Speeches in the National Assembly

April 12, 2012
Mrs. Backer: Thank you, thank you. I will sign autographs subsequent to my presentation.   [Mr. Nandlall: Pink pantheress.]       The pink panther.      [Mr. Nandlall: Pantheress.]      The pink pantheress. Thank you.
Mr. Speaker, I rise to begin my two-hour conversation with the National Assembly on Budget 2012. Before I go to my remit, let me first congratulate, joining with other Hon. Members, all those young persons, new comers, so to speak...      [Mr. Greenidge: You are gender neutral.] Yes, I am gender neutral. And also to welcome back old friends like Hon. Member Mr. Neendkumar. I am sorry, Sir. And the Hon. Member, Mr. Rohee.
I now turn immediately to my remit, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. In examining the stated formulation policies of the Government in the 2012 Budget, we see some policies of this Government which, to an extent, mirror ours, as laid down in our 2011 Manifesto – A Good Life for all Guyanese. And I must commend our Manifesto as compulsory reading to everyone.
We believe that the overlap in our policies on the issue of foreign policy is good because we believe that on the issue of foreign policy, the only sensible way forward for Guyana is to have a national consensus on major policy frameworks and initiatives. I turn, firstly, to Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. Given the territorial claims by both Venezuela and Suriname to parts of Guyana, Venezuela claiming 159, 500 square kilometres, approximately 5/8 of our land and Suriname claiming approximately 15,540 square kilometres, it is absolutely necessary that safeguarding our sovereignty and territorial integrity remain central to our foreign policy. It is worthwhile to restate that the issue of our territorial integrity predates Guyana’s independence. And I am sure that Dr. Gopaul will be happy with me that I will move briefly to the past. I quote from Tyrone Ferguson’s Book, To Survive Sensibly or to Court Heroic Death. This is what he said about foreign policy at page 421:
“The performance in the area of foreign policy was indisputably outstanding. Shortly after the coalition government took power in December, 1964, it faced the severest of threats to its very survival of the nation. It confronted virtually simultaneously the double hazards of serious territorial threats from both Venezuela and Suriname. It is exceedingly difficult...”
He goes on to state:
“...to find another example of a post colonial nation it its infant days of nationhood, facing a more hazardous situation. In a real sense, this hard fact of pure survival forced Guyana’s diplomatic leadership to have to devise an effective diplomacy to safeguard our nation. In Ramphal’s view...
He says:
“...that context has a positive consequence for Guyana. As Ramphal puts it, we will be hardened by fire.”
A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) wishes to, again, unequivocally place before this House that on the issue of Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, there is no APNU, AFC, PPP; there is one Guyana. We stand shoulder to shoulder with the Government, with the AFC and with all patriotic Guyanese in defence of all 214,970 square kilometres of this beloved nation of ours. That said, let me hasten to add that for A Partnership for National Unity, the most appropriate way for the Government to further concretise this unanimity is to have ongoing consultations and, in fact, the active involvement of the Parliamentary Opposition on issues of our sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Despite the unjustified territorial claims by both Venezuela and Suriname, we believe that the continued development of mutually respectful and beneficial relations with our neighbours must remain critical. As such, as we continue discussions with Suriname on the bridging of the Corentyne River, we trust that our Minister of Foreign Affairs will recall all the concessions that Guyana was constrained to make, viz-a-viz Suriname’s demands before the commencement of the ferry service between our two countries. We trust that presently in place at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs are the necessary diplomatic skills to ensure that our priority falls part of the eventual Corentyne Bridge agreement.
