Government economic responsibility – Stabroek News

As a resource-rich country on the cusp of oil gains, the management and distribution of our nation’s promised wealth is often debated. Given our continuing history of politicians delivering themselves and their corporate holders, the disadvantaged have real concerns about how they will benefit from it all.

The popular belief among the population is that there is nothing to gain for the working class. Oil wealth will undoubtedly raise our GDP and has already been discouraging us from relative international oblivion, but none of this bodes well for most. They will largely remain without the resources needed for their survival and development.

Despite marginal increases over the years, Guyana’s poverty rate has remained relatively high and oil will further widen the inequality gaps that currently exist. This is because we have never had a wealth production problem, what we have never had is a wealth distribution problem. While the popular quote is, the poor will always be with us, often used to illustrate the enduring effects of poverty, much has been adopted to justify inequality and continue to demonize minority populations. The poor are routinely portrayed as needing enduring charity and saving – hapless victims of their own personal failure. However, the role of government and prioritizing capital economies over humanity is seldom seen as the driving force behind this inequality.

Opponents who argue against government cash support for the poor often point out that money should be invested in policies, programs and sectors such as health, education and housing instead of distributing them. They like to use the saying that someone has to be taught how to fish instead of giving them said fish. All this is well and good, there should be investment in various appropriate sectors, policies and programs, but that does not negate the need for direct financial assistance to the people. People need to be given the tools, resources and opportunities to succeed.

While it is a well-known fact that government cannot be relied upon in targeting inequality it does not mean that they should not be. Certainly, individuals can and should come together to achieve community success, but that should not necessarily be a burden they require. I often see stories of individuals in isolated communities in particular, coming together to do things that central and local government should do. It is usually framed as feeling good about community responsibility, but nothing feels good about the government’s constant failure to provide basic necessities to communities in need. Political leaders are elected to serve the people and put us on a path that not only considers a path of survival but one of growth among the poor.

With a still-building pandemic and a government that places more value on the health of the economy over the health of its citizens, many safety nets for the poor and vulnerable have been removed. It has been allowed that for 2020, due to the contested elections, budgetary constraints / considerations are for a long time, so far there has been no inkling of a long-term economic plan for those who are still affected by the pandemic. However, the scheme appears to be entirely focused on maximizing the private sector’s profit in delivering a decree of personal liability to the public.

There has been tangible support provided to date in the distribution of cash grants to households across the country. Cash transfers of course are not necessarily new to Guyana, as he has been employed occasionally over the years. When the proposal to use parts of Guyana’s oil wealth to tackle the effects of poverty was put forward by leading members of the Workers’ Alliance, it quickly became a big contention. While the coalition was overlooking the idea, seemingly genuinely worried about how people would spend their money, it was interesting to see how quickly the PPP / C had jumped in with their sincerity to him. The coalition’s early response showed a class orientation, the PPP / C response reflected their class interests agenda. Neither response showed a true understanding of the need for financial support for those in need.

However, the cash distribution exercise taking place now is a small step forward. The twenty-five thousand dollars is said to be supposed to supplement household income. With the economy being what it is, that amount is certainly a lot of money and considered a blessing to many people for whom money is often tight. So I get and support the idea behind this. But it also raises many concerns. There seems to be little thought given to the fact that many people do not have an income to add and food accessibility is getting more difficult with each passing day. What other relief measures are being put in place to assist these individuals? Will this grant be a one-off distribution for the whole pandemic or will there be more? Are house-to-house visits really the best way to distribute sums of money? Given that many households across the targeted regions have not received, it can be seen that this method of distribution was not well thought out. In many households, many families live in the home and due to lack of access to personal housing, a large part of our population rents. Although the revisiting of houses with more than one family is said, what are the considerations put in place for those renting and / or homeless? It would be good to have some insight into the long-term economic plans of the ruling class for the people, but so far they seem perfectly content with staying out of touch. After all, while COVID-19 does not discriminate, the rich and poor experience the pandemic very differently.

Source