Four parties, GTUC appeal to Caricom heads to ‘rekindle hope’ among Guyanese
Posted By Stabroek staff On July 5, 2009 @ 5:09 am In Local News | 1 Comment
http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/news/local/07/05/four-parties-gtuc-appeal-to-caricom-heads-to-%e2%80%98rekindle-hope%e2%80%99-among-guyanese/
An appeal to the Caricom Heads of Government to “rekindle hope” among Guyanese citizens was made yesterday via a full-page advertisement in the local newspapers placed by four political parties and a trade union body.
They cited Guyana’s steadily declining population whose young people did not see the country as an option, and the loss of hope in the reconciliation process which was to flow from the Herdmanston Accord and St Lucia Statement.
The Alliance for Change (AFC), GAP-ROAR, the Working People’s Alliance (WPA), the United Party, and the Guyana Trades Union Congress said that the hopes that Guyanese had placed in the Herdmanston Accord and St Lucia Statement had gone and the promise of the heads “to remain engaged with our reconciliation process” had not been met. “Guyana continues to hemorrhage,” the advertisement said.
And yesterday President Bharrat Jagdeo responded to the issues of governance and immigration raised in the ad, and singled out the AFC and one of its leaders Khemraj Ramjattan for personal criticism. He lauded Guyana’s democracy, and said the country was in the top 30 where press freedom was concerned.
The advertisement captioned an ‘Open Letter to Caricom Heads of Government’ was placed in yesterday’s edition of the Stabroek News, and expressed the view that the small Guyanese population was not interested in any of the pronouncements of the Heads of Government Conference except the “single issue of the new Barbados immigration practices which make illegal immigrants out of West Indians born in the West Indies.”
“Unlike other crises confronting the region, this one touches intimately and immediately on what our increasingly desperate people see as their very survival,” the advertisement said.
“The hopes that Guyanese had placed in the Herdmanston Accord and St Lucia Statement have been dashed. After a full decade the promise of the Heads of Government to remain engaged with our reconciliation process has been unfulfilled,” and many Guyanese felt “deeply betrayed by the process,” the advertisement said.
The sponsors also stated that the lack of interest shown “is nothing new, since the masses of the Caribbean have long been disconnected from your discussions and decisions about the future. So, whether it be the global financial crisis or the failure of regional regulatory mechanisms to prevent the banditry of a CLICO or a Stanford, the broad masses of Guyanese are unlikely to be distracted from their day to day agonies.”
According to the advertisement:
“The reality is that Guyana is a society in the process of disintegration. Lawlessness stalks the land. Rape and murder of women and girls are on the rise. Guyana is not alone in the region with the growth of violent gun crimes, including extra-judicial murder by elements of the security forces and by private armies of drug lords, protected and cosseted by sections of the state. Well documented instances of torture by elements of the army and police are dismissed as ‘roughing up.’”
The statement identified “cronyism and financial skullduggery” as major issues within the country, and referred to “the looting of the public purse” which was confirmed year after year by the Auditor General. The collapse of the country’s education system and the “terminal decline” of the administration of justice were two other issues that were also identified.
Further, the statement said that the trade union movement was “a sad shadow of its former self, its impotence on show with every passing day, bludgeoned into submission in the face of blatant union-busting and subversion of the industrial relations process.” Additionally, the government was accused of “seeking to increase its control of the minds of its citizens by extending its domination over as many sources of information as possible, while restricting the right of citizens to free access to information by owning and controlling the single radio monopoly in the country and stymieing freedom of information legislation.”
The sponsors also said that “a movement is under way to restore hope and re-open the doors of opportunity here in our own country. Such a movement begins with the belief that Guyanese in and out of Guyana have a duty to remove the blight that has settled over the land.”
The advertisement made reference to the right of citizens to control their affairs, which was enshrined in Article 13 of the Constitution which states:
“The principal objective of the political system of the State is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens, and their organizations in the management and decision-making processes of the State, with particular emphasis on those areas of decision-making that directly affect their well-being.”
“It will not be easy”, the sponsors noted, “but the work of national revival must begin now. In order to ensure success, it needs the involvement of all Guyanese throughout Guyana and the Diaspora, regardless of race, class or religious belief”, they added.
According to a release from the Government Information Agency (GINA), in responding to the immigration issue, the President said that political parties had to act in the best interest of the people, and try to avoid “public hysteria” or use complex regional issues for political purposes. “I think Raphael Trotman and the AFC are using this issue politically. The last thing I want is for that to happen. The government doesn’t have that luxury,” GINA quoted him as saying.
He went on to say that Guyana cannot “determine the immigration policies of Barbados outside of those that are provided in the Revised Treaty of Chaguaramas,” but would continue to try and ensure that Guyanese were treated “fairly and with dignity.”
Where issues of governance were concerned, he was reported as saying that Guyana was one of the most democratic countries in the hemisphere. “Of the top 192 countries in the world, we’re in the top 30 for the freedom of the press,” he said.
According to the release, Jagdeo said the AFC’s “antics” were intended to create the impression among heads of government that Guyana was violating democratic norms, but that his fellow heads were wise politicians who would recognize that the AFC was trying to exploit the occasion of the conference.
1 Comment (Open | Close)
1 Comment To "Four parties, GTUC appeal to Caricom heads to ‘rekindle hope’ among Guyanese"
#1 Comment By BORAPORK On July 5, 2009 @ 8:53 am
Guyana is doomed as long as the tyranny of the majority rules supreme. Until such time as the majority population groups stop ethnic voting Guyana will be parasitic. When is the World number one beggar leaving to berate some other group for a handout?
