliance for Change was not too smitten with the local embassy. The local diplomats who dispatch diplomatic cables are requited to do so regularly as part of their job. What they write in those cables does not always reflect US foreign policy. These diplomats provide information which their jobs demand of them, but there are specialized agencies which gather intelligence and provide the background papers that go to top State Department officials. It is the top regional experts that help make foreign policy. These cables are just news and updates.

The local embassy staffers are “small fries” within the Department of State. While some of them have an attitude and write about local officials at times from a position of arrogance and haughtiness, these officials would probably never see the door of the Secretary of State, except for a photo opportunity. Also, certain information is embargoed from the local diplomats. They have no direct access to the intelligence of the Port of Spain office of the DEA. They have to apply for certain information and this will only be provided if it is seen as being necessary for fulfilling certain political objectives. Even when it comes to increased security for the ambassador, approval has to be sought from overseas.

In this context of being low-keyed players, it is not unusual to find embassy officials trying to give greater importance to their mission and to their ambitions by making all manner of claims, some of which are merely intended to allow the superiors in Washington to believe that the local staff is really doing critical national security work. For example, it was claimed that a local drug lord was connected with the FARC guerrillas in Colombia. The FARC guerrillas would hardly, however, have need for someone in Guyana to supply them with weapons in exchange for cocaine. They have had other supply lines, and in fact long after the rendition of Roger Khan, the United States claimed that it was the Venezuelans that were supporting FARC.

What is clear, though, is that the United States embassy in Georgetown was not in league with the Alliance for Change, even though the United States government favoured a party to act as a balance of power in parliament. The cables suggest that the United States was being fed information about the party and the government by other interlocutors, and not by anyone from within the Alliance for Change. But that suggestion has also been denied by some of the individuals concerned, just as there was a denial that Khemraj was accused of taking information to the embassy just before his expulsion.

In light of what has now been revealed, it is time for the PPP to reopen the case against this expelled member. Even though he is not likely to return to the party, at least the honourable thing should be done and his expulsion reversed.

Source

9/21/115:22 PM

Former Member

A GOOD CHOICE
SEPTEMBER 19, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES/COLUMNISTS, PEEPING TOM

The Alliance for Change has made a political masterstroke in appointing Mr. Raphael Trotman as its Prime Ministerial candidate. There are important, numerous and timely benefits associated with this decision. The AFC has become symbolized as a new brand in Guyanese politics, one reflecting multi-racial balance, new blood and a new decent and responsible approach to political discourse. The faces of this new brand have always been Trotman and Ramjattan and having done so well during the 2006 election, it seemed much too premature for this duo to not be the face of the AFC in the 2011 elections.

The original Ramjattan/Holder ticket just was not sparkling in the same way as a Ramjattan/Trotman ticket would. The AFC seemed to lack something and now with Trotman back on the ticket, the fortunes of the AFC are going to be improved as will no doubt the civility with which it conducts it campaign. The AFC has allowed itself to be drawn into a mean-spirited campaign against the ruling Peoples Progressive Party. This is exactly what the PPP was hoping for because it could discredit the AFC as a decent political force. With Trotman back on board and given his own personal example of respectfulness, the AFC is likely to adopt a different approach and rise above the basic aspects of campaigning.

Trotman is therefore going to make a huge difference. His presence back on the ticket will see the middle class more comfortable now with the AFC and they are likely to have a much better chance at improving on their five seat haul in the last elections. The AFC may have opted for Sheila Holder in the interest of gender balance. But what is more important in the context of Guyanese politics and particularly for a multiracial party is for there to be ethnic balance. Gender balance can take place as regards the overall composition of the slate but when it comes to the most pronounced images on the ticket, when it comes to who will be the Presidential and Prime Ministerial candidate, there is a need to have ethnic balance over gender balance.

There are already constitutional provisions which indicate that a party is supposed to have gender-balance in its representation on the list and in parliament and therefore all parties will have to have a certain amount of female candidate contesting the elections. In the context of Guyana’s fractured politics, however, what is important, especially for multiracial parties is for the image of the party to reflect a multiracial image in the two critical positions.

The AFC may have been going ahead of itself by originally going for a female Prime Ministerial candidate. Many women’ will say that instead of a female Prime Ministerial candidate, playing second fiddle to a male, what is required is a female presidential candidate. The delegates of the PNCR had an opportunity to appoint a female presidential candidate. The PPP did this in 1997. The PNCR took to the streets in a nasty campaign against the first female president of Guyana and this year they rejected the opportunity to appoint a female from their own ranks.

