KINDLY permit me to respond to Part 4 of Bulkan and Palmer’s ‘critical’ reviewing of the GFC’s annual reports, submitted to Parliament, and carried in the Thursday, January 30, 2014 edition of the ‘Stabroek News’. 

I wish to state the following:1. Bulkan and Palmer’s main objective in their so-called reviewing of the GFC’s reports submitted to Parliament is to deliberately find fault and, moreso, to criticize the reports, which currently have no basis. But the GFC is equipped with its own expertise to prepare its reports and does not need persons like Bulkan and Palmer to provide any public lecture on their annual report writing.
2. Bulkan and Palmer are so far in their fourth series of reviewing the GFC’s reports and, to date, have not come up with anything substantial, only an accumulation of worthless claims that are mere figments of their own imaginations to bamboozle the unsuspecting reading public. This is an indicator that Bulkan and Palmer are totally incompetent to professionally and technically analyse the GFC’s reports.
3. But Palmer, or ‘Johnny P’, should know better as a British citizen, that in order to conduct proper reviewing of reports, he has to do so in a sequential manner before they can become acceptable in the British Parliament. But he failed miserably to commence his reviewing from the period 1964-1992 and then move on to 2005-2012 in relation to Guyana. The Queen of England will be very disappointed with ‘Johnny P’, and Former Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher (deceased) is no doubt turning in her place of rest knowing that a British citizen is an accomplice to unprofessional conduct where unacceptable accounting is concerned.
4. What Bulkan and Palmer can therefore do quickly is to lobby their PNC/APNU party to move a motion in parliament for the establishment of a special committee to review Guyana’s reports from 1964-1992 and then move onwards. Certainly the PNC/APNU will identify both Bulkan and Palmer to serve on this committee so as to produce an analysis, or analyses, of Guyana’s development performance for the periods mentioned.
5. But the problem with Bulkan and Palmer is their reluctance to acknowledge that in Guyana there has been social and economic progress from 1993 – to present under the current Government, which did not happen from 1964-1992 under the illegal PNC Government. Today they are totally ashamed and are making claims that Guyana has not changed for the betterment of Guyanese, hence their so-called reviewing of reports, particularly those of the GFC. My advice to Bulkan and Palmer is to return to Guyana and find out about its economic growth and inflation rates, the number of titled Amerindian Communities and the annual increases of the wages and salaries of public servants, to name just a few. The reality is that Guyana is positioned for major social and economic transformations where Bulkan and Palmer’s party the PNC/APNC is now calling for shared Governance, which was never offered to the PPP while being the “Government” for the twenty-eight years of their rule.
6. Bulkan and Palmer, however, continue to spread misleading and malicious information about Guyana, even though they have been calling for the freedom of information act. What they need to do now is to call for laws for the prohibition of persons spreading misleading information and the prosecution of such persons.
7. Finally, I am inviting Bulkan and ‘Johnny P’ to Guyana for a holiday in the Waini River area where there will be lots to eat and drink, with never ending cool breeze, which is the correct treatment for malnourishment.

Peter Persaud