–new phase of development, Rodrigues-Birkett counters
Members of the opposition and government benches yesterday clashed over the $847 million allocated towards the installation of a new fibre optic cable exclusively for e-governance, with PNCR-1G MP Aubrey Norton describing the proposed expenditure as a “waste” of valuable resources.

However, Foreign Affairs Minister Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett firmly rejected the assertions by Norton and said this initiative was “no ordinary project” since “it will put our country in another phase of development altogether.”  As the debates over the 2010 Budget continued yesterday in the National Assembly, Rodrigues-Birkett argued that it was necessary “to think out of the box about new and exciting interventions that ensure Guyana fits into the modern world.” She said the $847 million was set aside towards the installation of the fibre optic cable from Brazil that will link Lethem and Providence via Linden and noted that an additional sum is provided to link Moleson Creek to Anna Regina. She also rejected suggestions made earlier this week by AFC Chairman Khemraj Ramjattan that there were “sinister moves” behind this development and argued that this was a provision made to develop the area of science and technology. She urged the opposition members to see “the bigger picture”.

Norton, in a presentation which riled government MPs, noted that in addition to the $847 million dedicated to landing the fibre optic cable a further $640 million was provided to commence the establishment of robust infrastructure to facilitate e-Govern-ment throughout the coast. He argued that GT&T has recently expended US$30 million to land a fibre optic cable on the seawall which had the capacity to provide all the services needed in the country. He said that the new facilities represented two fibre strands each with a capacity of 64 gigawaves. He asked what will be the capacity in gigawaves of the cable that the government will be landing and asked the government to say why it was investing in this initiative when GT&T has the necessary capacity.

The current changes by GT&T will enable a new capacity which is 3,000 times more than the current capability. Further, he said he was aware that moves were being made by GT&T to upgrade the Americas II Cable, which he said could easily be damaged. Norton questioned what would be done if the cable that the government was installing was damaged.

Norton argued that this was not a wise investment in the ICT sector but one that was “unnecessary”. Further, he contended that if another cable was to be installed it should have been opened to the private sector. When Norton made this remark, Agriculture Minister Robert Persaud, from his seat, argued that the opposition had given GT&T, monopoly over this sector while it was in government.  To this remark, Norton said that the same way the government had opened the cellular phone market to Digicel the same could have been done for this project.

Further, Norton criticised the moves by the government to sell its shares in GT&T with the intention of providing 20,000 computers to homes. The opposition member said it “was the most backward step we can take. What we need to do is to first of all increase the real wages of the people, create employment so that they can purchase their computers,” he said, even as government MPs heckled him about being “against computers”. Pointing to some students present in the viewing gallery at the time, Norton said “each child there, yes they want a computer, but they would like to know their father and their mother has the capacity to buy it… that is what they want…they don’t want the government giving them handouts”. He further argued that if 200,000 computers are provided, in the modern world computers are changed after two years and he asked who was going to replace these items after this period had elapsed.

As Norton continued to criticize the government for its initiative with the full vocal and table banging support of the opposition benches, the government members responded by shouting and heckling, forcing Deputy Speaker Clarissa Riehl to caution the members about their behaviour, especially since school children were present.

According to Norton, the government needed an approach that allows people in the country to buy the goods and services they need. He said this move by the administration showed that it was not interested in the general development of people but that it wanted to control all the resources and decide how the people develop.
Judicious diplomacy
Meanwhile, speaking on the country’s foreign policy, Norton argued that the 2010 budget did not take into account the need for “a judicious diplomacy” to counter the negative effects of an international political and economic environment that is imbalanced and asymmetric in favour of the developed world.

Noting that much had been made of President Bharrat Jagdeo’s trip to Iran, Norton said that the PNCR-1G believes every state has the right to choose its friends.  He contended that this must be done in context of the extant international situation and in Guyana’s strategic interest. Much more analysis needed to be done of the timing of state visits, he stated.

In calling for the restructuring of the country’s overseas missions to adapt to the changing foreign policy situation, he said there needed to be a Guyanese Ambassador in China. He argued that governments deal with each other based on reciprocity and that the country stood to benefit more if it had an Ambassador.

Responding to this recommendation, Rodrigues-Birkett indicated that this would soon become a reality and that an announcement on this issue will be forthcoming shortly.

Speaking about issues relating to the environment, Norton said that there was the “need to pursue a much wider strategy than the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS).” He urged the nation to pursue “the benefits to be derived from the Convention on Biodiversity and to put measures in place to deal with gene rustling.”  Norton called on the administration to “pursue in the international community assistance to help us meet the challenges that climate change brings in agriculture – especially the increase in pests”.

In response, the Foreign Affairs Minister said the LCDS was not only for today but that it would continue with successive administrations. She said that while the opposition members continued to criticize the LCDS, it was being lauded internationally.

Meanwhile, in her presentation Rodrigues-Birkett argued that the 2010 Budget needed to be seen within a context. She noted that Guyana was a country that was only 44 years old and that the greater part of this time had not been used wisely resulting in regressing in the 70s and 80s while other countries in the region moved forward at an enviable pace. She said that the main opposition had to take the blame for this.

She said the PPP/C administration had to address the problems caused by the previous administration and to consolidate gains made and is now at the stage of transforming the country. She said the country had made significant grounds in its foreign policy and in particular its growing relationships with its continental neighbours particularly Venezuela and Brazil. She also noted that even as the country was pursuing relationships with its continental neighbours it had not come at the expense of its relationship with the Caricom member states, which she stressed was still important to Guyana.