Dear Editor,
I must commend the Guyanese press for highlighting the anticipated change of ownership of Guyana’s leading international hotel at Providence, although I sensed a veiled grudge against Buddy Shivraj. For me, regardless of Shivraj’s background, once he does legitimate business and at the same time adheres to the rule of law, he is entitled like any other citizen of the free world to turn a profit, be it windfall, abnormal gains or high rate of return. With respect to this business transaction, the Guyanese public ought to only concern itself with the extent of any loss or gain to the treasury and why and what the sociological impact to the greater society is. Other than that, this is a private transaction between two business persons, as is being done on an hourly basis in the rest of the world. Transactions of this nature are actively encouraged in the progressive world by their governments, their media and their people since they create new wealth for their respective communities. Guyana should be no different.
Now what are some of the taxpayers’ concerns?
1. Was Buddy Shivraj single-sourced in the allocation of the land at Tract ‘BS’ Block 2, Providence and why?
Once upon a time, a country had the vision to co-host Cricket World Cup 2007 (CWC ’07) with the rest of its Caribbean partners but they had inadequate facilities to even dream of such an event. There was even a preliminary plan to hold games in Florida, USA. How obnoxious! The land of Rohan Kanhai and Clive Lloyd cannot even take part in CWC ’07? A government became desperate to serve its people and had no choice but to make decisions. It engaged the Government of India to build a stadium in record time but there was a catch. That country must have a fixed amount of world class hotel rooms available or else.
I was in Guyana at the time and am aware that all Guyanese, including the non-resident population, were implored to invest in world class rooms for CWC ’07. Not one business person, save and except Buddy Shivraj, was prepared to take the required risk on such a grand scale, put their money on the table (US$12M) and save Guyana’s face. So yes, it appears that the available lands were leased mostly to Buddy Shivraj, save and except the piece that went to the non-resident Guyanese investor, but they were leased in this context.
In any business negotiations, the counterparties act based on their understanding of the strength of their opponent. It is obvious that Buddy Shivraj knew he was the key to Guyana hosting CWC ’07 and he made his demands. To the government’s credit, they did insert an exit clause that unless the hotel was operational, the land would not be sold to Buddy Shivraj, thus preserving their rights over the land if the hotel was not built.
Buddy Shivraj took grave risks in a very risky country and thus no one should envy him now as he reaps the rewards.
2. Was the price for the land adequate?
From a layman’s perspective, the price of G$8M appears highly inadequate for the plot of land at Tract ‘BS’ Block 2, Providence. However, we must again give context to this concern since the land was a disused canefield close to the East Bank Highway, and thus can be treated as potential industrial or housing land. The 100ft x100ft housing plots at Eccles ‘A’ Scheme were G$1M each, so obviously G$8M looks dodgy. However, government wanted to secure CWC ’07 and must have taken a strategic decision to give something to get something. It appears as if they offered a discounted value on the land to secure CWC ’07. In retrospect, this is not a heavy price to pay since the gains from CWC ’07 (and they are many) more than adequately compensate for the losses on this plot of land. However, the administration is duty bound to offer a formal explanation as to why they offered Buddy Shivraj an apparent discounted value on the land.
3. Is this transaction going to contribute negatively to Guyana’s sociological fabric?
That debate took place when the gambling law was approved by parliament and any debate on that topic now is throwing good energy behind a futile cause since it is the law of the land now, so I say no more on this concern.
It is untenable that the powers that be continue to hold press conference after press conference to explain in an ad-hoc manner serious state matters. These press conferences, more than anything else, deepen the distrust of the process and fuel the speculative position that they have something to hide, so they will hold a press conference to bamboozle the media with words, figures and numbers. Well, the Guyanese people are not stupid, they can quickly analyse a sand dance when they see one.
I personally believe that parliament should formally request an explanation from the executive about their actions, including a detailed description of the process leading up to the leasing of the land and once and for all put all speculation to rest.
In concluding, I believe this hotel has significantly changed Guyana’s architecture, business prospects and tourism product for the better, and that is good for Guyana. We have spent an inordinate amount of time pondering over why a pure business transaction resulted in a businessman making a windfall. That is what business is about: business people turning a profit, duh!
Yours faithfully,
Sasenarine Singh