A Partnership for National Unity recommends and history demands that our Guyana Defence Force, once again, attain a capacity that can enhance our diplomatic leverage and economic activities. Had the Guyana Defence Force that capacity in June, 2000, it would have been able to repel the unlawful attack by Surinamese gun boats on the CGX oil rig which was operating within our territorial water. This incapacity by our army then has resulted in oil exploration in that area being delayed by seven years. Had CGX been allowed uninterrupted exploration within our territorial waters, today we may have been an oil-producing nation rather than one poised to so do. I am glad that everybody is awake. Before leaving the issue of Guyana’s sovereignty and territorial integrity, let me say that A Partnership for National Unity believes that the Government must, as a matter of high priority, deal decisively with the back track operations between Guyana and Suriname. This is a difficult thing to do but do it we must because by turning a Nelson’s eye towards the operation, what this Government has in fact done is to erase a part of our Eastern border. That is what the Nelson’s eye has done. We wish to remind this Government that the unhindered flow of our custom goods, undeclared gold, illegal drugs and guns, and illegal migrants going in and out, including Roger Khan, are as much a threat to our sovereignty and territorial integrity as Venezuela and Suriname on just claims. One cannot speak about territorial integrity and not seek to take some control of one’s borders, particularly when in that case it can be done.
Venezuela recently – and it is reported in the Kaieteur News, my second newspaper of choice... Of course, Chronicle will be the fourth. On Saturday, 17th March, 2012, we see, Venezuela deploys troops to Guyana border to combat drug trafficking. And then in yesterday’s newspaper, the Stabroek News, my favourite newspaper, Heightened security at Suriname’s borders. It says here:
“Tighter security measures for the border with Guyana in the west are also well under way…”
What they are trying to do by enhancing their army presence on the border is to stop that illegal flow that I spoke about. And there was a very interesting lecture that was given by Professor Ivelaw Lloyd Griffith – I think we all know him – a distinguished son of the soil, at the 13th Annual Eric William Memorial Lecture, entitled: Drugs and Crime without passports in the Caribbean… I repeat, Drugs and Crime without passports in the Caribbean: How Secure is Security, and How Sovereign is Sovereignty? That is a very interesting article and I will do a pictorial version for my friend Mr. Neendkumar.
[Mr. Rohee entered the Chamber]
I am glad Mr. Rohee is back because I am going to turn to him shortly.
The issue of the promotion of Trade and Investment is listed as a priority focus of the Government’s foreign policy with the primary strategies being – and I am reading here from page 54:
“…the strengthening of bilateral relations with countries with whom we have had traditional ties and fostering new strategic alliances with some focus on enhancing economic and social links with our neighbours.”
My eloquent Member, Dr. Roopnarine, has already said that our Minister of Finance did not have that usual zest. It could be, like me that he is suffering from the aging process. But these were lofty words by the Minister. The question that immediately springs to mind is this: has our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, through our overseas missions and through its staff at Takuba Lodge, prepared for this task of leading trade and investment to Guyana?
It is an undeniable fact that when the PPP/C took office in October, 1992, the Ministry of Foreign Affairs was staffed with highly qualified diplomats, both at our overseas missions and at the Ministry of Foreign Affairs Headquarters. Indeed, Guyana’s Foreign Service was the envy of our CARICOM Sister countries and those further afield. Guyana led and the rest of CARICOM followed. It was also an undeniable fact that one of the first tasks of the new PPP/C’s Government in 1992 was to remove these well qualified and highly skilled High Commissioners and Ambassadors and other Senior Diplomats.
While it is not my intention to dwell on the past like Dr. Gopaul did yesterday, let me say that it is worthwhile to note that the removal by the PPP/Civic Administration of 69 staff, including High Commissioners, Ambassadors, within months of assuming office in 1992 resulted in the mere destruction of this most important Ministry. Indeed, only Ambassador Ronald Austin who was removed in 1993 and Rudy Insanally escaped the PPP/Civic’s scourge. This beheading of the Ministry’s staff was carried out by none other than my friend, the Hon. Mr. Clement Rohee, who went not around the world in 80 days, but from mission to mission in great haste and almost – as I sought to compare him – like the Queen of Hearts, and Alice in wonderland, and I have the book here for him. The Minister, like the Queen of Hearts and Alice in Wonderland, moved from mission to mission “Off with your head, off with your head! Who is this? Off with your head.” He did that to 69 people, but the Government was not satisfied with that. It was not satisfied with the Queen of Hearts. It did its coup de grace. And I want to give the English translation for Mr. Neendkumar. The French call it a coup de grace and the English dictionary defines it as thus: “a final blow or shot given to kill a wounded person or animal”. Not satisfied with sending the Hon. Member, Minister Rohee, around the diplomatic circle in 80 days, the Government’s coup de grace was to appoint him...      [Members gave a different pronunciation of coup de grace.]     No, I have checked with the French people and you are wrong. The Government’s coup de grace was to appoint Minister Rohee as the Minister of Foreign Affairs. We have taken years to recover from that coup de grace and, even as I speak, I am not sure that we have come out of that.
