Speeches in the National Assembly

HONOURING THE 21ST AUGUST, 2012 AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE GOVERNMENT OF GUYANA AND THE REGIONAL DEMOCRATIC COUNCIL, REGION 10
Mr. B. Williams: Mr. Speaker, thank you. If it pleases you, I rise to support this motion standing in the name of the Hon. Member, Ms. Vanessa Kissoon.
I have heard the Hon. Member, Mr. Lumumba say they invested billions in Linden. The Hon. Member, Mr. Benn said, “We want Linden to succeed”. But, the fact of the matter is, Linden is a depress community. In fact, I am not going to be stranded in the past, but from 1992, Linden has been marginalised. Right now it has the highest rate of unemployment for any community in this country.
I know Linden and I knew Linden was a place I loved to go, as a boy. A beautiful community, well appointed and owned and controlled by the people of Guyana, and managed by Guyanese people - a wonderful community. I also knew it after it was taken over and headed really under the charge of the Hon. Member, Mr. Neendkumar. To compare the modern day Linden to what I knew of Linden in the past is depressing. When you travel to Linden it is dilapidated, you can see the buildings - the whole place.
It appears that a couple of years ago, the Government, after intense pressure, after a constant publicising of the fact that they neglected Linden as a community, decided that if they have to do something in it they will also try politically acquire it. Well that was a forlorn hope. But do not want to be stranded in the past as I said. I would like to deal with, bearing in mind what you said about the motion that we had earlier in this Parliament, deal with the post-protest, which would cover the Commission of Inquiry and the period of the agreement.
Mr. Speaker: And if you could respond to some of what Ms. Teixeira said about the minutes and what has been agreed to and what is happening as well. It would be good if you could rebut some of that. Thank you.
Mr. B. Williams: Mr. Speaker, I am sure you heard names listed and read out, participants...
Mr. Speaker: Actually, it is in the name of APNU; it is an APNU motion and you do not bat without... I know that you will handle yourself.
Mr. B. Williams: Sir, I am advised. Our founder leader used to like to say, “If huri comes from the bottom of the pond and I tell you boy down there cold.” You have to believe them. I am instructed by my Hon. Member, my sister, Ms. Kissoon that the picture, which was painted by the Hon. Member, Teixeira is nothing that lends itself to accuracy. [Interruption]
It is important that the Hansard reflects what happened to the town and the people of Linden. The Government celebrates Enmore Martyrs Day every year; a grand charge every year. One would have hardly have expected that they would have perpetuated similar acts in Linden. So do not worry with all the obfuscations, the meat of the matter is, three persons were murdered, while peacefully protesting. It must never happen again in this country, in no community and we must not lose sight of that.
I am saying that peaceful protest – they were peacefully protesting for most of the day. The Guyana Police Force had the opportunity to prevent what happened that night from happening. If, as the Commission’s report shows, relying on evidence from no less a person than the former head of the Tactical Squad Unit (TSU), Superintendent Alves, who confessed that the police should have cleared the bridge when they were there at midday, one o’clock, that day. They should have cleared the bridge then. Because of that confession, Superintendent Alves has been harassed and removed from his job. I know him, he is a principled person. That is another shame, a shame on this Government. That a man who spoke the truth at the Commission of Inquiry...
Mr. Speaker: Did this confession come under your cross-examination or some other?
Mr. B. Williams: Yes.
Mr. Speaker: I see.
Mr. B. Williams: There were a lot of confessions that day, by no less a person than the Hon. Member, Clement Rohee. I see he is not here, but I know that he is looking at the monitor inside the room. The records show that the Minister in charge of the Police Force in Guyana and the security in the wider context of this country was totally unaware of everything that he needed to be aware of. Totally unaware and it was a sad day. It was a complete abdication of his responsibility to the people of Guyana, which resulted in the killing and mass wounding of the people of Linden.
The protest was peaceful and the Government must answer for why instructions were not given to clear the people off the bridge at high, bright, midday, but then attempted to do so at night, under the cover of darkness, which was accompanied by a coordinated blackout of the community. So under the cover of darkness, the heinous acts were committed and we do not want to lose sight of that.
The Commission of Inquiry Report was pellucidly clear on who was to be blamed for such acts and they fingered the policemen at the scene.
I was saying that for you to just go to a crowd, unarmed and just shoot them down like common dogs, must not be repeated. We are saying this; it must not be repeated again in this country. That Commission of Inquiry had to have been the highest paid Commission of Inquiry ever conducted in this region. They made certain awards; I think people would see in today’s newspapers that the awards were collected, albeit under protest.
Mr. Speaker, if I might respectfully refer you to the WHEREAS clause in the motion:
”CONCERNED that even while the negotiations were ongoing the Guyana Police and Guyana Defence Force were used against the people of Linden, including the indiscriminate shooting and injuring of innocent persons in their homes on a quite Sunday.
What is wrong? What did the people of Linden do to deserve that kind of treatment? It was like Palestine, when they were invaded by the Israeli forces. Indiscriminate shooting; a lot of persons were injured, maimed and disfigured. We asked, even before the Commission was about to embark properly on its work, that they be included also. The Hon. Member and Leader of the Opposition, Brigadier (Ret’d) Granger wrote the President, asking him to include that also within the remit of this Commission of Inquiry, that we were spending so much taxpayers’ money on and he refused.
One of the things that we would like at the present time, since we want to move forward... I really cannot see how we can have proper moving forward if you have scores of persons walking around the community of Linden, with pellets in them, scars of the scourge of war that was perpetuated on them. I am respectfully submitting that these persons that were injured, after the 18th of July, on that weekend, must be compensated also. We do not need a Commission of Inquiry for that. We will provide the list of persons, with their medical evidence and we expect the Government to show their bona fide-ness and their goodwill...
