The level and value of governmental procurement has escalated to such a height that, having regard to Guyana’s ethnic diversity, an entrenched, law-based, programme of supplier diversity is rapidly becoming a necessity. Such progammes do not exist in developing countries such as Guyana. But it exists in many developed countries in North America and Europe. The United States, which has had a long history of discrimination against African Americans and other groups, such as American Indians, as well as an equally long history of resistance to such discrimination has, as a consequence, developed advanced programmes of supplier diversity. These policies generally exist in large companies, but the Federal Government and many State Governments have also passed laws which provide for supplier diversity in their own procurement practices. In Guyana’s context, supplier diversity includes infrastructure and procurement of goods and services.
In Guyana’s past, supplier diversity was not an issue because State and private procurement were too modest to be of financial consequence to the business community, even though there have always been complaints about corruption. However, the restoration of democracy coincided with the resolution of Guyana’s debt crisis in the early 1990s. This resulted in a large inflow of resources from the Inter-American Development Bank, the World Bank and other financial institutions and the restoration of economic growth both of which led to an exponential increase in Government spending in both infrastructure development and procurement of goods and services. This situation gave rise to two developments, namely, accusations of corruption and of discrimination. Both were stoutly denied but the accusations persisted.