Article printed from Stabroek News: http://www.stabroeknews.com
URL to article: http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/news/local/07/05/four-parties-gtuc-appeal-to-caricom-heads-to-%e2%80%98rekindle-hope%e2%80%99-among-guyanese/
Sunday, July 5, 2009
Friday, July 3, 2009
The failure of the National Drug Strategy Master Plan
The failure of the National Drug Strategy Master Plan
Posted By Stabroek staff On June 30, 2009 @ 5:01 am In Editorial | 2 Comments
http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/editorial/06/30/the-failure-of-the-national-drug-strategy-master-plan/
President Bharrat Jagdeo marked last Friday, June 26 − which was observed as ‘International Day against Drug Abuse and Drug Trafficking’ − by declaring, “I think we are doing the best we could in terms of combatting the trade. I keep saying that very few countries in the world …[certainly] none in this hemisphere that I know of, would have polygraphed their narcotics unit twice in six months and gotten rid of the people who failed.”
According to the Guyana Chronicle newspaper, the President then went on to say, “If we had more resources… we may be able to better patrol our waters; if we had more resources, we may be able to have radar coverage over our whole country and, maybe, be able to fly and police all of our borders. But we cannot do those things. But the little resources we have, we are deploying it as best as we could.”
The President made no mention on Friday of the fact that the fourth anniversary of his administration’s launch of the National Drug Strategy Master Plan for 2005-2009 on June 21, 2005 also slipped by last week. In its most recent International Narcotics Control Strategy Report − released only four months ago on February 27 − the US Department of State noted, “In the penultimate year of its National Drug Strategy Master Plan for 2005-2009, the Government of Guyana has achieved few of the Plan’s original goals. Minimal cooperation among law enforcement bodies, weak border controls, and limited resources for law enforcement… allowed drug traffickers to move shipments via river, air, and land without meaningful resistance.” If the US government concluded that the Guyana Government has under-achieved, so have Guyanese citizens.
Why, after four years, has the administration not fully established the key arms, commissions, committees, centres, secretariat, and regional units called for in the Plan? Why has the Plan’s implementation lapsed into a farcical pantomime of promises without performance?
Even if erecting the Plan’s entire, operational infrastructure and governmental superstructure could not be financed, surely the most important elements needed to strengthen and support the work of the Customs and Police anti-narcotics units could have been activated! Even without a large number of ships, aeroplanes and radar, much more could be done to fight narco-trafficking than polygraphing the narcotics unit.
Despite the evidence of failure, Minister of Home Affairs Mr Rohee unabashedly told the National Assembly that the administration was “aggressively working” to ensure that several aspects of the Plan were implemented. He cited the establishment of the lame Inter-Agency Task Force on Narcotics and Illicit Weapons but did not explain why the components prescribed by the Plan were still not in place.
An excellent example of the administration’s real intentions has been its jokey performance on the establishment of a permanent office of the US Drug Enforcement Administration in Guyana. Over the years that this topic has been tossed around, Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr Roger Luncheon announced that the establishment of a DEA office in Guyana would be welcomed suggesting that “certain details” had to be discussed beforehand. Then, former Minister of Home Affairs Ms Gail Teixeira kept up the jape by saying that “talks are ongoing” to establish the DEA office. When Mr Clement Rohee took over the ministry, he could say only that he “could not pronounce definitively” on the matter.
After four years of failure, it is obvious to everyone that the administration has never fully implemented the National Drug Strategy Master Plan because it never had any intention to do so.
2 Comments (Open | Close)
2 Comments To "The failure of the National Drug Strategy Master Plan"
#1 Comment By badlall( DRUG BARONS HAVE A FREE HAND IN GUYANA) On June 30, 2009 @ 9:11 am
NOT ONE DRUG BARON THAT IS “CONNECTED” IN THIS COUNTRY HAS EVER BEEN PROSECUTED.
#2 Comment By Andy On June 30, 2009 @ 11:01 pm
Not one person suspected of smuggling drugs or money laundering has ever been polygraphed and then sentenced for failing the test. Yet these people are floruishing while the President boasts about firing government employees who fail drug tests.
Article printed from Stabroek News: http://www.stabroeknews.com
URL to article: http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/editorial/06/30/the-failure-of-the-national-drug-strategy-master-plan/
Posted By Stabroek staff On June 30, 2009 @ 5:01 am In Editorial | 2 Comments
http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/editorial/06/30/the-failure-of-the-national-drug-strategy-master-plan/
President Bharrat Jagdeo marked last Friday, June 26 − which was observed as ‘International Day against Drug Abuse and Drug Trafficking’ − by declaring, “I think we are doing the best we could in terms of combatting the trade. I keep saying that very few countries in the world …[certainly] none in this hemisphere that I know of, would have polygraphed their narcotics unit twice in six months and gotten rid of the people who failed.”
According to the Guyana Chronicle newspaper, the President then went on to say, “If we had more resources… we may be able to better patrol our waters; if we had more resources, we may be able to have radar coverage over our whole country and, maybe, be able to fly and police all of our borders. But we cannot do those things. But the little resources we have, we are deploying it as best as we could.”
The President made no mention on Friday of the fact that the fourth anniversary of his administration’s launch of the National Drug Strategy Master Plan for 2005-2009 on June 21, 2005 also slipped by last week. In its most recent International Narcotics Control Strategy Report − released only four months ago on February 27 − the US Department of State noted, “In the penultimate year of its National Drug Strategy Master Plan for 2005-2009, the Government of Guyana has achieved few of the Plan’s original goals. Minimal cooperation among law enforcement bodies, weak border controls, and limited resources for law enforcement… allowed drug traffickers to move shipments via river, air, and land without meaningful resistance.” If the US government concluded that the Guyana Government has under-achieved, so have Guyanese citizens.
Why, after four years, has the administration not fully established the key arms, commissions, committees, centres, secretariat, and regional units called for in the Plan? Why has the Plan’s implementation lapsed into a farcical pantomime of promises without performance?