Let me get back to the preparedness of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. Given the global economic rearrangement that has seen the emergence of the BRICS countries (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) and other emerging nations, A Partnership for National Unity believes that it is imperative that our missions in Brazil, the “B” in BRICS, and India, the “I”, be headed by our most accomplished and highly qualified diplomats who can take a lead role in encouraging trade and investment in Guyana.
I have sought the advice of Dr, Rupert Roopnarine - because I was in severe problems - and he has advised me, and I verily believe that the words “accomplished” and “highly qualified” cannot be attributed to either High Commissioners Kellawan Lall or Ronald Gajraj. We therefore urge this Government to quickly remove and replace them. I do not know if Mr. Rohee can help us out in that regard because we would daily like him to go to them as he did to 69 people “off with their heads”. These two missions are too critical to be used as rewards for party loyalists who perform poorly in Guyana. (Retracted the names: Kellawan Lall and Ronald Gajraj)
I hope that I can continue to refer to my Hon. friend Mr. Rohee. Once I can do that, Sir, I am happy.
Mr. Speaker: Provided that he gets a chance, if he wishes, to clarify or on a Point of Order to respond to anything that he feels fit.
Ms. Teixeira: He is here.
Ms. Backer: Oh, he is. Thank you. We note the appointment of High Commissioner, Professor David Dabydeen to China, and urge that in the implementation of our trade and investment agreements with China, shared values based on our laws are central to all agreements with that great country. We urge the Government to immediately begin the process of establishing a mission in South Africa, the “S” in bricks. Guyana, as we all know, already has tremendous good will with South Africa, given our unequivocal condemnation of apartheid on our solidarity then and still with the people of that country. The establishment of such a mission, namely the mission in South Africa, will advance not only trade and investment in that country, but will also enable Guyana to more easily develop economic and trading ties with other African countries, many of whom have fast growing economies.
While we are on the continent of South Africa, APNU wishes to place on record our congratulations to the new President of Malawi, Ms. Joyce Banda who now becomes the second woman to head a nation in the great continent of South America.
Still on the issue of the preparedness of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs to lead the promotion of trade and investment, I invite the National Assembly to join me as I turn very briefly to the present staffing of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The Ministry, according to volume three of 2012...      [Neendkumar: You sound like Aubrey]       Yes, I sound a little “unsad” about what I am going to say. The Ministry has a total staff of 258 persons distributed as follows: Ministry Administration – 108, Foreign Relations – 131, Foreign Trade and international cooperation where we have given priority to – 19. So, out of a total of 258 persons, we have dedicated to this very critical area of Foreign Trade and International Cooperation 19 persons. Approximately, as Mr. Greenidge has advised me, 7.3% of the Ministry’s staff. The question is whether this is sufficient to adequately promote Guyana’s Trade and Industry, particularly when you take into account the fact that we do not have the best and brightest at all of our missions. I am calling no names.
We think that it is also worthwhile to note that staffing within the Foreign Trade and International Cooperation section has declined from 27 in 2009 to 19 this year. Of that princely sum of 19 persons, 42 are contracted workers, which means that they can leave at very short... [Members: Forty two of nineteen?]       What am I saying? Significantly of the 19 persons 42% are contracted employees. They are good students Sir, they are listening. So, it is easy to declare, as our Minister of Finance did on page 54. I do not think I can properly imitate him; I have the height but not necessarily the “wit”, W-I-T Minister. He says at page 54 that the promotion of Trade and Industry is a priority focus of the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. These words, we submit, will be rendered meaningless if no serious effort is taken to enhance and to expand the staff dedicated to Foreign Trade and International Cooperation.
