|
Revisiting
the National Development Strategy: End of the future?
Introduction
This revisit was
prompted by the mid-August visit to Guyana of former President Carter on the
initiative of President Jagdeo, although for the record, the invitation was
extended by both President Jagdeo and Mr Robert Corbin, leader of the PNCR.
The press statement by President Carter at the end of the visit sought to
put right back on the front burner the question of the National Development
Strategy (NDS) on which millions of dollars and thousands of hours of some
of the best human talent in Guyana had been expended.
They produced one
of the most far-reaching and comprehensive development documents this
country has ever seen, designed to transform this divided poor country from
which thousands flee annually into a truly united Guyana.
Covering the decade
2001- 2010, the only real criticism would be that it was too visionary -
just the ingredient that Guyana most needs as it struggles to record any but
the most minimal economic growth despite massive investments funded largely
by external aid and loans as well as substantial domestic borrowings.
In our article last
week, we wondered aloud what Presi-dent Carter would have said to the
modern-day representatives of the international bodies which had gathered in
Atlanta, Georgia in 1996, and who had given their approval to the NDS as the
mechanism which would facilitate the co-ordination of assistance by the
international community. That speculation was prompted by the fact that
those very organizations, and more especially the Inter-American Development
Bank (IDB) are throwing money behind projects and programmes with dubious
objectives, outside of any co-ordinated plan and without the benefit of the
most elementary studies being undertaken.
To be fair to the
IDB, however, it is no less a body than the venerable IMF that trivialised
the importance of such studies on the altar of expediency when it announced
that the feasibility study of one of those projects - the cricket stadium -
would be undertaken simultaneously with the construction work and even as
the bulk of its financing was yet to be approved!
Question answered
The web site of the
Carter Center provided the answer to our speculation. It announced that the
representatives of the donor community Carter met during his visit,
including the US, the UK, Canada (sometimes referred to as the ABC
countries), the European Community, the UNDP, the IMF, the World Bank and
the IDB, had all expressed concern about the stalemated country but were
unwilling to confront the Guyana Government. President Jagdeo has shown
little tolerance of or patience with criticism, no matter how constructive
or well-meaning, and those representatives could not be unaware of the fate
of the UNDP representative who has effectively been asked to leave the
country. The donor community has been cowered by the turning on/off of
relations and the possibility of accusations of interfering or imposing
unreasonable conditionalities.
The end of the future
Last week, we had
also traced the virtual disappearance of references to the NDS by senior
government functionaries, and most notably the surreptitious manner in which
the NDS has given way to the PPP/C elections manifesto as the development
strategy of the current administration. This intellectually bankrupt
approach to development prompted us to conclude then that we would be
considering this week the future, if any, for the NDS. We recall that
President Carter listed the resumption of consideration of the NDS among the
several recommendations, the execution of which would determine whether the
Carter Center would have a "future role" in Guyana. The other major issues
he identified are the resumption of constitutional reform and the
implementation of decisions agreed and set out in the May 2003 communique by
President Jagdeo and Mr Corbin as part of the constructive engagement which
they had undertaken amidst much fanfare and considerable hopes.
The omens are
certainly not good. No sooner had Carter and his team left these shores than
the two major political parties resumed a relationship that is more common
among teenage rival siblings than mature politicians in whose hands the fate
of a nation rests.
President Jagdeo
announc-es that Mr Corbin should call him, but neither one is prepared to
take the initiative, the state-owned media continues its usual brand and
slant of programming which effectively denies the political opposition
access to that media, Dr Luncheon says "there is no basis" for the
reassurances sought by the PNCR for the resumption of talks, and President
Jagdeo announces that ninety per cent of the NDS has been implemented!
Boys' play
President Carter,
obviously exasperated at the games which our politicians play, did not help
the process by his very direct if slightly veiled criticisms of President
Jagdeo posted on the Center's website after the visit. Even international
diplomacy could not hide the huge disappointment at the lack of magnanimity
of Jagdeo, his willingness to take full advantage of the winner-take-all
system and some of the more shallow responses by President Jagdeo with whom
the Carter Center is clearly extremely disappointed.
The Center notes in
the document referred to in last week's column, that five years is the
normal time for the Center's presence in any country. America's best known
NGO has been here for more than double that limit, expending resources with
considerably greater opportunity value elsewhere. Carter is looking to civil
society to take and run with the NDS ball, but who in the increasingly
marginalized and fragmented civil society has the stature to do so or the
courage to ask President Jagdeo about the basis of his 90% claim?