Even if erecting the Plan’s entire, operational infrastructure and governmental superstructure could not be financed, surely the most important elements needed to strengthen and support the work of the Customs and Police anti-narcotics units could have been activated! Even without a large number of ships, aeroplanes and radar, much more could be done to fight narco-trafficking than polygraphing the narcotics unit.
Despite the evidence of failure, Minister of Home Affairs Mr Rohee unabashedly told the National Assembly that the administration was “aggressively working” to ensure that several aspects of the Plan were implemented. He cited the establishment of the lame Inter-Agency Task Force on Narcotics and Illicit Weapons but did not explain why the components prescribed by the Plan were still not in place.
An excellent example of the administration’s real intentions has been its jokey performance on the establishment of a permanent office of the US Drug Enforcement Administration in Guyana. Over the years that this topic has been tossed around, Head of the Presidential Secretariat Dr Roger Luncheon announced that the establishment of a DEA office in Guyana would be welcomed suggesting that “certain details” had to be discussed beforehand. Then, former Minister of Home Affairs Ms Gail Teixeira kept up the jape by saying that “talks are ongoing” to establish the DEA office. When Mr Clement Rohee took over the ministry, he could say only that he “could not pronounce definitively” on the matter.
After four years of failure, it is obvious to everyone that the administration has never fully implemented the National Drug Strategy Master Plan because it never had any intention to do so.
2 Comments (Open | Close)
2 Comments To "The failure of the National Drug Strategy Master Plan"
#1 Comment By badlall( DRUG BARONS HAVE A FREE HAND IN GUYANA) On June 30, 2009 @ 9:11 am
NOT ONE DRUG BARON THAT IS “CONNECTED” IN THIS COUNTRY HAS EVER BEEN PROSECUTED.
#2 Comment By Andy On June 30, 2009 @ 11:01 pm
Not one person suspected of smuggling drugs or money laundering has ever been polygraphed and then sentenced for failing the test. Yet these people are floruishing while the President boasts about firing government employees who fail drug tests.
Article printed from Stabroek News: http://www.stabroeknews.com
URL to article: http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/editorial/06/30/the-failure-of-the-national-drug-strategy-master-plan/
Wednesday, July 1, 2009
AG to undertake 'Value for money audit'
Kaieteur News news item, Wednesday 01 July 2009 - "AG to undertake 'Value for money audit'" - http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2009/07/01/ag-to-undertake-%e2%80%98value-for-money-audit%e2%80%99/
Kaieteur News news item, Wednesday 01 July 2009
http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2009/07/01/ag-to-undertake-%e2%80%98value-for-money-audit%e2%80%99/
AG to undertake ‘Value for money audit’
July 1, 2009 | By Ananthsa | Filed Under News
…report recommends that Public Procurement Commission be established
The Auditor General will be doing a ‘Value for money audit’ of the National Procurement Board.
But even as this is being anticipated, the 2007 report recommends that every effort be made to have the Public Procurement Commission established.
The AG report said that this should be in place to ensure the independent, impartial and fair discharge of functions in relation to procurement and the benefit to the Board of persons with expertise in procurement, legal, financial and administrative matters.
It was only on Friday last that President Bharrat Jagdeo was questioned about when the administration was going to submit its nominees for this commission and his response was ‘soon.’
The Head of State admitted that the usual ‘toing and froing’ between the government and the People’s National Congress Reform is what led to the delay in the resubmission of the administration’s nominees for the Commission.
A source close to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) told Kaieteur News on Monday that the general functioning of the National Procurement Board cannot operate in a smooth manner because the commission has not been established. This is causing problems.
According to the Act, the National Board shall have responsibility for exercising jurisdiction over tenders as prescribed in the Regulations and the maintenance of an efficient record keeping and quality assurance systems.
The Constitution provides for the establishment of a Public Procurement Commission to monitor public procurement and procedures in order to ensure that the procurement process is conducted in a fair and transparent manner.
In the absence of a Public Procurement Commission, the Auditor General report noted that the Board will also have responsibility for the making of regulations governing the procurement of goods and services, determining the forms of documents for procurement, reporting annually to the Minister of Finance on the effectiveness of the procurement process, organising training seminars regarding procurement, and adjudicating debarment proceedings.
The 2007 Auditor General Report states that the administrations response to this issue was as a consequence of the Commission not being established and in accordance with the Act, the National Board has taken the responsibility for the making of regulations governing the procurement of goods and services.
The Board has also taken responsibility to determining the forms and documents for procurement and reporting to the Minister of Finance on the effectiveness of the procurement system.
According to the report, the Minister of Finance appointed the members of the National Board in November 2004.
The Act states that the Board shall comprise seven members, not more than five from the Public Service and not more than three from the Private Sector.
Just under a week ago, Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee, Volda Lawrence, told another section of the media that the delay in submission of the names is holding up the debilitation to commence.
The members of this constitutional commission were supposed to be completed since last July.
Lawrence had said that the PNCR and the Alliance for Change have already submitted their nominees to the body.
Kaieteur News news item, Wednesday 01 July 2009
http://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2009/07/01/ag-to-undertake-%e2%80%98value-for-money-audit%e2%80%99/
AG to undertake ‘Value for money audit’
July 1, 2009 | By Ananthsa | Filed Under News
…report recommends that Public Procurement Commission be established
The Auditor General will be doing a ‘Value for money audit’ of the National Procurement Board.
But even as this is being anticipated, the 2007 report recommends that every effort be made to have the Public Procurement Commission established.
The AG report said that this should be in place to ensure the independent, impartial and fair discharge of functions in relation to procurement and the benefit to the Board of persons with expertise in procurement, legal, financial and administrative matters.
It was only on Friday last that President Bharrat Jagdeo was questioned about when the administration was going to submit its nominees for this commission and his response was ‘soon.’
The Head of State admitted that the usual ‘toing and froing’ between the government and the People’s National Congress Reform is what led to the delay in the resubmission of the administration’s nominees for the Commission.