Mr. Speaker: Is it a Point of Order.
Ms. Teixeira: On a point of Order, Dr. Rupert Roopnarine spoke earlier about the attempt to conclude the Terms of Reference and the postponement for a day for the signing. One of the issues in all the discussions is the Terms of Reference, including that particular phrase, which the Government had included in the original Terms of Reference, to include post July18th. It was removed based on an agreement with the APNU and the AFC. Therefore, the Terms of References which were finally agreed to, did not include the phrase. It would have included August 12th and August 8th and those days, thank you.
Mr. Speaker: We will allow that as a point of clarification. The point being made was that the post 18th July injuries sustained should have been included...
Mr. B. Williams: Yes.
Ms. Teixeira: It was not post 18th ...
Mr. Speaker:  In other words, Mr. Williams, that was removed from the Terms of Reference.
Mr. B. Williams: I did not know that. Sir, as you just said, notwithstanding whatever happened there, an application was made. A letter was sent for its reconsideration even if that happened. To know ... [Inaudible]
Mr. Speaker:  I take that point that notwithstanding what may have in or out...
Mr. B. Williams: It was overtaken by the letter from the Leader of the Opposition to the President of Guyana.
Mr. Speaker:  Very well. Proceed, Sir.
Mr. B. Williams: We believe that the Government of Guyana can show its bona fide- ness, its commitment to the people of Linden; it could corroborate the Hon. Benn’s statement that we want Linden to succeed by compensating these people of Linden, who were injured subsequent to the 18th of July.
The agreements I heard, for in particular, the television item in the agreement. I heard the Hon. Member Ms. Bibi Shadick speaking to that issue and have actually said to this Honourable House that for the television to get off the ground in Linden, they would be required to pay $2.5 million license fee. I am not sure that the Hon. Member is serious.
When this agreement was signed we assumed that it would have been signed in good faith, bona fide- ness on both sides. I am sure that it would not have been within the contemplation of either party that what they agreed on, they would have to pay $2.5 million, to put into operation. I am saying...
Mr. Speaker:  In fact, had it been contemplated, there would have been a clause for its waiver.
Mr. B. Williams: Mr. Speaker, I agree with you.
Mr. Speaker: In other words, it could never have been contemplated.
Mr. B. Williams: It could never and it cannot.
Mr. Speaker: Why were you not there, though, Mr. Williams?
Mr. B. Williams: I cannot say that I know, Sir. I am not important enough, Sir. Sir, as you know when you were with me, I have always been a worker. I am a worker. I am a worker for the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) and I am a worker for the people of Guyana.  I hope the Hon. Members, on the other side, are taking me seriously. I am saying that for them to now say to the people of Linden that they must pay $2.5 million to start up their television, it cannot sell. It cannot. It would be an imposition on the people of Linden; it would be something that is in terrorem in terror of the people of Linden because it is an impoverished community.
I do not understand what is going on. Why is the Hon. Member Mr. Ganga Persaud so bloodthirsty? Why does he want the people to be trampled on?  I am urging the Members on that side that they cannot, at this late stage - Sir, this is basic contraction principles - unilaterally vary the contents of the agreement. They cannot, now, subsequent to the signing of the agreement, unilaterally impose other terms, and then onerous terms as that. Their blood will  be upon their heads.
The agreements made by Government... My Hon Friend, the Hon. Member, the Reverend Morian was alluding to other practices in other countries but right here, in Guyana, I can assure him, there are a lot of  examples of dishonouring agreements. Agreements must be observed by Governments when they make them. Pacta sunt servanda - you must observe your contracts. When the Hon. Member from Linden asked to bring this motion to this National Assembly, alleging foot dragging, alleging dilatoriness, alleging all of this delay, Sir, it was something that we would believe without more because we know about agreement signed in 2001. We know about communiqué signed. In all those agreements signed by the Government there were agreements about equitable access to the media - you know about all of these things, Mr. Speaker - but have it observed any items in those agreements it had signed? It has not, so it has a track record of dishonouring agreements when it signs them. With particular reference to agreements coming on the heels of conflict, it is clear that its modus... is to sign the agreements to let the conflict abate and then when the conflict subsides it then refuses to implement agreements signed. That is its modus... It wants to do that again in Linden. All I could say to you, Hon. Members, on the other side, as my Saint Lucian friends would say, the mood I see in Linden, “the people aint eating nice”. That is what I would say to you as, my Saint Lucian friends would say, “they aint eating nice”. I would suggest to Government that it honours the agreements.
It is appalling and disgusting that, again, having signed another agreement, the persons come and they are lamenting again. I mean, it is the same old thing. There are committees which cannot be formed; when the committees are formed they cannot work. What is going on? It is the same old story again. What is going on? A Government must have some pride in its self; the people must respect a Government. If the Government is signing on to agreements it must accept its responsibilities and its obligations. Now, nothing has moved. I am instructed that nothing has moved pursuant to the agreement and what I am hearing here now it means that satisfaction of the agreement is light years away. I was hoping to hear from the Government side a recommitment to performing the obligations under that agreement that it had signed for the benefit of the people of Linden but not to come here...
Okay, the Government has problems to this point; I am urging it to start a new. We will expect that within a month we would see progress on every item, in that agreement. We want a commitment like that from it. Let bygones be bygones and let us start anew. Let us move ahead because it is only a couple of people here, but the masses of the people of Linden are suffering and we call upon the Government to honour its obligations under the agreement that it has signed.
Thanks Mr. Speaker. Goodnight Members on that side. [Applause]