Opposition Leader Aubrey Norton has responded to the recent call by the Alliance For Change (AFC) for Guyana’s political parties to collaborate on a 15-year development plan for the country. While acknowledging the proposal as well-intentioned, Norton expressed scepticism about the feasibility of such collaboration, citing fundamental differences between the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR)/A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) in key areas of governance and development strategy.
Speaking during a press conference today August 20, 2024, Norton emphasised that the PNCR/APNU appreciates the rationale behind the AFC’s proposal, particularly the need for continuity in government policies. However, he highlighted significant ideological and ethical disparities that he believes make collaboration unlikely. Norton argued that the two parties differ fundamentally on national priorities, development strategies, leadership styles, and moral values, with the PPP focusing on enriching its “families, friends, and favourites” through corruption at the expense of the Guyanese people.
He stressed that the PNCR/APNU is committed to putting the people of Guyana at the centre of its development agenda, viewing this as both a moral obligation and an economic investment. In contrast, Norton used the opportunity to criticise the PPP’s focus on large-scale infrastructure projects, arguing that these initiatives disproportionately benefit the party’s cronies rather than the general population. He also pledged that, if elected, the PNCR/APNU would prioritise the fight against corruption and financial waste in government spending, accusing the PPP of facilitating the diversion of billions of dollars into the bank accounts of its allies, thus making any collaboration on a joint development plan untenable.
Furthermore, Norton sought to underscore the importance of good governance, noting that the PNCR/APNU seeks to embed the principles of transparency, accountability, and the rule of law in Guyana’s political landscape. He expressed doubt that the PPP would support such endeavours, pointing to the party’s alleged resistance to measures like full liability coverage for oil spills, the establishment of a Petroleum Commission, and comprehensive audits of oil revenues. Norton argued that the PPP’s approach to managing the country’s oil resources and its broader governance practices are fundamentally at odds with the PNCR/APNU’s vision for Guyana’s future.
Commenting on the broader political landscape, he asserts that joint economic planning must be based on a solid political consensus, which he believes is impossible under the PPP’s current leadership. He pointed out that the PPP’s obsession with total political control precludes any meaningful collaboration, although the PNCR/APNU remains open to joint efforts when they are likely to succeed, such as in the defense of Guyana’s territorial integrity.
As such, Norton dismissed the possibility of crafting a joint 15-year development plan in the current political climate, while noting that many of the projects under the current government were originally conceptualised by the Coalition government or during the tenure of the Burnham-led PNC. He stated that the PNCR/APNU would not seek to stop or reverse these projects but would instead aim to rescue and streamline them for the benefit of all Guyanese.