A source close to the Public Accounts Committee (PAC) told Kaieteur News on Monday that the general functioning of the National Procurement Board cannot operate in a smooth manner because the commission has not been established. This is causing problems.
According to the Act, the National Board shall have responsibility for exercising jurisdiction over tenders as prescribed in the Regulations and the maintenance of an efficient record keeping and quality assurance systems.
The Constitution provides for the establishment of a Public Procurement Commission to monitor public procurement and procedures in order to ensure that the procurement process is conducted in a fair and transparent manner.
In the absence of a Public Procurement Commission, the Auditor General report noted that the Board will also have responsibility for the making of regulations governing the procurement of goods and services, determining the forms of documents for procurement, reporting annually to the Minister of Finance on the effectiveness of the procurement process, organising training seminars regarding procurement, and adjudicating debarment proceedings.
The 2007 Auditor General Report states that the administrations response to this issue was as a consequence of the Commission not being established and in accordance with the Act, the National Board has taken the responsibility for the making of regulations governing the procurement of goods and services.
The Board has also taken responsibility to determining the forms and documents for procurement and reporting to the Minister of Finance on the effectiveness of the procurement system.
According to the report, the Minister of Finance appointed the members of the National Board in November 2004.
The Act states that the Board shall comprise seven members, not more than five from the Public Service and not more than three from the Private Sector.
Just under a week ago, Chairperson of the Public Accounts Committee, Volda Lawrence, told another section of the media that the delay in submission of the names is holding up the debilitation to commence.
The members of this constitutional commission were supposed to be completed since last July.
Lawrence had said that the PNCR and the Alliance for Change have already submitted their nominees to the body.
Ultimately accountable
Stabroek News Editorial, Tuesday 30 June 2009 – http://www.stabroeknews.com/2009/editorial/06/29/ultimately-accountable/
Ultimately accountable
By Stabroek staff | June 29, 2009 in Editorial
http://a.stabroeknews.com/www/delivery/lg.php?bannerid=3&campaignid=1&zoneid=6&loc=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stabroeknews.com%2F2009%2Feditorial%2F06%2F29%2Fultimately-accountable%2F&cb=56ebed962e
With each passing day, the questions about whether this administration is committed to transparency and accountability grow more sonorous and with good reason. At his press conference on Friday President Jagdeo was given the opportunity to clear the air on several controversial areas which posed questions about the administration’s probity.
The first had to do with Minister Ramsammy and the claim by the former lawyer for Mr Roger Khan that he had been in contact with the Minister on certain matters. The President’s response was disappointingly dismissive. He would not, he said, launch an investigation just on any allegation otherwise there would have to be myriad investigations to take account of all such allegations. Except that the allegation made about Dr Ramsammy has come amid a stream of claims about the links between this administration and Mr Roger Khan starting with the fact that this fugitive from US law, now a confessed drug trafficker and believed to have been the number one drug lord here, was able to establish himself to the point that he was able to build houses, operate a business on an island in the Essequibo River and come within a whisker of acquiring a prime forest concession in the south of the country no doubt for the continuation of the drug business he was involved in.
On top of that, though caught red-handed with weaponry and the spy equipment that Dr Ramsammy’s name has been mentioned in connection with, Mr Khan was able to avoid a conviction and, according to him, embarked upon an extensive campaign to aid the government in its fight against crime. So is President Jagdeo’s government brave enough to risk an investigation of all the allegations of its links to Mr Roger Khan? Clearly not, although any credible investigation would have to be completely free of government influence and would have to be headed up by persons of repute and without connections to the administration.
President Jagdeo was also asked if he would now agree to an investigation of what transpired with Clico (Guyana) since the PNCR had said it was quite prepared to have an investigation done of the Globe Trust debacle. Readers may recall that when he was first tackled with the question of why no forensic investigation of Clico (Guyana) to determine exactly, among other things, how US$34M in Guyanese investments went from here to Miami instead of Clico (Bahamas), President Jagdeo most ill-advisedly said he might countenance a probe if the PNCR was also willing to have one of Globe Trust – the rub being that several persons affiliated to the PNCR were blameworthy in the collapse of the institution. The President rather naively believed that the PNCR would not risk this inconvenience but it has since called Mr Jagdeo’s bluff and is prepared for such an investigation. When asked about this on Friday President Jagdeo’s disappointing answer was that he was unaware that the PNCR was so disposed. For someone who is well in touch with the goings-on across the board and has access to wide a variety of willing sources it was disappointing that President Jagdeo was unaware of the main opposition party’s position. Even though there should have been no linkage between the two probes the question persists. When will President Jagdeo convene an inquiry into Clico (Guyana) to discover how our money got to Miami and who was withdrawing large sums in the days leading up to the placing of the business under judicial management?
Trinidad has already taken a lead on this and a forensic investigator has issued a report which has lifted the veil on some of the unsavory business practices of affiliates of the C L Financial Group. It is all the more important as the lead Clico (Guyana) executive Mrs Geeta Singh-Knight had a very positive relationship with this administration and ended up in plum positions on the Guysuco interim board and as head of the Berbice Bridge Company prior to the crisis in the group. You don’t end up in these positions in this country unless the government is in favour of it.
Third, President Jagdeo was also asked about his rather troubling disclosure at the Conference of Caribbean Police Commissioners in May that a plea bargain was in the works in relation to the polar beer case. Such a development was unknown to the public and still is.
Further, such information should have been restricted to the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions and should not ideally have been within the knowing of the President. What is more relevant here, given the time and rhetoric invested in the investigation commissioned by the President is that it has fallen flatter than stale beer through a series of inexplicable events that has left the DPP’s Chambers mute on the decision to abandon the prosecution of Mr Joshua Safeek and the GRA in the dark. It is typical of many so-called investigations that have been commissioned by this government.
