Dear Editor,
I WRITE with reference to an article under the title: “Concerns grow over alleged one-sided distribution of Public Works contracts” (Kaieteur News, 05/12/2022). While the article assumes the form of impartial news reporting, it is actually a highly partisan and inflammatory piece intended to disseminate injurious claims and propositions tantamount to race-baiting.

The central point of the article was first presented in another Kaieteur News article under the title “PPP policies weakening competition, growth in business, other sectors – accountant” (KN, 11/30/2022). The “account” in the latter title refers to Nigel Hinds. Both of the articles noted above rely on a document titled “Economy and Justice in Guyana” authored by Attorney at Law Nigel Hughes.

Readers should consider the following points in their assessment of the allegations that the current administration favours party supporters and foreign entities over other groups in awarding government contracts.

Let us begin with the basics. The Procurement Act stipulates how tenders are to be advertised and administered. It is a transparent process administered through the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB).

Any faulty decision could be challenged by any aggrieved individual or company to the Public Procurement Commission. This is a constitutional body under the direction and control of no one. If Afro Guyanese individuals and companies have grievances, they have redress to the PPC. If they feel they are discriminated against then they have recourse to the Courts under the Anti-Discrimination Act.

Readers should know that by law, all tenders must be publicly advertised and evaluated by a transparent team of evaluators. There is within the Act, provisions for any technically justifiable deviation, for example, purchasing of items that is specialised and highly complex in nature where only one supplier or producer can meet the specified requirements.

The evaluators are a team of professional public servants, not politicians, who are tasked with the responsibility of overseeing a very transparent process. Note that APNU+AFC has two nominated members on a five-person PPC. The Chair of the PPC is no less than Attorney Pauline Chase, who is also the President of the Guyana Bar Association.

Now let us consider the guess that African Guyanese contractors are systemically excluded. If this is correct, it means that in addition to Pauline Chase (who incidentally is the daughter of the famed Labour Attorney and Trade Unionist, Ashton Chase) the following Cabinet Ministers, who are of African descent, all gang up against African contractors – Bishop Juan Edghill, Minister of Public Works; Oneidge Walrond, Minister of Tourism, Industry and Commerce; Robeson Benn, Minister of Home Affairs; Kwame Mc Coy, Minister within the Office of the Prime Minister; Joseph Hamilton, Minister of Labour; Hugh Todd, Minister of Foreign Affairs; and not least Brigadier (Ret’d) Mark Phillips, who is the Prime Minister of Guyana. Add to this at least four other Cabinet Ministers who are not of Indian ancestry, but whom you are asked to believe gang up against African contractors.

It is imperative that readers know that Cabinet has no role in the determination of the award of any contract. The awards are made by NPTAB and merely goes to Cabinet for its no objection. As all of us know, and that includes Mr. Hughes and Mr. Hinds, the civil service in Guyana is predominantly populated by non-Indians.

I note this to underscore the scale of betrayal that would have to be in place for African contractors to be systemically excluded from contract awards to which they are rightfully entitled. Might I also remind both Mr. Hughes and Mr. Hinds, that thousands of Indians also voted for the APNU+AFC, and that a significant number of established Indian contractors are “big-time” supporters of the same APNU+AFC. In fact, this same coalition is on record giving out humongous contracts to Indian businesses, most of it well-deserved, I am sure.

Editor, I very much urge the learned Attorney, Mr. Hughes, to use his enormous skills, expertise, and reputation, to advance the cause of those who he feels are victims of favouritism, racism, or are otherwise being discriminated against in the procurement process. He has nothing less than an obligation to protect and defend the rights of those who he claims are discriminated against. In the meantime, an apology is necessary. He should know to whom.

Yours sincerely,
Dr. Randolph Persaud