Dear Editor,

CONTRARY to the view propagated by opposition member, Ganesh Mahipaul that the APNU is “ready to lead Guyana into a new era of prosperity”, their proven historical track record and combined competencies as per their current configuration, are, unfortunately, not in their favour.

A critical assessment of their historical fiscal track record and their seemingly disjointed and unsustainable campaign rhetoric will in fact reverse the prosperity gains attained under the governing PPP/C administration, thus driving the economy into another era of poverty, macroeconomic disaster and bankruptcy.

Suffice it to state, the APNU’s incompetence is further exposed with their argument that they did not have access to the oil resources, yet they were able to build some roads and schools. This, however, is an audaciously false premise, which ought to be challenged and rejected in the strongest form.

It is worthwhile to note that in 2015, the APNU+AFC had inherited a solvent economy, with strong and stable macroeconomic fundamentals. In this respect, they inherited over $200 billion in liquid cash in government deposit accounts and national reserves. Conversely, in 1992, the PPP/C inherited a bankrupt economy, with negative balances in the bank, zero reserves, and practically all the State entities were bankrupt, some of which had to have been wound up.

Lest we forget, it was the PNC, reincarnated as APNU+AFC that was in government for more than two decades since independence that ended with: A bankrupt economy with a debt-to-GDP nine times the size of the economy, or 900%, debt service was >150% of revenue, inflation rate was 87%, poverty rate was 97%, interest rate was over 40%, nil foreign exchange reserves, nil savings in the bank and GDP per capita US$428

Contrastingly, by 2011, the PPP/C government was able to restore economic and financial viability to the economy whereby: The debt-to-GDP plummeted to 0.5x the size of the economy or 50%, down from 9x or 900%, interest rates (prime lending rate) plummeted to 11% from 40%, foreign exchange reserves stood at US$750 million, representing five months of import cover, government deposit accounts stood at over $101 billion and GDP per capita rose to US$5,000.

And, lest we forget, these outstanding macroeconomic outcomes attained between 1992 and 2011 were not under normal circumstances by any stretch of one’s imagination.

That was an era when the opposition in their previous incarnation as the PNC/R, sought to actively destabilize the country.

A few notable events in that regard were: 1992–1997: there was a short period of street protests and violence having restored democracy, following which the economy took off (short period of stability); 1997–2001: prolonged street protests and disruption; 2002–2003: prison break, the crime wave spiraled out of control and politically motivated disruptions; 2004–2008: unrests, politically motivated disruptions and 2008–2012: Lusignan, Lindo Creek, Bartica massacre, violence erupted when protestors blocked the Wismar Mckenzie bridge.

In addition, with the foregoing political challenges, there was the adverse economic impact engendered by the 2005 floods (a natural disaster) that resulted in a loss of 60% of GDP.

Notwithstanding the foregoing multiplicity of constraining factors, between 1992 and 2011, some of the most notable development projects undertaken by the PPP/C government include the following.

Firstly, the Berbice River Bridge. The Berbice River Bridge was the first project that was undertaken via a Public Private Partnership (PPP) model. The bridging of the Berbice River was a major development, identified in the 1996 NDS, which was a crucial project linking the counties of Demerara and Berbice, thereby facilitating ease of access, which effectively cut the travelling time from Georgetown to Berbice from almost an (8 hours) day travel with the ferry, to 3-4 hours.

Secondly, integration of the coastal highway system: resurfacing Mahaica to Rosignol Road, resurfacing of the West Coast Demerara Highway, Essequibo Coast Road, and extension of Soesdyke Linden Highway. Other new and rehabilitated road networks included: farm to market roads: Bartica-Issano, Black Bush Polder, Mabura-Lethem Roads, Hague, Enmore, Buxton, Mara, Nurney, Bushlot, Champagne, and Bath; urban Development Programme: Georgetown, Norton Street, Robb Street, and streets around Stabroek Market area; New Amsterdam – Pitt Street, East, North and South of Pitt Street, New Amsterdam market: Rose Hall: J.C Chandisingh East Side Line Dam, Middle Street (North), the drains surrounding those streets and Rose Hall Town Hall; Corriverton: The Main Street Rampor, Cemetery Road, their related drains, and the No. 79 Village Market; in Linden: Residential Roads in Canvas City, and the McKenzie and Wismar Markets; rehabilitation of Mahaica / Rosignol Road; four lane road from DHB to Georgetown; rehabilitation of road from Harbour Bridge to Parika; construction of the Takatu Bridge linking Guyana and Brazil in Region Nine and the construction of a Multipurpose Stadium (Providence), modernization project of CJIA, and the Marriot Hotel Project.

Thirdly, the Electricity Sector: Rural Electrification Project, providing 55,000 customers with electricity. In 2002, the installed capacity of electricity was 90 MW with peak load of 67 MW. Investments were made of US$93 million for the period 2001-2005 to add another 40 MW of power, interconnection of its three separate systems, reinforcement of the transmission and distribution networks and connection of new customers. In 2006, provision was made to add another 85 MW of power within two years, thus a total of 125 MW of power.