The aforementioned cases are only a few of the matters which the government has thrown thick blankets around. The prime one is the pressing need for an investigation of the 2002 prison break and numbing violence that followed and claimed the lives of hundreds of people. The President had signalled that a comprehensive probe would be done of the killings that demoralized the police force, the East Coast and the entire country and there is still enough time for this before the end of this administration’s term in office. Last year’s three massacres and particularly the claims about the involvement of elements of the Joint Services in the Lindo attack are ripe for a rigorous investigation.
Numerous other issues cry out for a proper reckoning. The government is yet to provide a comprehensive account to the public for the use of billions of dollars in Lotto funds, the spending on the 2005 Great Flood, the accounts for the 2007 world cup, expenditure for the 2008 Carifesta, even though millions are still owed, and whether state funds that went to the Buddy’s Hotel and the Casique Hotel have been repaid.
Questions have resurfaced this year about the large drug supply contracts that have been entered into with New GPC (NGPC) with the concurrence of the Cabinet. It is a matter of public importance as NGPC’s parent group QA11 is another of those with favoured relationships with the government as witnessed by the controversial Sanata Textiles deal and subsequent fiscal concessions which had to be specially legislated for.
All of these issues and the continuing pall of doubt they cast over the propriety of governance by this administration carry over from month to month and year to year without the government being too bothered by it. That is something that should worry all Guyanese as it means they either don’t care enough about the quality of governance to complain about it or their government is comfortable knowing that it won’t be held ultimately accountable.
Ultimately accountable
By Stabroek staff | June 29, 2009 in Editorial
http://a.stabroeknews.com/www/delivery/lg.php?bannerid=3&campaignid=1&zoneid=6&loc=1&referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.stabroeknews.com%2F2009%2Feditorial%2F06%2F29%2Fultimately-accountable%2F&cb=56ebed962e
With each passing day, the questions about whether this administration is committed to transparency and accountability grow more sonorous and with good reason. At his press conference on Friday President Jagdeo was given the opportunity to clear the air on several controversial areas which posed questions about the administration’s probity.
The first had to do with Minister Ramsammy and the claim by the former lawyer for Mr Roger Khan that he had been in contact with the Minister on certain matters. The President’s response was disappointingly dismissive. He would not, he said, launch an investigation just on any allegation otherwise there would have to be myriad investigations to take account of all such allegations. Except that the allegation made about Dr Ramsammy has come amid a stream of claims about the links between this administration and Mr Roger Khan starting with the fact that this fugitive from US law, now a confessed drug trafficker and believed to have been the number one drug lord here, was able to establish himself to the point that he was able to build houses, operate a business on an island in the Essequibo River and come within a whisker of acquiring a prime forest concession in the south of the country no doubt for the continuation of the drug business he was involved in.
On top of that, though caught red-handed with weaponry and the spy equipment that Dr Ramsammy’s name has been mentioned in connection with, Mr Khan was able to avoid a conviction and, according to him, embarked upon an extensive campaign to aid the government in its fight against crime. So is President Jagdeo’s government brave enough to risk an investigation of all the allegations of its links to Mr Roger Khan? Clearly not, although any credible investigation would have to be completely free of government influence and would have to be headed up by persons of repute and without connections to the administration.
President Jagdeo was also asked if he would now agree to an investigation of what transpired with Clico (Guyana) since the PNCR had said it was quite prepared to have an investigation done of the Globe Trust debacle. Readers may recall that when he was first tackled with the question of why no forensic investigation of Clico (Guyana) to determine exactly, among other things, how US$34M in Guyanese investments went from here to Miami instead of Clico (Bahamas), President Jagdeo most ill-advisedly said he might countenance a probe if the PNCR was also willing to have one of Globe Trust – the rub being that several persons affiliated to the PNCR were blameworthy in the collapse of the institution. The President rather naively believed that the PNCR would not risk this inconvenience but it has since called Mr Jagdeo’s bluff and is prepared for such an investigation. When asked about this on Friday President Jagdeo’s disappointing answer was that he was unaware that the PNCR was so disposed. For someone who is well in touch with the goings-on across the board and has access to wide a variety of willing sources it was disappointing that President Jagdeo was unaware of the main opposition party’s position. Even though there should have been no linkage between the two probes the question persists. When will President Jagdeo convene an inquiry into Clico (Guyana) to discover how our money got to Miami and who was withdrawing large sums in the days leading up to the placing of the business under judicial management?
Trinidad has already taken a lead on this and a forensic investigator has issued a report which has lifted the veil on some of the unsavory business practices of affiliates of the C L Financial Group. It is all the more important as the lead Clico (Guyana) executive Mrs Geeta Singh-Knight had a very positive relationship with this administration and ended up in plum positions on the Guysuco interim board and as head of the Berbice Bridge Company prior to the crisis in the group. You don’t end up in these positions in this country unless the government is in favour of it.
Third, President Jagdeo was also asked about his rather troubling disclosure at the Conference of Caribbean Police Commissioners in May that a plea bargain was in the works in relation to the polar beer case. Such a development was unknown to the public and still is.
Further, such information should have been restricted to the Chambers of the Director of Public Prosecutions and should not ideally have been within the knowing of the President. What is more relevant here, given the time and rhetoric invested in the investigation commissioned by the President is that it has fallen flatter than stale beer through a series of inexplicable events that has left the DPP’s Chambers mute on the decision to abandon the prosecution of Mr Joshua Safeek and the GRA in the dark. It is typical of many so-called investigations that have been commissioned by this government.
The aforementioned cases are only a few of the matters which the government has thrown thick blankets around. The prime one is the pressing need for an investigation of the 2002 prison break and numbing violence that followed and claimed the lives of hundreds of people. The President had signalled that a comprehensive probe would be done of the killings that demoralized the police force, the East Coast and the entire country and there is still enough time for this before the end of this administration’s term in office. Last year’s three massacres and particularly the claims about the involvement of elements of the Joint Services in the Lindo attack are ripe for a rigorous investigation.