I would like to turn to the United Nations. Given the critical importance of the United Nations, it is of paramount importance that Guyana has a highly qualified, highly skilled and experienced diplomat heading our United Nations mission. We are therefore happy with the appointment of Mr. George Talbot as Guyana’s permanent representative to the United Nations. It is worthwhile to note that Mr. Talbot’s appointment along with several others occurred “PLSE”. With “PLSE” having nothing to do with the voters list, “PLSE” being “Post Luncheon’s Sworn Evidence”, which stated, and I quote, this is the “PLSE”  sworn evidence, “The lack of African Guyanese as ambassadors was not due...”,
Attorney General and Minister of Legal Affairs [Mr. Nandlall]: Mr. Speaker if I may. It is well known that this matter is still receiving the attention of the Court.
Mrs. Backer: Sir, I am quoting from a newspaper.
Mr. Speaker: Are you quoting form a newspaper or verbatim records of the Court, Ms. Backer?
Mrs. Backer: No Sir, from a newspaper. I am quoting from a newspaper, I am well prepared as I always am, Stabroek News Friday 6th of January. Allow me to read from the papers now that I know that Mr. Nandlall...
Mr. Speaker: One second Mrs. Backer. I believe Hon. Attorney General, if it is a matter which has been reported in the public and has passed, she may comment, but do not dwell on it please though Mrs. Backer.
Mrs. Backer: No, of course not, Sir. I am just reading. I was going to pass on but I am going to read now. I am reading form the Stabroek News of Friday, 6th January:
“Many of the new appointees serve to debunk Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr. Luncheon, statement made in open court last year that the absence of African Guyanese as ambassadors of Guyana was not due to racism but to the fact that no Guyanese Africans are qualified to be ambassadors of Guyana.”
That is the newspaper. I am saying that Mr. Talbot’s appointment occurred post those statements.  I congratulate, and I am sorry that she is not here to hear me because we always say that we do not congratulate our Ministers, the Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs for the adroit way in which she deflected questions that were asked in January, of her, concerning that statement. The fact is that by not immediately denouncing Dr. Luncheon’s inaccurate and reprehensible statements, the Hon. Minister of Foreign Affairs and by extension all 32 people on that side of the House have to take responsibility for them. APNU denounces those most unfortunate statements then and we do...      [Mr. R. Persaud: Quoted out of context.]      Where did you come from? ... and we do so again.
Depending on where you sit I have taken a certain fondness, which some people say is strange, to Dr. Nanda Gopaul. I want to help him Sir, because he had a fixation about Dr. Clive Thomas who he quoted from 1980-something when he criticised the PNC, but he did not quote him between 1992 and now when he has been destroying the PPP. We understand, it is selective memory recall. I want to take him down memory lane a bit, but because Dr. Gopaul, if you do not mind, I am slightly younger than you I suspect, I may be wrong.     [Neendkumar: But you are looking old.]       Yes, I know I look like you. I withdraw that, Sir.
Mr. Speaker with your leave, I would like to read from another lecture by Dr. Ivelaw Griffith, “Guyanese Strategic Culture Leaders Levering...”       [Neendkumar: That is the man that you all threw out of the Party.]         What is going on? Sir, this is what he says:
“The PPP did make changes though. A diplomatic one has been the increasing removal of Afro-Guyanese from key public sector, diplomatic and other positions and their replacement by East-Indians.”
I am reading. I am not saying I agree; I am reading. We could discuss it.
“Top Afro-Guyanese bureaucrats generally have been viewed as PNC loyalists and unworthy and have been marginalised or victimised.”
The following service has been affected dramatically prompting Dr. Mark Kirton trungent remark:
“Guyana’s diplomatic status in the global arena has been significantly reduced since the Ministry of Foreign Affairs has been fossilised.”
That was Dr. Mark Kirton speaking on the 7th of October 2001 Dr. Gopaul. I am not going to go back to the 70s and 80s. We are glad that there seems to have been a change within the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. We congratulated you after you were hit on your head for years to understand that we will do better in foreign affairs if we work together. We wish to formally congratulate Mr. George Talbot, Mr. Michael Brotherson who has been appointed Consul General of Barbados, Mr. Keith George who is Guyana’s ambassador to Suriname, Mrs. Audrey Jardine-Waddell who is Guyana’s ambassador to UNASUR, Mrs. Sattie Sawh on her confirmation of Hon. Consul General to Toronto and Ms. Esther Griffith who is the Chief of Protocol. This was a good move in the right direction.