Fourthly, the Health Sector: Establishing (i) dental clinics at Moruca, Matthew’s Ridge, Sophia, Lethem, Kato, Paramakatoi, (ii) constructing health posts at Tassiwini, Itaballi, Mikwak, Orinduik, and Kuduwini; (iii) extending health care to Ithaca and constructing new centres at Bush Lot and Calcuni, (iv) rehabilitating Kamarang, New Amsterdam Skeldon Hospitals; and (v) new living facilities for nurses at Kwakwani and Suddie. During this period, a Materials Management Unit in the Health Sector was introduced.
Fifthly, the Education Sector: The Primary Education improvement Project delivered 37 new schools that were rebuilt and 68 that were rehabilitated among other things. And over 15,000 pieces of school furniture and fittings were supplied to primary schools nationwide. Additionally, expanded distance education learning, added a Berbice Campus to University of Guyana, increased number of technical and vocational institutes.

Sixth, the Water Sector: Construction of the LBI interconnected water system; refurbishment of country-wide stand-alone systems, including those at Yukusari, Williamsburg, Lesbeholden, New Hope, Caledonia, Timehri and Covent Garden: completion of the Eccles Interconnected Water System and Bartica water network; rehabilitate distribution systems at Bath Settlement, Nos. 52-58 villages, and Eccles to Friendship among other areas, Georgetown Rehabilitation and Sewage Project, Construction of Iron Removal Plants at Central Ruimveldt and Sophia, rehabilitation of water distribution main in North Ruimveldt, installation of transmission mains and water metres
iv. Refurbishment of the Shelter Belt Water Treatment Plant and construction of sludge receptacle at Tucville and the implementation of the Hinterland Water Strategy: construction of ground storage tanks, procurement of hardware and software, and development of new networking systems. In addition, construction of water treatment plant and water holding tanks, and the provision of water metres for Corriverton, Anna Regina and Parika.

Seventh, the Housing Sector: Approximately >100,000 low-income homes, house lots the regularization squatting areas were delivered during this period. To name a few: improve and develop new housing sites, Tuschen, Hampshire, Diamond, Golden Grove, Amelia’s Ward, Cornelia Ida, Mon Repos and Fortlands/Ordinance, among others; new Housing Schemes developed in Eccles, Vigilance, Cane Grove, Parfait/Harmony, West Watooka, and Culvert City; and development of housing Schemes at Bellwest, Sophia, Port Kaituma, Mabaruma, Orealla, and Siparutta, Anna Regina, Golden Grove, Supernaam, Diamond and Rose Hall.

Eight, other selected development initiatives: Rehabilitation and strengthening of the East Demerara and Abary Conservancy Dams; over $12.2 billion expended on poverty reduction programs for the period; over 6,000 youths were trained under the Youth Entrepreneurial Training Programme; farm to market roads providing access to more than 30,000 acres of agricultural land; development of industrial estates to support the private sector; and Essequibo Coast and West Demerara Sea Defence Projects.

Between 2015 and 2020 when the APNU+AFC returned to government, they virtually reversed the gains attained by the PPP/C government.

By the time the APNU+AFC demitted office in 2020, the PPP/C once again inherited weak macroeconomic fundamentals: by the end of February 2020, the government’s deposit accounts at the Bank of Guyana accumulated a whopping $82.4 billion deficit balance from a surplus position of $15 billion in 2015, while bearing in mind that these deposit accounts over the last two decades prior, had always recorded surplus balances as high as >$60 billion at one point. Additionally, the public sector’s total deposits in the commercial banks stood at $55.4 billion, giving rise―to―a deficit position of $26.5 billion or US$127 million, compared to a surplus position in 2015 of $84 billion or US$403 million.

Further, the Bank of Guyana’s International Reserves balance stood at US$595 million, which represented almost five months’ worth of import-cover in reserves at the end of 2014. However, by the end of February 2020, the reserves stood at US$548 million but was equivalent to less than 2.5 months’ worth of import-cover―thus, indicative of a weaker position from almost five months import cover in 2014, a perusal of the Auditor General’s reports for the period 2015-2020 revealed that the sum of approximately $930M was both unaccounted for; the controversial US$18 million signing bonus, which was hidden, was subsequently transferred to the Consolidated Fund, attributed to a legal challenge mounted by the opposition at that time. This was a major violation of the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act 2003 (FMA); the overdraft on the Government deposit total $128 billion as of September 2020. These sums were unlawfully withdrawn as the former Finance Minister, Winston Jordan effectively circumvented the approval of and scrutiny of these withdrawals by the National Assembly, inter alia, in breach of the FMA Act and consequently, these were also not reported in the national stock of domestic debt which was subsequently regularized shortly after the incumbent Government assumed office in 2020.

Further, following the successful passage of the no-confidence motion in December 2018, the Government, in accordance with the provisions in the Guyana Constitution, was deemed to be a caretaker Government. Under these circumstances, the Government, through the former finance minister, had no authority to expend monies from the capital budget. This was nonetheless blatantly disregarded and the full capital budget in 2019 was expended to the tune of $66 billion. Of note, this is exclusive of the sum expended during the period January to August 2020.

This is the APNU’s track record as far as fiscal prudence and financial management are concerned, which is evidently far from being prudent and fiscally responsible and sustainable. In the final analysis, if the APNU and AFC are allowed to have it their way, the total stock of public debt would have risen from US$6 billion in 2024 to US$12 billion in 2025, effectively doubling the size of the total public debt, instead of US$7.6 billion based on the PPP/C’s budget 2025, resulting in a debt-to-GDP ratio of over 40%, up from 24%, in just one year. Note that this does not account for oil price volatility. What if oil price falls below $50/barrel?

It is against this background that the APNU is propagating an audaciously fallacious, unrealistic campaign rhetoric that would derive, in reality, the inverse (undesired outcomes) of what they are selling to the electorate.

Sincerely,
Joel Bhagwandin