Govt well within its rights to defend its track record

Dear Editor,
The assertion by a columnist in the local press on September 6, 2024, that ‘If the PPP/C’s performance truly stood on its own merits, there would be no need to constantly invoke the spectre of the APNU+AFC Coalition’, fails to appreciate the full picture of governance in Guyana.
Understanding the historical context, addressing the selective nature of media coverage, and recognising the importance of comparing administrations are all crucial for a comprehensive analysis of Guyana’s progress under the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) leadership.
Firstly, it is impossible to evaluate the performance of any government without understanding the historical context within which it operates. Guyana’s socio-economic and political realities have evolved substantially over the past few decades, and this evolution has been shaped by the leadership of successive PPP/C administrations. Guyana’s trajectory, from economic instability and underdevelopment to its present phase of unprecedented growth, must be evaluated in light of the policies that enabled this transformation. Under PPP/C leadership, particularly in the current administration led by President Dr. Irfaan Ali, there has been substantial development across sectors. The government’s proactive approach to diversifying the economy, strengthening infrastructure, and investing in social programmes such as housing, education, and healthcare must be viewed as part of a broader national vision. The transformation of Guyana from a struggling post-colonial nation to an emerging energy superpower and regional leader in economic growth cannot be ignored when evaluating the PPP/C’s governance. Historical context allows us to appreciate just how far the country has come, from the days when Guyana was hamstrung by economic stagnation and mismanagement. Under successive PPP/C Governments, not only has Guyana secured a more stable political environment, but it has also attracted international investment and initiated projects that promise long-term benefits for the country.
Further, it is misleading to suggest that the PPP/C Government invokes the APNU+AFC Coalition merely as a distraction. Instead, it is important to refer to where the country was prior to the PPP/C’s return to power in 2020, particularly after the five-year period of APNU+AFC rule from 2015 to 2020. This comparison is essential to understand both the challenges inherited by the current government and the progress it has made in its tenure thus far. The APNU+AFC Government presided over a period marked by economic decline, political instability, and deteriorating social services. The abrupt halt in development initiatives, coupled with inefficient management of the emerging oil and gas sector, placed Guyana on a dangerous path during the Coalition’s time in office. Referring to this period is not an evasion of the PPP/C’s own track record; rather, it highlights the continuity of progress under the PPP/C versus the stagnation and regression experienced during the Coalition’s rule.
Moreover, much of the public discourse surrounding the performance of the PPP/C administration has been shaped by selective reporting from sections of the media. This has contributed to an unbalanced portrayal of the current government’s achievements and challenges. A critical examination of media coverage reveals that many of the promises made by the PPP/C in its 2020-2025 manifesto have been sidelined or outright ignored by certain media outlets. These promises include, but are not limited to, significant infrastructural development projects, improvements in public services, and initiatives to reduce poverty and enhance social welfare. For instance, the government’s emphasis on providing affordable housing, improving healthcare delivery, expanding educational opportunities, and enhancing the agricultural and manufacturing sectors has not received the widespread attention it deserves.
Some sections of the local media often choose to focus disproportionately on perceived shortcomings while failing to give adequate coverage to the positive developments occurring across the country.
Additionally, media bias becomes even more evident when comparing the treatment of the APNU+AFC Coalition and the PPP/C Government. During the APNU+AFC’s tenure, many egregious acts went underreported or were inadequately scrutinised by sections of the press. Corruption scandals, economic mismanagement, and social unrest were not given the same prominence in the media as similar issues have been under the current administration. This selective reporting creates a skewed public perception, whereby the PPP/C is unfairly criticised for missteps while the Coalition’s failures are downplayed or ignored. As the PPP General Secretary, Bharrat Jagdeo, rightly said recently, had some of the actions committed by the APNU+AFC administration been carried out by the PPP/C Government, media coverage would likely have been far more severe and widespread. This unbalanced discourse not only undermines the public’s trust in the media but also skews the broader political discourse in Guyana, making it seem as though the current government’s performance is far worse than it actually is. In this context, the PPP/C is justified in pointing out the double standards and biases that exist within certain sections of the media, as these distortions prevent the public from forming an informed opinion about the country’s governance.
Editor, the suggestion that the PPP/C Government relies on referencing the APNU+AFC Coalition to obscure its own performance misrepresents the reality of governance in Guyana is misguided. The PPP/C’s track record speaks for itself, and the government is well within its rights to defend it while continuing to work toward the betterment of all Guyanese.

Sincerely,
Brian Azore