Dear Editor,
“Allocation of house lots and housing are based on the principles of fairness and equity,” says Minister of Housing Susan Rodrigues. These twin principles are equally applicable to service delivery in other sectors of the economy such as GOAL scholarships and “Because we Care” school grants. Despite this approach to equity, opposition forces still criticize the PPP/C government for race discrimination in these and other areas, like in employment. They have been drawing heavily from a narrow range of observations on political and contract employment to support their allegation, although they know that these are temporary appointments and are at the pleasure of the existing government. Any new government has the right to employ political and contract employees at strategic levels that will execute its policies and programs in accordance with their ideology and vision, and not to be detracted by hostile forces within.
Anti-PPP/C groups that have an enduring pre-occupation with racism and are perched to descend upon the government with venom, are likely to have their rationality smothered in this approach. Polemics and platitudes have driven them into that condition, while they discard or ignore statistical evidence to validate their claim. There are mechanisms, like the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC), which could investigate allegations of race discrimination. For example, the ERC commissioned a study in 2007 on the distribution of academic scholarships during the PPP/C’s term in office covering the period 1997 and 2006. The consultant Lyris Alicia Primo noted: “there is considerable equality of opportunity in the award of academic scholarships.” The PPP/C has continued to build upon this foundation. The equity spoken about by another PPP/C government official, Minister Sonia Parag, regarding GOAL scholarships is supported by Adron Pires’ analysis which shows that 39% Afro-Guyanese, 40% Indo-Guyanese, 21% Mixed and Amerindians, were granted scholarships.
The existing job situation in the government service is interesting. Despite Afro-Guyanese account for only 29% of the country’s total population, they comprise 95% of the army, 75% of the police force, 95% of the prison service, 65% of the public service, 60% in teaching and 70% in nursing. Even some quasi-government institutions, like the University of Guyana, are equitably represented in employment. The University of Guyana, for example, has an Afro-Guyanese staff complement of over 75%. Notwithstanding these disparities, the PPP/C government does not believe in reverse discrimination.
Another trenchant critique is leveled against the government when opposition forces assert that the oil wealth is being “given away to one ethnic group (Indo-Guyanese).” This assertion is preposterous. First, no amount of the oil revenues [($US) 607.65 million] has been spent as of February 2022. The money still sits in the Federal Reserve Bank in New York and could only be withdrawn under specified rules. The NRF Act (2021) requires that any withdrawal from the fund must first be recommended by the Board of Directors to the Minister of Finance, who in turn must seek Parliamentary approval. Oversight function is also exercised by the Public Accountability and Oversight Committee. All NR funds are paid into the Consolidated Fund and are managed (operationally) by the Bank of Guyana which is required to submit regular reports to the government and to Parliament. There is also a stringent audit regime. These are tough requirements that have been imposed to safeguard the integrity of the NRF.
Withdrawals from the NRF (which is limited by law and by the operation of a funding formula) go towards budget support to fund physical and social infrastructure transformational projects. Critics have expressed the misguided claim that the government would deplete the NRF and leave nothing for inter-generational equity. This is an irresponsible position as the facts point to the contrary. Based on the Ministry of Finance’s calculation for the period 2020 to 2025, total projected oil revenues are $(US) 7.099 billion, while withdrawal is projected at $(US) 3.451 billion which is 48.6% of revenues. Thus 51.4% (or $(US) 3.65 billion) of the NRF remains for intergenerational equity and emergencies.
Notwithstanding, watchdog groups and Parliament must continue to exercise vigilance and ensure that rules and protocols connected to the NRF are faithfully followed. Guyanese are smart enough not to be sidetracked with misinformation and distortion. And those who revel in political polemics and platitudes must know that these have no staying power, and that this quality (staying power) could be found in the facts/evidence.
Sincerely,
Dr. Tara Singh
