LEADERSHIP must be measured not only by the number of promises made, the speeches delivered or the political battles fought, but also by the willingness to confront difficult problems and make decisions in the national interest.
Guyana is approaching such a moment, and the responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of those entrusted with executive authority.
The recent engagements and statements by President, Dr Mohamed Irfaan Ali have brought several important national issues into focus.
From the rising cost of food and the economic pressures confronting households during the Christmas season, to the disturbing threats of organised criminal activity, terrorism, political incitement, misinformation and racial division, the message is clear: governing a rapidly developing country requires more than managing its progress. It requires protecting that progress.
Guyana cannot afford complacency. Neither can it afford a government that reacts only when circumstances become politically uncomfortable. Leadership must anticipate problems, confront them decisively and establish systems that deliver measurable results.
The president’s approach to the current challenges presents an important opportunity to demonstrate what executive leadership should look like. His approach is firm where national security is concerned,
compassionate where people’s livelihoods are affected, uncompromising where corruption is concerned and responsible when national unity is threatened.
The bottom line of his administration is that the people must come first.
Firstly, one of the most immediate concerns is the economic pressure being felt by ordinary Guyanese. While Guyana continues to experience significant economic growth, the reality is that economic expansion does not automatically translate into financial comfort for every household.
Guyana can record impressive economic indicators while a mother is still struggling to stretch her salary, a pensioner is calculating the cost of groceries and a working father is wondering how he will meet his family’s Christmas expenses. I understand this fully.
This is why the president’s announcement of a three-month pilot programme to stabilise the prices of eggs, poultry, beef and mutton is particularly important.
Following discussions with suppliers, wholesalers, producers and supermarket owners at State House on November 13, President Ali proposed a coordinated purchasing arrangement that would consolidate demand, establish predictable supply arrangements and introduce transparent maximum mark ups for participating retailers.
This is the kind of intervention that demonstrates the importance of executive leadership. Rather than simply lamenting rising prices or blaming international market conditions, the president has brought the relevant stakeholders around the table and is seeking to address the structural weaknesses contributing to the problem.
The proposal to consolidate purchasing through a centralised system is particularly significant. When public institutions, wholesalers and retailers purchase independently, opportunities for bulk negotiations are lost. Transportation, storage, financing and distribution costs can become unnecessarily high. Those costs eventually find their way into the prices paid by consumers.
The initiative recognises that affordability and agricultural production must go hand in hand. Small producers must have opportunities to access larger wholesalers and processors instead of being disadvantaged by an inefficient distribution chain.
The three-month pilot must produce measurable reductions, regular public reporting and accountability from every participating stakeholder.
If wholesalers benefit from lower purchasing costs, those savings must reach consumers. If retailers participate, they must honour their commitments. If producers are promised predictable markets, they must receive them.
This is especially important as Guyanese prepare for Christmas, a season when household expenditure increases considerably.
The government must therefore treat the holiday season as a period requiring deliberate economic intervention. It must continue monitoring essential commodity prices, strengthen competition, prevent exploitative practices and ensure that vulnerable households are not left behind.
The objective should not be to create an artificial impression that everything is affordable. It should be to make essential goods genuinely more accessible, while protecting local businesses and producers.
That is what putting people first must mean in practical terms. That’s what this measure piloted by President Ali and the PPP means.
Secondly, perhaps the most troubling issue confronting Guyana is the growing concern about attempts to undermine public safety, threaten citizens and attack the institutions that keep the country functioning.
President Ali’s November 12 national-security statement was a serious warning that must not be dismissed as another political announcement.
The president disclosed that intelligence gathered by Guyanese security agencies, working with international partners, suggested the possible existence of a coordinated criminal conspiracy involving threats against individuals, damage to public and private properties, disruption of essential services and activities intended to create disorder.
He also raised concerns about intelligence relating to the possible movement of senior members of Tren de Aragua, a criminal organisation designated as a terrorist organisation by certain authorities.
These concerns came against the backdrop of an attack on the Guyana Power and Light substation at Good Hope, East Coast Demerara, on November 10. CCTV footage reportedly captured two individuals throwing Molotov cocktails at the facility, apparently targeting an electrical transformer. Fortunately, the attack did not damage the facility.
Let us understand what this means for Guyana.
