Dear Editor,

STABROEK News Editorial of August 17, 2024 had, as its opening paragraph, “In an August 11th letter brimful of nostalgia and social history, Claudius Prince outlined elements of the self-help housing scheme which had been pioneered under the Forbes Burnham administration in the 1970s and 80s and which resulted in several well-developed settlements.”

The contents of Mr. Prince’s letter are neither nostalgia nor history. It is an absolute fiction. It amazes me that the contents of this letter appear as an editorial. While I had tremendous confidence in Stabroek News, I now have serious reservations.

While not quoting the contents of either Mr. Prince’s or Stabroek’s text, I wish to inform the reading public of the following:
In 1961, the co-op group, to which my father belonged, was selected and awarded house lots, on which self-help houses would be built.

The group consisted of 21 members, three Indo‑Guyanese and 18 Afro‑Guyanese. In the group there were two single‑women, Miss Majeed and Miss Monderson. Each of these women had several children.

Simultaneously, another group was selected, also of 21 members, consisting of two Indo‑Guyanese, one Amerindian and 18 Afro‑Guyanese.

The PPP was the party in government in 1961, and Dr. Cheddie Bharat Jagan was the Premier.

Please observe that 86 per cent of these houses were for Afro‑Guyanese. Has the PNC ever awarded even 50 per cent of any project to Indo‑Guyanese?

Late in 1961, both groups commenced construction of 21 houses each, in East La Penitence.

At the time of construction, and several years after, neither Mandela Avenue nor the East La Penitence Police Station existed. In 1971, Sheriff Street was extended southward, beyond Bel Air, across the back of the Lamaha Canal pumping Station and the back, or through the Botanical Gardens. The extension continued through Lodge, Le Repentir Cemetery, North‑East La Penitence, East La Penitence and East Ruimveldt, eventually linking with what was then, back‑road, East Ruimveldt.

The housing area was immediately east of the current East La Police Station. Our house was on Arapaima Street, the fifth house, west of Morocut Square Street. Morocut Square Street is the first north‑south‑running street, from Arapaima Street, east of the Police Station. I spent my teenage, and some of my adult years, in that house.

On the first day of work, members brought their own cutlasses to the site and commenced clearing the land. Cutlasses were not provided by the government. However, please note that it was the PPP Government that provided the resources for the construction of those houses. Self-help house‑construction was NOT started by Forbes Burnham.

I spent my pre-teen years in Albuoystown, at 55 Albuoys Street, in a yard of six families in three houses.

Of the six tenants, there was always one Afro‑Guyanese. In the early fifties, the Afro-Guyanese tenant moved to East La Penitence, a few houses east of Vlissengen Road, on Middle Road. While I am not certain, I suspect that that/those house(s) were built by self-help. The PNC was not in office at that time. I suspect that it was this Afro-Guyanese family’s move which informed my father of the possibility of home‑acquisition by means of self-help.

For the construction, the PPP Government provided a foreman, who supervised every aspect of the construction. Only the plumbing and electrical work were executed by contract.

Workers were expected to be at the job site by 17:00 hours on weekdays. Work ceased at 23:00 hours on those days.

I’m not certain of the starting times on either Saturdays (a working day, to 12 noon) or Sundays. On Sundays, work ceased at 16:00 hours.

My father, a messenger with Bookers, (from 16 to 55 years of age), also had a business, a record store (initially at home). On Sundays, he travelled to the West coast of Demerara to conduct business. Since he could not be at the job site on Sundays, my mother stood-in for him. Since he assumed my mother would not be able work “as a man”, my 15-year-old older brother also worked at the site.

I recalled that there were two single mothers who were in the group. Therefore, my family contributed twice the labour as the other families.

One of the men mixed the cement to make the concrete blocks, while the women loaded the mixture into the moulds and compacted it. A man would then carry the blocks to the “rack” where they would “cure,” dry and “harden,” in the sun.

The block-making shed was next to the bond so the women were able to observe the men as they carried materials from the bond. The women would comment that my fifteen-year-old brother would carry more material than any of the men. So, my family contributed more labour than two families.

When a septic‑tank was being cast, the casting had to be completed before work stopped; occasionally this would be 04:00 hours. Should casting cease and be completed the next day, the “joint” would not fuse completely and would develop a leak. Hence the casting, having started, would have to be taken to completion.

Materials were delivered to the site during the working day, at a time when group members were at their regular work, so they were not present to inspect the quality of materials delivered. This function was executed by the foreman, who was at the site 24/7. He lived in a room in the office building. Therefore, the workers were not present to inspect and reject sub‑standard materials.

These houses were expected to cost $3,000. However, our group was informed that, as a result of loss (theft) of some materials, the cost would be $3,300.

The houses were built about two feet off the ground. They were 20 feet square and had two bedrooms, a kitchen, bathroom and living room. My family consisted of nine members: parents and seven children.

It was the understanding that, upon completion, allocation of the houses was to be done by drawing cards from a bag. If this event was ever conducted, my father was not invited. He was simply told that he has been awarded the second house that was constructed. There was reluctance to accept the first‑constructed houses. It was believed that those houses were not properly constructed since the members were learning construction and made mistakes. Also, the front of the house did not “face” the road.
Subsequent to the construction of the 42 houses, additional houses were constructed. Those immediately‑adjacent houses were raised approximately six feet off the ground. This group was called the Bookers group. The members were workers of Bookers. Further east of the Bookers houses, was another group of houses, built similar to ours. These houses were adjacent to the bridge to Tucville and Uncle Eddie’s Home.

To this point, the houses were constructed by the PPP Government, not Burnham’s PNC.

After the PPP Government lost the election in 1964, and the PNC/UF assumed office, Tucville was constructed. The Tucville houses were constructed by contractors. The reason advanced for the construction of Tucville at that time was that the TUC was being rewarded for calling the strike which destabilised the PPP government. In addition, it was my understanding that the PNC‑built Tucville houses costing $15,000, five times the cost of those built by self‑help by the PPP.

Readers, much of this information may be verified from government records. The Burnham Government did NOT commence house construction by self-help.

Also, contrary to Mr. Prince’s claim, such construction was started at least a decade, and possibly two decades, before Mr. Prince’s claim of the 70s. I moved into our PPP’s self‑help‑built houses in September or October of 1962.

In a future letter, I will outline the extremely successful PPP’s agricultural project(s). The PNC attempted to emulate those projects but failed miserably. Many of us may recall the numerous co‑ops, established and failed under the PNC.

The PNC nationalised and destroyed numerous businesses. One such, which was mentioned in the media, only once, but completely overlooked in every other mention of the PNC failures, was the largest ship-building yard in the Caribbean, Sprostons.

Sincerely,
Zamir