The PNCR has not yet named a prime ministerial candidate. But if they do appoint a female, some women are going to ask what is the significance having seen the party faithful overwhelmingly reject a female presidential candidate. The constitution does not require a prime ministerial candidate to be named. But those parties wishing to distance themselves from the maximum leader concept have sought to emphasize a ticket comprising a president and a prime minister and in Guyana’s ethnically-fractured society, it is often prudent for the ticket to reflect a multi-racial balance over gender balance.

With Sheila Holder as its Prime Ministerial candidate and Khemraj Ramjattan as its presidential candidate, the AFC could claim that its ticket reflected both gender and ethnic balance. But it lacked spark and appeal. The return to Trotman will inject this spark and just at the right time as the campaign gets going.

Source

9/21/115:30 PM

TK_REDUX (Guest)

quote:
Originally posted by Gerhard Ramsaroop:
THE CASE AGAINST ‘PRAKS’ SHOULD BE REOPENED
SEPTEMBER 16, 2011 | BY KNEWS | FILED UNDER FEATURES/COLUMNISTS, PEEPING TOM

During the disciplinary hearings by the ruling party against Khemraj Ramjattan there were reports that he had been accused of taking information to the United States embassy. Mrs. Jagan was reportedly fed this lie.
A number of leaders of the party subsequently signed a statement denying that the accusation was ever made at a meeting of the party’s Central Committee. But the damage had already been done.

Jimmy Carter came to Guyana not long after the expulsion and he was given another reason why Ramjattan was expelled, one that was at odds with the official position of the party. And therefore the situation became all the more confusing since the official reason of the party why Ramjattan was expelled was contradicted by what was told to Jimmy Carter. WikiLeaks has now confirmed that Ramjattan was never an interlocutor with the United States embassy. He was not named as someone carrying party business or government business to the United States embassy and in these circumstances, the case against him needs to be reopened, because even though the party denies that he was disciplined for any such charge, this was one of the many accusations that hung over the entire disciplinary process.

Mrs. Jagan was fed a pack of lies about Khemraj and she may have fallen for those lies. So while he may not have been expelled on a charge of giving information to any foreign nation, the die was cast against him because of the rumours that were circulating, to the extent that they caused the party to issue a disclaimer as to what was said at an important Central Committee meeting. The WikiLeaks cables confirm that the United States did not receive any information from any of the leader of the Alliance for Change. In fact, the cables also debunk the theory that the United States embassy was supportive of the Alliance for Change.

This does not mean that the United States government was not supportive of a third party holding the balance of power between the PPP and the PNCR. In fact the cables confirm that the local embassy here was very much keen on this, but the local embassy were not directly in bed with the Alliance for Change and in fact, one leader of the Alliance for Change was not too smitten with the local embassy. The local diplomats who dispatch diplomatic cables are requited to do so regularly as part of their job. What they write in those cables does not always reflect US foreign policy. These diplomats provide information which their jobs demand of them, but there are specialized agencies which gather intelligence and provide the background papers that go to top State Department officials. It is the top regional experts that help make foreign policy. These cables are just news and updates.

The local embassy staffers are “small fries” within the Department of State. While some of them have an attitude and write about local officials at times from a position of arrogance and haughtiness, these officials would probably never see the door of the Secretary of State, except for a photo opportunity. Also, certain information is embargoed from the local diplomats. They have no direct access to the intelligence of the Port of Spain office of the DEA. They have to apply for certain information and this will only be provided if it is seen as being necessary for fulfilling certain political objectives. Even when it comes to increased security for the ambassador, approval has to be sought from overseas.

In this context of being low-keyed players, it is not unusual to find embassy officials trying to give greater importance to their mission and to their ambitions by making all manner of claims, some of which are merely intended to allow the superiors in Washington to believe that the local staff is really doing critical national security work. For example, it was claimed that a local drug lord was connected with the FARC guerrillas in Colombia. The FARC guerrillas would hardly, however, have need for someone in Guyana to supply them with weapons in exchange for cocaine. They have had other supply lines, and in fact long after the rendition of Roger Khan, the United States claimed that it was the Venezuelans that were supporting FARC.

What is clear, though, is that the United States embassy in Georgetown was not in league with the Alliance for Change, even though the United States government favoured a party to act as a balance of power in parliament. The cables suggest that the United States was being fed information about the party and the government by other interlocutors, and not by anyone from within the Alliance for Change. But that suggestion has also been denied by some of the individuals concerned, just as there was a denial that Khemraj was accused of taking information to the embassy just before his expulsion.

In light of what has now been revealed, it is time for the PPP to reopen the case against this expelled member. Even though he is not likely to return to the party, at least the honourable thing should be done and his expulsion reversed.

Source

ALLBUTT and dem jokers here like Taps Son will not be able to handle this one.

9/21/115:38 PM

Skip to main content

Topics

Add Reply

Membership Required

Remove From Your Block List

Manage Follow Preferences

Block

Premium Membership Required

GNI VIP Member

Please wait...