Is it the trade
union movement which is unable to speak with one voice when it speaks at
all? Is it the private sector that is still looking for an identity and that
is so open to accusations of misconduct, poor governance, tax evasion and
the pursuit of personal and corporate objectives at the expense of all else?
It cannot be the
bar association that is headed by expelled PPP/C member Khemraj Ramjattan.
It cannot be the doctors, the accountants, the farmers or Red Thread. In
short, there is no one or group around who can take on what President Carter
advocates - which leaves us with the same two we are trying to run away
from. Has anyone noticed that the civil society organisations have stayed
clear of the suggestion? Those organisations perhaps have more sense than
courage, and fear peeking their head out. We are indeed between a rock and
granite.
The world's most unrealised country
In the midst of all
of this, the purpose of the invitation to President Carter was for him to
keep the Guyana's Center open with an eye on the 2006 elections. But
President Carter was not going to allow the opportunity to pass without
reminding the country of what he considers his Center's major contribution
to Guyana - the NDS. His experience of working with hundreds of Guyanese on
the NDS must have convinced him of the enormous talent of Guyanese which
with the country's natural resources makes our economic performance in
recent years - he puts our GNP growth at zero at best - most regrettable. It
must surely be to our national shame that of scores of Third World countries
visited by President Carter, he rates Guyana as the one with the most
unrealised potential.
It is hard to
believe that President Jagdeo's comments that the ten-year NDS covering the
decade 2001-2010 has been 90% implemented was based on any recent encounter
with that document. Was that possible? Have President Jagdeo's increasingly
bloated entourage and bevy of advisers reminded him that Chapter 30 of the
NDS - 'Implementing the National Development Strategy' - called for the
approval of the NDS by the National Assem-bly, a radical departure from the
normal approaches to infrastructural development to one in which the
government's role in those developments would be as a facilitator rather
than a financier, and the establishment of a National Development Commission
comprising a small number of commissioners, wholly drawn from civil society
and supported by a number of consultants and a secretariat?
Have any of the
ministers attempted to follow 30.1.5 of the NDS which requires them to
"revise existing programmes so that they might fall in line with those of
the NDS"? Is the Minister of Finance familiar with the NDS, it genesis and
contents and if he is, why would he have ignored it in the first two of his
budget speeches?
Governance counts
That President
Jagdeo would be so wrong in his assessment of the NDS stems, however, not
only from his unfamiliarity with it, but also the different perspectives of
development and concepts of democracy. President Jagdeo appears to believe
that free and fair elections certified as such by the Carter Center are the
sum total of democracy and that good politics is good business rather than
the other way around. It is far easier for a politician to walk around a
poor country making promises than to sit down and make the hard decisions
and trade-offs necessary for sustainable long-term economic and social
development. Tantalising Lindeners with a US billion dollar investment or
the rest of the country with goodies financed by borrowed money might take
the government through the next elections, but does little for real
development.
To President
Carter's reminder to President Jagdeo that Chapter 3 of the NDS on
governance has been ignored, must be added the link between performance and
governance, something that our private sector bosses can tell the President.
The irony is better governance is perhaps one of the least-cost vehicles for
development since it allows the robust examination of options, strong
criticisms and feedback, society-wide participation and the commitment and
inputs of the whole of society.
Paradoxically,
President Jagdeo sees in Chapter 3 risks rather than opportunities, and
demonstrates paranoia about those seeking power through the back door, and
an immature appreciation of the realities of Guyanese society and history.
Not only are these the very antitheses of the NDS, but they also prevent the
vision of the NDS ever gaining a foothold in our political culture. It is
for this reason, as well as the fact that Mr Robert Corbin was quick to
embrace his recommendations that President Carter appears to have directed
some of his strongest comments at President Jagdeo. Patience may be a
virtue, but you do not waste it - not when experience tells you that success
is unlikely and when there are others who are far more appreciative of your
efforts.
Conclusion
Business Page is
far from optimistic about the future of the NDS. Despite President Carter's
hope, there is no civil society to carry it forward. In the current milieu
of Guyana's politics, the PNCR's acceptance counts for little in the absence
of agreement by the Government, which at best has shown little interest in
the NDS's key provisions. Without the implementation of Chapter 3 dealing
with governance, the benefits of the NDS are severely threatened, and
without the NDS - by whatever name we may want to call it - our economy and
therefore our future will remain bleak. There is little likelihood that this
column will be returning to the NDS any time soon.
(Back to top) |
