Dear Editor,
I have no doubt that the remarks by our Minster of Finance, that “the NIS investments in the Berbice Bridge and CLICO were criminal”, were only a manner of speaking in a heated debate. Nonetheless, there may be some (with all the talk about corruption) who may take him literally, and others though not taking him literally may yet think it’s smart to disparage our attempts to invest our own savings in our own development, paddling our own canoe. I write to address those who might be misdirected by the Minister’s remarks.
For growth and development, individuals, families, nations must first save, and having saved, having deferred some near-term gratification, there is then the task of doing something with that saving (money). No good putting it under the bed or burying it as in Christ’s parable about the talents! It has to be invested, put to work with the greatest likelihood (never certainty) of its eventual return with a suitable reward, a share in the increased production and productivity which the investment has enabled and which reward sweetens further savings and investment
Our NIS and other pension funds have to be invested. We Guyanese have been critical of (and rightly so) an earlier predisposition to invest our savings in foreign (beyond Caricom) funds. CLICO has been in Guyana and other Caribbean countries for more than seven decades and until then had been a solid company. Not only our PPP/C and NIS administrators but many others as well in Guyana and throughout the Caribbean saw the investments in CLICO as attractive and safe. Furthermore in our Guyana context CLICO had been much associated with Afro-Guyanese. You could imagine what would have been the interpretation if our PPP/C administrators had had any premonition and had taken a policy position not to invest in CLICO. Certainly there are lessons for us to learn from the CLICO debacle but nothing criminal in making those investments.
Our success in putting together the financing and in the construction of the Berbice Bridge should give us growing confidence and comfort in today’s world of responsibility for oneself against the background of interdependence between nations. There is no doubt that we are better off for having the Berbice Bridge. Do we need to recall what life was like before the bridge? The hours of waiting to get on the steamer! Imagine what cries of political patronage there would have been from some quarters if we, PPP/C, had opted to budget less in other places and finance the Berbice Bridge from the government’s Consolidated Fund, with tolls no more than those at the Demerara Harbour Bridge. On the other hand, there was the obvious opportunity which some could not resist to proclaim that we were taking advantage of our support and supporters in Regions 5 and 6. I will only say that we have been proceeding in the path of Dr Jagan, in doing the best we realistically could to bring advancement and benefit to our people, in good time. And often, the earlier we come to terms with reality the earlier we could address and resolve the emerging issues.
I can assure my fellow citizens that under then President Jagdeo, despite all that they might hear, the choice of type of bridge and its location were driven by the need to keep the investment costs and the sustaining tolls as low as possible.
It could not be criminal to begin learning about investing our own savings to meet our own needs. Rather, I see it as obligatory.
Editor, our history has disposed us to look to others to finance and amortize many of the investments we need for our development. Before Independence we could look to our colonial masters. Over the last three decades we have been recipients of much relatively large and generous assistance from multilateral agencies and through bilateral arrangements, which have helped to put us back on track following two decades of wanderings after our Independence. But we have been receiving warnings that the days of special assistance are over and we must take up the mandate of responsibility for our continuing development.
As I argued in Parliament, the tolls across the Berbice Bridge are only high in comparison with the negligible tolls across the Demerara Harbour Bridge. There are historical reasons for this difference. We would be doing ourselves a great disservice to stay trapped by historical circumstances. I believe that we may be already late in beginning arrangements for a new four-lane, high-level bridge across the Demerara Harbour. A toll structure like that across the Berbice Bridge would immediately make that bridge with its approaches, financially viable. The present disputes about the Berbice Bridge would only deter future investments whether local, regional or foreign.
Editor, we have to go on boldly, learning from our experiences and ready to resolve and reconcile the issues which will emerge. With respect to some of the issues about the Berbice Bridge, one development that I would like to see tried, is a small- boat service between the Blairmont and New Amsterdam wharves similar to the V/Hoop-Stabroek Market service across the Demerara River.
Yours faithfully,
Samuel A Hinds
Former Prime Minister