This was a good move. We are also aware – I see Ms. Teixeira looking hoping that the clock would move quickly.     [Ms. Teixeira: Are you telepathic?]        I am. Sir, this Government has a way of equating the signing of agreements with the actual performance and achievement. It is a start, we accept that, but we have signed so many protocols but it is the honouring of them that is the problem. I would just like to refer to one convention that the Hon. Member who spoke before me termed “ruffing-up”. We all know that it was torture. We signed that, but we always tend to sign and observe in the breach. I do not have the time nor the energy, having come almost of age, to go through the list, but I would like to say that equating signing and actual performance is a dangerous thing.
I would like to quote from the Executive Summary on CARICOM which I am coming to next. This is what the executive summary said on the review of CARICOM, I want to borrow it. It says that “CARICOM’s tendency” and I would like to replace this here by “Government”, “The Government’s tendency to announce decisions over new initiatives as if full implementation was imminent has resulted in the so called implementation deficit.” We are saying that as regards to the UN, not with relation to CARICOM, it is okay to sign. We signed the one on Human Rights yet Minister Rodrigues and my very good friend Ms. Teixeira went to the UN to defend and to justify why they could not do all that they should have done. The Hon. Minister Priya Manickchand, having signing certain agreements and the UN said things that we do not necessarily agree with either.
I agree with you Sir, I should not reduce myself to the Hon. Member. During her 26th of January 2011 Budget presentation my genuine Hon. friend, Hon. Minister Rodrigues-Birkett reminded the House that CARICOM members were awaiting a review of CARICOM institutions including the Secretariat, which the heads had requested. At the recently concluded 23rd Intercessional Meeting of the Conference of Heads held in Suriname during March, the Heads received and according the communiqué issued subsequent, they received and considered in depth the review which was contained in a 159 paged report entitled “Turning around CARICOM, Proposals to Reconstruct the Secretariat”. Having read the report, A Partnership for National Unity has concluded that if not in actual crises as stated in the report, CARICOM is near enough to the brink to cause us worry.  With that said, we share the view held by all CARICOM Heads that CARICOM will survive and indeed must survive and be strengthened. We believe that can happen if our heads act on the report and the recommendations of the report.
CARICOM remains the regions flagship organisation and it is essential to the wellbeing of our people, the continued promotion of the economic and social integration of our people, the improvement of our standard of living to name a few. We have seen the communiqué issued and we agree and have noted that a five year strategic plan will be drawn up by CARICOM for consideration by the heads at the 33rd Meeting scheduled in July of this year in St. Lucia. This five year strategic plan is of critical importance not only for this Government but this entire nation and all the people of Guyana. We therefore look forward to meaningful consultation between the Government and the Parliamentary majority on this five year strategic plan prior to His Excellency Donald Ramotar proceeding to meet with the Heads in July 2012.
We need buy in on CARICOM major policies, and the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) is sufficient example. We have such a turnover of Governments now in CARICOM. We almost turned over and that will soon be turned over. I am not calling any names. The reality is that we need buy in on important policy decisions. That is why the CCJ is so problematic, one Government would say yes and then the Government changes and when the Opposition becomes the Government the feel ‘no’ because there have not been a buy in. We are saying that for CARICOM to be stronger there has to be a buy-in. All major stakeholders must commit and must be involved in this five year strategic plan, if not it will take us nowhere.
We always here that PNC, APNU, AFC or whoever do not give recommendations, we just get up and criticise. I have tabulated some recommendations in a simple form so that my friend Mr. Neendkumar can understand. We need to enhance, as I have stated before, our army to the extent that it can once again attain the capacity to enhance our diplomatic leverage and economic activities. We need to establish formal engagement between the Government and Opposition on issues of sovereignty and territorial integrity with a view of obtaining actual national consensus. It is not just getting up and saying, “Yes, we believe these people are supporting us”.
