Dear Editor,
I read your report on the opening of Buddy’s Hotel in the February 22, 2007 issue and again was appalled at the arrogance and “bitchiness” exhibited by the President in his remarks. The construction of this “mystery hotel” cannot be argued in any way as logic for eminent domain. It is for the direct financial benefit of an individual’s private good. The President cannot justify the use of public funds for a private good unless he fully discloses the nature of the agreement between the government and the private owner. My questions to the Guyanese people, since the President said he would not respond to criticism, are: How much money is actually disbursed to this venture? How will the money be repaid? Was a formal IOU note signed? Why is there so much nondisclosure? If this venture is deemed a public good then why is the full extent of disclosure of the deal so hard to come by? Let simple logic be the judge.
It would appear that the President’s speech was directed at all his critics and again his defiance is no different from Burnham’s. Today, at least two of Burnham’s legacies still remain in Guyana – the Demerara Harbor Bridge and the Soesdyke-Linden Highway. So, I guess he wants his to be this hotel.
I take comfort knowing that these words do not fade. It has always spoken truth to all those who read. It is written in Proverbs 14:33-34 “Wisdom resteth in the heart of him that hath understanding: but sin is a reproach to any people. Righteousness exalteth a nation: but sin is a reproach to any people.” Mr President, let the truth set thee free.
Yours faithfully,
Steve Hemraj
Editor’s note
It was reported that the payment of $168 million to Buddy’s hotel was to cover advance booking for rooms for officials and others for world cup cricket and was to be secured by a fourth mortgage.