Numerous other issues cry out for a proper reckoning. The government is yet to provide a comprehensive account to the public for the use of billions of dollars in Lotto funds, the spending on the 2005 Great Flood, the accounts for the 2007 world cup, expenditure for the 2008 Carifesta, even though millions are still owed, and whether state funds that went to the Buddy’s Hotel and the Casique Hotel have been repaid.
Questions have resurfaced this year about the large drug supply contracts that have been entered into with New GPC (NGPC) with the concurrence of the Cabinet. It is a matter of public importance as NGPC’s parent group QA11 is another of those with favoured relationships with the government as witnessed by the controversial Sanata Textiles deal and subsequent fiscal concessions which had to be specially legislated for.
All of these issues and the continuing pall of doubt they cast over the propriety of governance by this administration carry over from month to month and year to year without the government being too bothered by it. That is something that should worry all Guyanese as it means they either don’t care enough about the quality of governance to complain about it or their government is comfortable knowing that it won’t be held ultimately accountable.
The President's Press and Publicity Officer on Swiss bank accounts
Freddie Kissoon is not capable of writing accurately, responsibly and/or fairly on any issue
KAIETEUR News columnist Freddie Kissoon is his usual rambling self in his column headed `Why was President Jagdeo in Switzerland ?’ in the Tuesday June 30, 2009 issue of the newspaper.
Readers of the newspaper would by now have become accustomed to his appalling attempts at trying to sound erudite and scholarly when all he produces is a mish-mash of so-called columns that never ceases to amaze.
One again wonders how come he is a lecturer at the University of Guyana when he produces such shoddy stuff. If these are an example of the intellectual level of his lectures to his students, then God help them.
His latest offering is another classic piece of diatribe which has little to do with the headline of the article but one that seems to fit in with the agenda of the Kaieteur News.
One recalls that sometime back the newspaper claimed in an article that President Bharrat Jagdeo had sold out the reserves of this country and when confronted with the false claim, it said it was just a joke.
In any other part of the world such a serious accusation against the Head of State would have had serious repercussions but this repeated behavior is demonstrative of the democracy, tolerance and freedom of the press Guyana lavishly enjoys.
If Kissoon had done his homework, he would have known that reporters at the press conference did not ask the President about his visit to Switzerland because he did not visit Switzerland.
President Jagdeo had intended to visit Switzerland on the invitation of Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Anan to speak on Climate Change but cancelled his visit because of the CARICOM Heads of Government conference. If he did not go there, how can he tell the nation what business he conducted?
The President’s visit was intended to be an official engagement and not because of Switzerland’s secrecy banking.
Kissoon’s latest essay is yet another unworthy example of him trying to unjustly snipe at the President.
But then that fits in with his cowardly tactics and character.
Kwame Mc Coy
Press & Publicity Officer to the PresidentThe P
KAIETEUR News columnist Freddie Kissoon is his usual rambling self in his column headed `Why was President Jagdeo in Switzerland ?’ in the Tuesday June 30, 2009 issue of the newspaper.
Readers of the newspaper would by now have become accustomed to his appalling attempts at trying to sound erudite and scholarly when all he produces is a mish-mash of so-called columns that never ceases to amaze.
One again wonders how come he is a lecturer at the University of Guyana when he produces such shoddy stuff. If these are an example of the intellectual level of his lectures to his students, then God help them.
His latest offering is another classic piece of diatribe which has little to do with the headline of the article but one that seems to fit in with the agenda of the Kaieteur News.
One recalls that sometime back the newspaper claimed in an article that President Bharrat Jagdeo had sold out the reserves of this country and when confronted with the false claim, it said it was just a joke.
In any other part of the world such a serious accusation against the Head of State would have had serious repercussions but this repeated behavior is demonstrative of the democracy, tolerance and freedom of the press Guyana lavishly enjoys.
If Kissoon had done his homework, he would have known that reporters at the press conference did not ask the President about his visit to Switzerland because he did not visit Switzerland.
President Jagdeo had intended to visit Switzerland on the invitation of Former United Nations Secretary-General Kofi Anan to speak on Climate Change but cancelled his visit because of the CARICOM Heads of Government conference. If he did not go there, how can he tell the nation what business he conducted?
The President’s visit was intended to be an official engagement and not because of Switzerland’s secrecy banking.
Kissoon’s latest essay is yet another unworthy example of him trying to unjustly snipe at the President.
But then that fits in with his cowardly tactics and character.
Kwame Mc Coy
Press & Publicity Officer to the PresidentThe P
Ghost writer, Elizabeth Daly replies to T. Khemraj
NO UNDERSTANDING OF DEVELOPMENTAL ISSUES
Guyana Chronicle, 1 July 2009
TARRON Khemraj in his letter titled, ‘Ms Daly misinterpreted the economic points raised’ in the Kaieteur News on June 30, 2009, seems to be very opinionated and also seems to believe that his word is gospel. On the other hand, I am just aiming for a healthy debate, but Mr. Khemraj continues to ramble on useless notions, let us stick to the issues Khemraj. And he should know that the ‘social sciences discipline’ is not an exact discipline as, say ‘mathemeatics’; so that his position and posturing cannot be the sole interpretation of the matter in question.
Mr. Khemraj knocks the ‘grow more food campaign’ which is no surprise to me. Since Mr. Khemraj clearly prefers to lie in his bed of roses and knock Guyana’s developmental plans, I deem him unworthy to nitpick. He should be in the battle field with his fellow soldiers and not sitting and watching the war and prattle.
