The combined opposition yesterday voted to cut proposed allocations in the national budget for the National Communications Network (NCN) and the Government Information Agency (GINA) down to $1, repeating a measure it took a year ago over concerns about bias in their operations.
As the Committee of Supply considered the estimated expenditure for the Office of the President (OP), NCN and GINA as well as expenses for security services, contracted staff and the government’s Information Communication Technology (ICT) project all faced the chopping block.
However, the AFC as well as the main opposition APNU, sated by answers provided by the government, decided that only funds intended for NCN and GINA would be reduced. As a result, by a vote of 33 to 32, the opposition successfully cut all but $1 for each entity. Under the government’s proposed budget, NCN was slated to receive $81,337,000 to supplement its operations, while GINA was slated to receive $135,858,000.
Last year, similar cuts by the opposition failed to curtail the operations of NCN and GINA as the funding was later restored by the government. Like last year, the barrage of criticisms leveled at both NCN and GINA centred on the way in which they carry out their operations.
Beginning the assault was APNU MP and Shadow Minister of Finance Carl Greenidge, who stated that despite continuous calls for an audit of both entities, the government has refused to commit to carrying out such exercises. This claim was immediately rebuffed by PPP/C MP and presidential advisor Gail Teixeira, who said that talks on the matter alluded to by Greenidge were inconclusive, since there was no proper dialogue.
The offensive, however, was quickly resumed by APNU leader David Granger, who stated that he had written to and received assurances from acting NCN Chief Executive Officer (CEO) Michael Gordon that the opposition parties would be given balanced coverage and access to what was described by Minister in the Ministry of Finance Juan Edghill as a “state asset.” In response to Granger’s allegations, Edghill disclosed that letters had been written to both APNU and the AFC on several occasions inviting them to appear at NCN to receive responses.
Granger, however, said that he had exchanged several correspondences with the CEO, who kept insisting that balance would be established. The opposition leader said that on each occasion, Gordon failed to adequately address the issue described in his letters, which led to the fruitless exchange.
AFC MP Cathy Hughes supported Granger’s claims with blows of her own, noting that her attempts to secure slots at NCN have not received responses. Hughes said that she has written NCN many times in her attempts to ascertain the availability of timeslots and the prices to occupy these slots but has never benefited from even a letter in response.
Considering actions taken last year, Hughes asked members of the PPP/C what has been done to ensure that NCN extended equal access to the services provided by the entity. Edghill, amidst disapproving heckling from the opposition side, insisted that a meeting was held to address the concerns of the opposition. He stated that the AFC refused to accept the meeting’s resulting decision. Edghill did not explain the decision that emanated.
Rising to offer his share of criticisms, APNU MP Basil Williams tore into the government for what he described as its laxness in taking the probe carried out into alleged improper practices of NCN seriously. Williams questioned why, after almost a year after the investigation, have actions not yet been taken against those accused of the wrongdoings. These arguments were supported by APNU MP Joe Harmon, who chastised the government on the failure to release, let alone act upon the findings of the report.
Edghill, once again, rushed to address claims, explaining that the results of the probe had not yet been released because it was still being reviewed by President Donald Ramotar. Edghill assured the opposition, however, that the report would be released by the end of this month, after the president’s review of the document was completed.
Considering that last year’s probe may have had criminal underpinnings, AFC MP Moses Nagamootoo asked if the government had submitted the report to the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) for advice or the Guyana Police Force for them to take action.
Edghill once again rose and stated that he was not able to say if the document was ever submitted to either of the bodies mentioned by Nagamootoo.
Nagamootoo, not letting up, proceeded to question the government on the provision of funds of approximately $81 million and $130 million to NCN and GINA respectively, despite the fact that these amounts were cut from the budget by the opposition last year.
This time PPP/C MP and Attorney General Anil Nandlall offered the defence, saying that based on the ruling of acting Chief Justice Ian Chang on last year’s budget cuts, Article 218 of Guyana’s constitution and the Financial Management and Accountability Act, Finance Minister Ashni Singh determined that there was need to access additional funds and accessed the Contingencies Fund and restored the amounts to NCN and GINA.
Nandlall said that the action taken was justified by Justice Chang’s ruling that the opposition’s cuts were unconstitutional, coupled with Singh’s ability to tap into the Contingencies Fund if he finds there are needs for addition funds.
But this declaration did not sit well with members of the opposition and prompted several of them to protest the action. Williams, Nagamootoo, and APNU MP Jaipaul Sharma all rose to question Nandlall’s rationale concerning the restoration of the slashed amounts to no avail as one by one Committee Chairman Raphael Trotman refused to entertain the arguments. He quickly brought the spat to an end, stating that because Justice Chang’s ruling was obviously interpreted differently by opposition and government parties, it made little sense to debate the issue, especially when the work of considering this year’s estimates lay before the National Assembly.
In his final statements on the consideration of the OP estimates, AFC Leader Khemraj Ramjattan, in whose name the motion for the cuts was tabled, said “the AFC will only go ahead with the purposed cuts for GINA and NCN, since their answers on the other projects had been sufficiently addressed.”