I would like to say what I mean by “Actual National Consensus”. In her last year budget speech the Hon. Minister Mrs. Rodrigues-Birkett said this, and she is speaking about the recognition of the state of Palestine as a free independent and sovereign state:
“This decision for Government marked a further confirmation of the longstanding and principle solidarity and support the country has given to the Palestinian people. I was pleased to see...”
I have skipped a bit:
“I was pleased to see that the Opposition PNC/R agreed with Government’s decision to do this.”
This is what the Hon. Member goes on to say, “I think that the AFC did so, but they said they wanted consultation”, which I did not understand, because this has been our position from way back and it is the only natural thing to do. We are saying that when we talk about actual involvement we must sit around a table. We must not have a Minister saying, “I thought they concurred because that is the only thing to do”.  I do not think my Hon. Friend Ms. Teixeira is having her best day, Sir.
We need to regularise, as I have said before, the Guyana-Suriname crossing. We need to replace – I want to tread carefully here – inexperienced and unqualified ambassadors who are incapable of giving their best by those who are. We need to restore the principle of rotation of staff at our diplomatic missions away. The United Nations did a study on the Ministry of Foreign Affairs and they lamented the fact that we, Guyana, had ambassadors so long in one posting – I read someone in inelegantly refer to it as diplomatic fatigue. I believe that if some of our ambassadors and high commissioners are woken up in the middle of the night and asked what their country of citizenship is, some of them automatically blurt out the United Kingdom or the United States of America. So long have they been there. We have to go back to rotating our staff abroad; it has been proven to be the best thing to do. Mr. Greenidge is troubling my documents, Sir.
We need to resuscitate the Foreign Service Institute under a new director. We need, with this new resuscitated Foreign Service Institute under a new director as I said, to invite visiting professors to come and give lectures. We need to invite Professor Ivelaw Griffith who I spoke about recently. We need to invite Professor Mark Kirton although after what he said in October 2011 he knows will probably be stuck from the record. We need to invite our own Leader of the Opposition, an expert in his own right on issues on issues of territorial integrity and sovereignty. Once this Government has the strengths of character to invite Guyanese of that calibre to come to the Foreign Service Institute and do guess lectures. We need to employ young and bright Guyanese who can form the backbone of our 21st century diplomats, for example the University of Guyana valedictorian who the Ministry of Foreign Affairs could not find accommodation for. I think that is the kindness way I could put it. We need to ensure the training of all Foreign Affairs staff to ensure that they can become more interdisciplinary with the emphasis we suggest, given the 19 staff only, being skewed towards trade and investment.
Our Manifesto is not perfect, but in our Manifesto, APNU’s Manifesto 2011, which I have already commended and recommended for good reading. I do not know if the Hon. Dr. Gilbert will allow me perhaps after he has presented his book to present this Manifesto and also “Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland to Mr. Rohee”. Time does not permit me to go through all of our major policy frameworks, but I just want to mention two of them, to re-energise the regional integration process with the CARICOM Single Market and Economy, develop diplomatic relations with strategically placed countries where possible, and where possible as part of a joint CARICOM mission, reorganising the constructive role of global civil society that continues to play a more and more significant part in international affairs.
As I conclude, let me say this. We believe that our recommendations along with those and the vision that the Government has, those that the Alliance for Change must have, and the recommendations of other stakeholders, we believe that if all these recommendations are taken together, impartially discussed and the best recommendations implemented, irrespective of where they come from, the end result would be a Foreign Affairs Ministry second to none and fully able to implement and fulfil the Ministry’s mandate. It will be a Ministry with a highly qualified and highly specialised staff. It will be a Ministry of Foreign Affairs that can play a lead role in enhancing trade and investment with Guyana. In short, it will be a Ministry capable of being used as a major tool for development.
A Partnership For National Unity (APNU) has already entered the door of cooperation as Dr. Rupert Roopnarine has said. We invite the Members of the PPP/C and, of course, the Members of the Alliance for Change, and all Guyana, to join us in the room of cooperation so at the end of discussions we can have a foreign affairs policy that we can all be proud of.
With those few words, Sir, I thank you. [Applause]