How does he interpret the comment of Paul Taylor in Stabroek News on August 9, 2008 captioned, “The Ministry’s “Grow more Food Campaign,” is helping”; in my last letter about the ‘Grow More Food’ campaign? Let him say something about this, so that we can have a healthy debate; instead, he ignores my points, and so his reply then becomes a silly reiteration of his posturing; this is inappropriate in any discussion. He needs to learn to relate to other people’s positions.
Also, since he so consumed in his opinions, then I suggest he presents some alternative plans that are bigger and better than ‘the grow more initiative.’ I always believe that it is better to try and fail than to not try at all.
Mr. Khemraj is misinterpreting the ‘grow more food initiative’; it not only refers to a kitchen garden, but it is part of a holistic plan. The world right now is experiencing food shortages because of climate change which ultimately leads to a rise in food prices. The demand for food will rise but the supply of food will not be available. The ‘grow more food initiative’ creates jobs for people; it encourages people to become more agriculture-oriented and enhance the agriculture sector of not only Guyana, but as well as the Caribbean. With the proper policy implementation, other countries can take example from Guyana and revive their agriculture sectors as well.
Why is Khemraj so concerned as to when my letters get published in the newspapers? I do not control any of the Guyana newspapers and these media houses are free to publish my letters whenever they desire; the decision when to publish is not mine. And, when your letters get published is clearly your problem and not mine.
Khemraj also knocked the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF’s) report on Guyana’s sound macroeconomic environment, which is a start for transformation of the economy; however, because of Khemraj’s strong opinionated personality and thinking, he deems this as wrong. The IMF has done some wonders for some parts of the developing world, and this must means something for the poor who live there: again, his focus on IMF’s concern for achieving stability indicates Mr. Khemraj’s failure to grasp the bigger picture of development in the developing world; from stability, a poor country can move to other things; and let us not forget, that as people squabble over the ‘conditionality’ control of the IMF over poor nations, it is the same funds that significantly contribute in the interim to the provision of human and social services for the poor.
Also, I am not interested in any donation from Mr. Khemraj, if he is so willing to donate some texts, then I suggest he contacts sources that may direct him to where the need exists.
ELIZABETH DALY
Guyana Chronicle, 1 July 2009
TARRON Khemraj in his letter titled, ‘Ms Daly misinterpreted the economic points raised’ in the Kaieteur News on June 30, 2009, seems to be very opinionated and also seems to believe that his word is gospel. On the other hand, I am just aiming for a healthy debate, but Mr. Khemraj continues to ramble on useless notions, let us stick to the issues Khemraj. And he should know that the ‘social sciences discipline’ is not an exact discipline as, say ‘mathemeatics’; so that his position and posturing cannot be the sole interpretation of the matter in question.
Mr. Khemraj knocks the ‘grow more food campaign’ which is no surprise to me. Since Mr. Khemraj clearly prefers to lie in his bed of roses and knock Guyana’s developmental plans, I deem him unworthy to nitpick. He should be in the battle field with his fellow soldiers and not sitting and watching the war and prattle.
How does he interpret the comment of Paul Taylor in Stabroek News on August 9, 2008 captioned, “The Ministry’s “Grow more Food Campaign,” is helping”; in my last letter about the ‘Grow More Food’ campaign? Let him say something about this, so that we can have a healthy debate; instead, he ignores my points, and so his reply then becomes a silly reiteration of his posturing; this is inappropriate in any discussion. He needs to learn to relate to other people’s positions.
Also, since he so consumed in his opinions, then I suggest he presents some alternative plans that are bigger and better than ‘the grow more initiative.’ I always believe that it is better to try and fail than to not try at all.
Mr. Khemraj is misinterpreting the ‘grow more food initiative’; it not only refers to a kitchen garden, but it is part of a holistic plan. The world right now is experiencing food shortages because of climate change which ultimately leads to a rise in food prices. The demand for food will rise but the supply of food will not be available. The ‘grow more food initiative’ creates jobs for people; it encourages people to become more agriculture-oriented and enhance the agriculture sector of not only Guyana, but as well as the Caribbean. With the proper policy implementation, other countries can take example from Guyana and revive their agriculture sectors as well.
Why is Khemraj so concerned as to when my letters get published in the newspapers? I do not control any of the Guyana newspapers and these media houses are free to publish my letters whenever they desire; the decision when to publish is not mine. And, when your letters get published is clearly your problem and not mine.
Khemraj also knocked the International Monetary Fund’s (IMF’s) report on Guyana’s sound macroeconomic environment, which is a start for transformation of the economy; however, because of Khemraj’s strong opinionated personality and thinking, he deems this as wrong. The IMF has done some wonders for some parts of the developing world, and this must means something for the poor who live there: again, his focus on IMF’s concern for achieving stability indicates Mr. Khemraj’s failure to grasp the bigger picture of development in the developing world; from stability, a poor country can move to other things; and let us not forget, that as people squabble over the ‘conditionality’ control of the IMF over poor nations, it is the same funds that significantly contribute in the interim to the provision of human and social services for the poor.
Also, I am not interested in any donation from Mr. Khemraj, if he is so willing to donate some texts, then I suggest he contacts sources that may direct him to where the need exists.
ELIZABETH DALY
T. Khemraj replies to Elizabeth Daly, ghost letter writer
Ms Daly misinterpreted the economic points raised
June 30, 2009 | By Christopher | Filed Under Letters
Dear Editor,
It is obvious from Elizabeth Daly’s letter (Kaieteur News, 26-06-09) that this individual did not understand the economic points raised by my letter (Kaieteur News 17-06-09). Instead the writer supposedly prefers to appeal to the old tried PPP technique of personal attacks, bottom house tricks and rum shop intelligence. However, it is precisely these emotions and uninformed arguments that my 10 points on the nature of the donkey-cart economy seek to eradicate.
