The coalition Government must be commended for establishing the Ministry of Social Cohesion just after it took the reins of government in 2015. That action demonstrated a will to definitively transform intention from weary rhetoric into more tangible derivatives for the realisation of the elusive mandate. While the challenges, complexities and sensitivities for such a realisation are indisputable, many, including some pessimists, harboured expectations for genuine inclusiveness to aid in carving the path to social cohesion.
Such expectations would not have been unrealistic for, by and large, Guyanese want peaceful cohabitation. Despite historical challenges, the people of this multi-faceted society have generally coexisted peacefully. This in no way negates the fact that there are deep-rooted suspicions which can and have catalysed discord, sometimes with tragic outcomes. Maybe therein lies the justification, not that one was necessarily needed, to burst the ceiling of rhetoric to catapult into a meaningful and honest process.
There was enough from our history that would have demanded the need for uncompromising policies to foster unity. There was enough in reports from previous attempts through harmony-seeking conferences and workshops to shape those policies for all. There appeared to be enough goodwill when the Administration changed in 2015 to build on those previous efforts. Unfortunately, the Government squandered those opportunities for meaningful engagements by its own actions.
It relentlessly embarked on a cleansing process to rid the Public Service of persons perceived to be associated with the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) Administration. In many instances, it did not matter whether those persons were skilled and vital to continuity of government. It was an exercise to create reality from perception.
Those actions did not take into consideration the razor-thin and controversial electoral margin that realised the change in administration. That consideration should have been paramount, especially at that time when division in this multi-ethnic nation was no longer a perception.
A proverbial line was drawn by party colours and the election results causing the new government to commence its tenure under some level of illegitimacy by half of the electorate. That should have been fundamental to the new guiding principles of the social cohesion policies which now had a home in the form of its Ministry.
Instead, what followed was countrywide outcry of witch-hunts and discrimination as those who appeared to be targeted were predominantly from one ethnic group. Many were fired with some charged and humiliated while around the same time, 2000 Indigenous Guyanese lost their jobs in what was described as “economic genocide” against those citizens.
Ironically, this occurred while the Social Cohesion Ministry was established for the first time in the country’s history. It did and still questions the impact or lack thereof of that Ministry. The country now appeared to be far more polarised in recent times. This seems to be compounded by the public promotion of the ruling party’s colour even on State entities.
That, along with what appears to be reluctance on the Government’s behalf to not constitute the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC), even though the identified members have been democratically selected, continues to scuttle the process to realise social cohesion.
While the notion of deliberateness has not been dismissed, the question of why is bewildering in the context of the provision of budgetary resources to the Social Cohesion Ministry. Also, the question of what it has achieved through the utilisation of taxpayers’ money seems unavoidable.
How then can the path to social cohesion be redrafted and possibly achieved? While genuineness must be absolute, smaller efforts would have to be encouraged and supported. Recently, a prominent cultural organisation hosted an ethnic relations forum, which, while not overwhelmingly attended, saw meaningful engagement among stakeholders from various concerned groups. While uncertain of its requested participation, noticeably absent was the Social Cohesion Ministry.
Evident among the gathering was the common passion for social harmony, the need for inclusivity in the process for its realisation, the need for such fora and for its expansion countrywide. If that can be taken as a sample, as small as it might have been, then it clearly represents an encouraging mindset of a people who yearn for sustainable and improved peaceful cohabitation. We should not be surprised at this for often the wishes of the people are forced into the background by the chess game of political convenience.
It is no secret that the Social Cohesion Ministry has been accused of being a glorified version of the former Ministry of National Mobilisation, which reportedly executed decisions of the party as against the mandate of public office. In other words, a vote-getting operation funded by the taxpayers.
This brings the following questions to the fore: Is the issue a current priority given the initial hype? Is this something that the hierarchy really wants? Maybe it should not be left for them to decide. The interested groups should explore mechanisms to sustain efforts and force the priority. After all, it’s the masses that are affected and not the few in authority.
