The People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) yesterday issued a statement questioning Opposition Leader David Granger’s support for the Guyana Defence Force (GDF).
According to the statement, the party has noted with disgust David Granger’s pronouncement following a meeting with the Army’s Chief of Staff and other senior officers.
It said that Granger had made statements that were in stark contrast with APNU’s refusal to engage government on the 2014 Budget Estimates.
It questioned whether the discussion with the army top brass was intended to be a “back door” attempt by Granger to pre-empt and influence the budgetary allocations to the army, since his public statements on his party’s support for the army allocation in the forthcoming budget debates.
“It boggles the mind that Mr Granger would seek an audience with senior army personnel ostensibly out of national security concerns when the parliamentary opposition of which he is Leader is doing everything possible to undermine the efforts of the PPP/C administration to put measures in place at the legislative and administrative levels to protect the integrity of the country, more particularly the citizens of Guyana,” the statement said.
It said that Granger’s utterances are all the more intriguing if not hollow given the APNU’s consistent attacks against the joint services.
It queried whether it was the same David Granger whose party was highly critical of the GDF on a range of issues including the unwarranted and unsubstantiated attacks on the role of the army in the Lindo Creek Massacre and alleged links to criminal elements which resulted in the massacres at Lusignan and Bartica.
It hoped that Granger would have informed the Chief of Staff about the basis on which he arrived at his conclusion that the metal shark boats provided to the army under the CBSI programme were unsuitable for the intended purpoe.
According to the PPP/C, the opposition leader should have articulated to the Chief of Staff, his plans to address the fight against narco-trafficking “given his manifest lack of familiarity with the Joint Task Force’s activities and initiatives.”