I sense the writer is quite tetchy on the subject of the “grow more food” campaign. The unknown Ms Daly must have a lot of high personal aspirations and ambitions invested in the “grow more food” campaign, which I did not seek to disparage. I merely wished the PPP understands there is a thin line between self-sufficiency and Sir Arthur Lewis’ subsistence level of living.
But I still do not believe it is a good long-term strategy although it might have reduced prices in the short-term. In a demonstration of astounding incompetence, Daly referred me to a letter in the SN in which someone attributed the falling food prices to the “grow more campaign.” That is supposed to be the evidence the policy is working, according to this individual. Nevertheless, not only are they aiming at self-sufficiency (which is akin to subsistence at the small farmer level), but also they are driving down the prices farmers must earn. Sir Arthur Lewis must be turning in his grave!
The letter writer has an uncanny degree of influence to get her responses published the very next day in both Kaieteur News and Guyana Chronicle. I have to wait three days for Kaieteur to publish my stuff and the Guyana Chronicle will not even touch mine. I suggest she takes economic lessons.
As a result, I would like to assist this aspirant to high levels by tutoring the individual on economics as it is important to see the big picture when in high up places. For instance, the writer demonstrates serious shortcomings by challenging me to challenge the IMF/WB statement on Guyana.
This person, however, does not seem to know that these institutions have specific boundaries within which they offer praise. For instance, the IMF focuses specifically on stabilisation and would not even touch industrial policy (the IMF and WB do not have a single scholar on industrial policy on their research team; they amuse themselves with deductive theoretical models developed by scholars in the advanced economies), which is a point I alluded to in earlier letters and this aspirant missed this point.
In other words, these institutions are concerned with stabilizing a donkey-cart economy and not transforming one. The latter is the task and responsibility of the PPP government working with the Guyanese people.
Therefore, I will develop the course outline and provide all reading materials free of charge for our very hopeful letter writer. But the writer must provide name, home address and profession to the media houses – Kaieteur News and SN in particular, so I can mail the free textbooks and reading materials. Otherwise, it makes no sense talking about economic matters. In the course outline, we will also have to deal with the difference between industrial policy and the National Development Strategy. We will have to show the letter writer that Mauritius, Belize, Barbados, The Bahamas and Suriname are still developing countries.
In closing, I have to revisit Daly’s interesting per capita GDP number for 1991 being US$231 against US$1214.3 in 2008. Given those numbers per capita GDP – real GDP divided by the population – grew at an annual compound rate of 10.9% over 16 years. Now, that’s fantastic stuff that I do no see in the real GDP growth numbers over the past 16 years. Was the population shrinking? Is that a good thing given that Guyana exports 83% of its skilled workforce?
Tarron Khemraj
June 30, 2009 | By Christopher | Filed Under Letters
Dear Editor,
It is obvious from Elizabeth Daly’s letter (Kaieteur News, 26-06-09) that this individual did not understand the economic points raised by my letter (Kaieteur News 17-06-09). Instead the writer supposedly prefers to appeal to the old tried PPP technique of personal attacks, bottom house tricks and rum shop intelligence. However, it is precisely these emotions and uninformed arguments that my 10 points on the nature of the donkey-cart economy seek to eradicate.
I sense the writer is quite tetchy on the subject of the “grow more food” campaign. The unknown Ms Daly must have a lot of high personal aspirations and ambitions invested in the “grow more food” campaign, which I did not seek to disparage. I merely wished the PPP understands there is a thin line between self-sufficiency and Sir Arthur Lewis’ subsistence level of living.
But I still do not believe it is a good long-term strategy although it might have reduced prices in the short-term. In a demonstration of astounding incompetence, Daly referred me to a letter in the SN in which someone attributed the falling food prices to the “grow more campaign.” That is supposed to be the evidence the policy is working, according to this individual. Nevertheless, not only are they aiming at self-sufficiency (which is akin to subsistence at the small farmer level), but also they are driving down the prices farmers must earn. Sir Arthur Lewis must be turning in his grave!
The letter writer has an uncanny degree of influence to get her responses published the very next day in both Kaieteur News and Guyana Chronicle. I have to wait three days for Kaieteur to publish my stuff and the Guyana Chronicle will not even touch mine. I suggest she takes economic lessons.
As a result, I would like to assist this aspirant to high levels by tutoring the individual on economics as it is important to see the big picture when in high up places. For instance, the writer demonstrates serious shortcomings by challenging me to challenge the IMF/WB statement on Guyana.
This person, however, does not seem to know that these institutions have specific boundaries within which they offer praise. For instance, the IMF focuses specifically on stabilisation and would not even touch industrial policy (the IMF and WB do not have a single scholar on industrial policy on their research team; they amuse themselves with deductive theoretical models developed by scholars in the advanced economies), which is a point I alluded to in earlier letters and this aspirant missed this point.
In other words, these institutions are concerned with stabilizing a donkey-cart economy and not transforming one. The latter is the task and responsibility of the PPP government working with the Guyanese people.
Therefore, I will develop the course outline and provide all reading materials free of charge for our very hopeful letter writer. But the writer must provide name, home address and profession to the media houses – Kaieteur News and SN in particular, so I can mail the free textbooks and reading materials. Otherwise, it makes no sense talking about economic matters. In the course outline, we will also have to deal with the difference between industrial policy and the National Development Strategy. We will have to show the letter writer that Mauritius, Belize, Barbados, The Bahamas and Suriname are still developing countries.
In closing, I have to revisit Daly’s interesting per capita GDP number for 1991 being US$231 against US$1214.3 in 2008. Given those numbers per capita GDP – real GDP divided by the population – grew at an annual compound rate of 10.9% over 16 years. Now, that’s fantastic stuff that I do no see in the real GDP growth numbers over the past 16 years. Was the population shrinking? Is that a good thing given that Guyana exports 83% of its skilled workforce?
Tarron Khemraj
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)