A deliberate attempt to destroy an electricity substation is not an ordinary act of vandalism. It is an attack on infrastructure upon which thousands of people depend. Electricity supports hospitals, businesses, schools, communications, water distribution, manufacturing and virtually every aspect of modern economic activity.
Imagine the consequences if an attack successfully disabled a major electricity facility. Hospitals could be affected, businesses could lose operations, families could be left without essential services and economic activity could be disrupted. The consequences could extend far beyond the immediate location of an attack.
This is precisely why threats against critical infrastructure must be treated with the utmost seriousness.
Guyana is a developing economy with significant investments, expanding infrastructure and growing international responsibilities. Its national security cannot be separated from its economic security. Investors must have confidence that their investments are protected, citizens must feel safe in their communities, and public institutions must be able to function without intimidation or sabotage.
The president’s warning about terrorism-related offences is therefore significant: it signals that the government recognises the seriousness of threats that go beyond conventional criminal activities and may involve organised networks, financing, planning, coordination and deliberate attempts to destabilise the state.
But decisive action must be accompanied by intelligence-led policing, effective investigations, strengthened border security, co-operation with international partners and the protection of critical infrastructure.
The authorities must identify not only those who physically execute criminal acts, but also anyone who plans, finances, directs or facilitates them, where the evidence establishes criminal responsibility. I figure this here is rational behind the recent raids and searches conducted at a WIN MP’s home, because there is intelligence about her alleged links to criminality and terrorist acts.
There must also be an unwavering commitment to the rule of law. Intelligence assessments must be investigated, allegations must be substantiated and prosecutions must meet the requirements of the law. Nobody should be convicted in the court of public opinion.
Equally, the government must never confuse peaceful political opposition with terrorism or criminal activity.
The freedom of expression is not a licence to organise violence, threaten families, destroy infrastructure or incite criminal conduct.
President Ali and the executive know this and are treading the grounds carefully and cautiously to ensure they must get that balance right. Don’t worry about all the noise by the opposition and anti-government commentators; the government will do what they need to do within the law. This is not the PPP’s first time dealing with political, economic or social threats.
Thirdly, disinformation is a national threat. We must also confront the dangerous relationship between political disinformation, social media and the mobilisation of public anger.
Guyana has entered an era in which a fabricated video, manipulated photograph, misleading voice recording or deliberately distorted statement can reach thousands of people before the facts are established.
This is no longer simply a matter of irresponsible social-media behaviour. When misinformation is deliberately used to provoke hostility, undermine confidence in public institutions, encourage racial animosity or incite violence, it becomes a threat to national stability.
The president has previously raised concerns about manipulated images and synthetic videos circulated during the MV Barima tragedy. He also indicated that the government was examining stronger legal measures and public education to address harmful misinformation.
That experience should remind us how easily national tragedies can be exploited for political purposes.
There is a difference between holding the government accountable and deliberately manufacturing information to deceive the population. There is a difference between questioning a minister’s decision and encouraging citizens to attack public institutions.
Political parties, commentators, influencers and media practitioners must understand that their words carry consequences.
However, the government must approach this challenge carefully. Legislation against misinformation must not become legislation against criticism.
The answer must be a combination of public education, responsible journalism, transparent government communication, independent fact-checking and proportionate legal enforcement.
When falsehoods spread, official information must be made available quickly. When citizens raise legitimate concerns, they must receive answers. Silence creates an information vacuum, and that vacuum is often filled by speculation.
There is a need for a Ministry of Information and Public Communication in the vastly developing Guyana. The damage done by the Mohameds family to the political and morale of a section of the country to avoid sanctions would have never been reality if this ministry had been established.
Finally, leadership must be decisive.
All these challenges point to one fundamental responsibility and the president must lead as he is doing , and the executive must deliver.
The president cannot personally resolve every problem, but he has the authority and responsibility to establish the direction, demand performance from ministers, hold agencies accountable and ensure that government machinery responds to the needs of the population.
I believe President Ali’s recent interventions demonstrate an understanding that these issues require attention at the highest level of government. But announcements, warnings and meetings must be followed by sustained action.
Leadership is not simply about occupying the highest office in the land, it is also about accepting responsibility for the direction of the country and having the courage to act when the national interest demands it.
DISCLAIMER: The views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the official policy or position of the Guyana National Newspapers Limited.