Dear Editor,
I have written to you about this and find myself obliged to repeat myself because of a question posed to me by a young lady who wanted to know “why they got so many cars still driving around with dark tinted glass since they say that police is controlling?” My answer to that is: No follow-up.
The reporters who, whether freelance or work for your newspaper, do not ask the tough questions and they just like almost the whole country never follow up. They do not follow up on neither what is suggested, promised, reported or brought forward in whatever form or fashion. From the highest to the lowest, both in and out of government there is no follow-up, because everything is taken for granted.
One thing I do know, is that we cannot blame the Dutch for that because they are just the opposite. I do not think that they go about it in an ethical way, because I do not think that to lay and wait is ethical, but they do follow up. Not only do they follow up, they also lock up, and we have not learned anything from that.
In an article with the heading “Government will let dump management contract expire” I read that MP Silveria Jacobs objected to the reasoning behind a suggestion to close the meeting, because the MP preferred the answers to her question from Government rather than have the session closed.
The article ends with “there is a possibility that answers will be delivered to the MPs in writing in the coming days.” What does “a possibility” mean in this case? Who is going to follow up on it? This again plays exactly to what this letter is about. The follow-up.
The people who diligently listen to those meetings very very rarely get to know what those answers in writing are, (I for one still strongly believe that there is an understanding If you don't tell on me I will not tell on you) because if those answers are satisfactory (or not) the people will not know because there are rarely follow-up meetings once answers are given in writing.
This is the reason why I write to you, because indirectly you too have a responsibility to the people who rely on your paper to give them a little more than what government is giving them. I am aware of the Gazette and other official communiques, but you and I know what is the more practical way.
As you know, I have always stated that government officials should not use the oplnion page to get their message across to the people, but they continue to rely on your prerogative. There is no follow-up from your reporters on questions which should be vital information for the public.
Nobody's job is threatened if they do it correctly. And if so be the case then that will expose their bosses. There is transparency of government and we should not let government get away with being derelict.
Serious investigative reporters could be a deterrent to recklessness. We need follow-up.
Russell A. Simmons
