At the recently held Business Development Forum hosted by the Georgetown Chamber of Commerce and Industry (GCCI), there were some interesting (unhealthy) exchanges of dialogue – albeit constructive — between very senior executive members of the Private Sector and senior Government functionaries. In dissecting some of the presentations in this regard that would have appeared in the press, one may agree that both sides of the argument constituted and reflected valid, pragmatic points of interest.
Before moving on any further, it is perhaps worthwhile to objectively analyse both sides of the key arguments presented. The first being the Minister of Business, in his presentation, was requesting of the Private Sector to stay out of politics, at least until elections’ time. He then went on to state, in response to the president of the GCCI, that Guyana has been enjoying political stability for some time now. To this end, the GCCI president, in his presentation, sought to emphasise the need for political stability.
The question is: Is there any form or symptom of political instability in Guyana? The answer to this question is no; hence the Minister is quite correct in his assertion.
Political instability is when a country experiences politically motivated violence and/or crimes in society, violent protests, workers going on strikes, and so forth. Political instability is also defined as the propensity of a government collapse, and when growth is significantly lower than otherwise. Poor economic performance, however, may lead to a government’s collapse and political unrest.
That being said, there was a time in Guyana when there was political instability – a period characterised as when there were politically motivated crimes and riots in the city etc.
Then, subsequently, at the said forum, a former president of the GCCI countered the Minister’s bold request to the Private Sector members, in which the argument was made that “the Private Sector has the right to be involved in politics, because it involves the expenditure of their money.”
This is an equally meritorious argument put forward by the Chamber’s former president, and the reason for this is quite simple to comprehend; and that is: the Government has a responsibility to stimulate confidence in the economy, and to create an enabling environment in which businesses are incentivised to prosper and invest more in the economy.
But perhaps in order to achieve such outcomes, this analyst is of the view that these Private Sector agencies may need to relook at their approach in how they seek to promote their interests and concerns to the Government of the day.
While such business forums are held with good intent, and do serve in a positive spirit, the Chamber and the Private Sector Commission should consider consolidating their resources into one agency. With due respect, it should be mentioned that this is a notion that was originally conveyed to this columnist by one of the Chamber’s former presidents; and it of course has a lot of merit, and is thus endorsed and re-stated here by this author.
Suffice it to state that this will aid in the optimisation of the limited resources which these agencies possess. And secondly, they would be able to focus on engaging in more meaningful dialogues with the Government in a more formal and appropriate setting, rather than utilising a multiplicity of other mechanisms to channel those concerns.
It is sometimes very essential that businesses and/or firms remain and maintain neutrality at all times; because, at the end of the day — if not all times, most of the time — national politics tends to triumph as being supreme.
As Clare Goff from the Centre of Economic Strategies in the United Kingdom put it: “a new era of regeneration is emerging; one defined by less money and fewer programmes, but where the top-down approach of the previous era will be replaced with the bottom-up approach. The Private Sector is being called on to lead countries back to growth, but with fewer resources or support to do so. Alongside this, corporate social responsibility is moving into a new phase, defined by stronger partnerships with stakeholders, and a deeper engagement with social and local issues. The opportunities are opening up for businesses to engage at a deeper level with local communities and social issues, but business alone is not enough to transform deprived local areas. Rather, bold thinking and stronger partnerships between the public, private and social sectors would help communities move towards a more resilient future”.
Next week, the author shall examine this subject matter from a number of different dimensions.
