Guyana at 60: A Moment for Pride, Not Pandemonium

AS Guyana marks its 60th anniversary this week, patriotic pride should sit comfortably beside sober reflection.
We celebrate remarkable national progress, yet we cannot ignore how flagrantly recent political choices have weakened the very institutions that nurtured our gains.
For decades, our politics produced leaders of substance: Statesmen and Stateswomen shaped by experience, competence and duty. These are people who elevated office above self, and guided the nation with prudence. That tradition made possible steady development and growing political maturity across administrations. On this Diamond Jubilee, we rightly salute the foundational contributions of Cheddi Jagan and Forbes Burnham, and acknowledge how both the PPP and PNC, at different moments, steered Guyana forward.
But since last year, a jarring departure from that standard has unsettled the Opposition, and, by extension, our national discourse. Electing Azruddin Mohamed as Leader of the Opposition has not delivered the constructive, disciplined scrutiny Guyanese were promised. Instead of coherent parliamentary oversight and robust policy alternatives, we have seen a leader more attuned to clicks than to caucus-building; more invested in spectacle than in strategy. The result is a fragmented, directionless opposition that fails to hold the government to account, and fails the electorate that entrusted it with sixteen seats.
Leadership is not performance art; it demands consistency, coalition-building, and, above all, a devotion to country over persona. Mohamed’s refusal to engage meaningfully with other opposition forces, his penchant for personal vendettas against individuals associated with the government, and a preference for social-media theatrics over legislative substance have diminished the quality of opposition politics in Guyana. The public deserves a credible counterweight in Parliament, not a succession of manufactured controversies and rhetorical excesses that distract from real policy debates.
Still, on balance, the past six years have seen transformative economic and social change. The PPP/C’s stewardship has overseen rapid development in infrastructure, services, and a growing oil and gas sector that is beginning to fund broad-based improvements in standards of living. Non-oil sectors continue to expand, technology is raising expectations about access and timelines, and ordinary Guyanese are moving beyond mere survival towards aspirations for quality and convenience. Under President Ali’s leadership, the trajectory is one of direction and delivery, a clarity that was often absent earlier in the decade.
Challenges remain: Inequality, cost-of-living pressures, and the need to ensure that growth is inclusive and sustainable. Those are problems for serious, policy-focused opposition and responsible government alike to address together. On this anniversary, Guyana should not be spectacle-driven but Statesman-like.
Imagine a moment where the Leader of the Opposition, regardless of party, stood with the President in mutual respect, offering rigorous critique and constructive proposals. That is the maturity we must demand.
As we celebrate sixty years of independence, let us honour the legacy of disciplined leadership that built our institutions, demand accountability from those who occupy them today, and insist that the opposition return to the business of governing, not grandstanding. Guyana’s future is too important for anything less.
The task ahead is clear: If Guyana is to convert the promise of its diamond jubilee into durable progress, political actors must rise above theatrics and embrace responsibility. The PPP/C has demonstrated capacity to govern at scale, delivering infrastructure, investing in health and education, and beginning to manage resource revenue for national benefit. But governance is an ongoing project; it requires rigorous opposition that tests policies, exposes weaknesses, and proposes viable alternatives. That is precisely why the current state of the opposition is so regrettable.
Azruddin Mohamed’s tenure has exposed a troubling paradox: In an era when institutional checks are most critical, the principal parliamentary opposition has opted for personality-driven narratives and selective antagonism. Rather than marshal expertise, coordinate policy critiques, and train a new generation of capable parliamentarians, the WIIN leadership appears content to trade in spectacle. This leaves Parliament poorer, and citizens less protected from bad policy or mismanagement. Constructive dissent is not optional in a healthy democracy; it is indispensable.
The opposition must decide: Will it be a force for disciplined accountability or merely a vehicle for attention-seeking? Practical steps are obvious and overdue. Let’s rebuild cross-party committees with credible chairs, recruit policy specialists in economics, public finance and energy, and prioritise constituency service over social-media stunts. The PPP/C, for its part, should continue transparent stewardship of oil revenues, strengthen anti-corruption mechanisms, and expand outreach to communities who feel left behind. Cooperative frameworks for oversight of resource management could bridge partisan divides and demonstrate that political rivalry need not mean national self-sabotage.
On our 60th, let this be a solemn reminder: Nation-building requires more than slogans. It requires competence, decorum, and commitment to the common good. Guyana’s journey has always been propelled by those who put country before self. If opposition leaders embraced that ethic, our political life would advance in maturity and our democracy would be strengthened to the benefit of every Guyanese household.