|

Introduction:
Twice in the recent past the Minister of Home Affairs has done the bold
thing and admitted to the existence and by implication the operations of
drug barons in our country. Given her portfolio, it is an amazing admission
and one has to wonder what she has shared with her President who seems to
prefer moving around the country handing out footballs and gifts of $5,000
to maladjusted juveniles than dealing with critical issues of governance,
corruption, law and order, the appointment of key judicial positions, narco-trafficking,
money laundering, fuel smuggling, tax evasion, etc. From a few pockets of
the economy, criminality is moving rapidly into every sector causing some
real competitive dilemmas. As the Government becomes hobbled with its poor
performance desperation will drive it to turn to this new breed of
businessmen - the Minister did not speak of baronesses. They ask no
questions such as where did the money come from and who are the major
backers.
GO-Invest has publicly admitted never to have referred a single
investment application to the central bank, the money laundering regulator
(to the extent that one has been permitted by the Government to operate) or
any other regulatory authority such as the Insurance Commissioner. Imagine
giving some $5B to $10 B in tax concessions in a single year and not asking
a single question. What kind of signal is sent when very senior members of
the government nightclub at a facility of a businessman who is charged with
fuel smuggling? Worse, that same businessman comes up trumps with a permit
to build a major hotel, almost out of the blue, in a most advantageous
location. What was the application and approval process and at what level
was the decision made? How many concessions and what other government
largesse is involved?
The economy has spoken:
Five years ago, flush from the 2001 elections victory, Minister of
Finance Saisnarine Kowlessar, in his 2001 Budget speech said: "The people
have spoken... They have given the PPP/C Government a renewed mandate to
consolidate the gains that have been made over the past eight years." He
went on, "mindful of the impatience of our people and acknowledging the
enormity of the tasks that lie ahead, we have developed a comprehensive
economic strategy for implementation over the next five years. We envisage
that by 2006, we will have a very robust, diversified economy that is both
capable of withstanding adverse external shocks and competing effectively
within the new globalised environment."

Let us fast forward to 2006 and see how the Jagdeo Government has
performed. Bear in mind that this period covered many years of PNC
inactivity whether in the National Assembly or on the streets, removing a
major and recurrent excuse of this Government. Bear in mind too that the
country continued to receive major debt-write offs - sometimes without even
trying. The Government was so poorly monitoring international developments
that it did not know it was in line for the bottom poorest countries' debt
relief at the 2005 Gleneagles G8 meeting!
Diversified economy:
Where is the robust, diversified economy predicted by the Government in
2001? First let us look at the sectoral performance of the economy and see
how diversified we have become, using the projections in the 2006 Budget
rather than 2005 figures which were affected by the floods.
The money-laundering rat
The official statistics show that only one sector, transport and
communication - the measurement of which is particularly suspect - grew by
more than 5% on a compound basis since 2000. Where then is the drug money?
First bear in mind that drug people like to stay behind secure walls, loathe
publicity and find financial accuracy anathema. Their tax returns are a
mixture of magic and further criminality and much of what they do stays out
of official statistics. But there appears to have been heightened activity
in 2005 and with some apparent official acquiescence. Inadvertently, the
Minister revealed more than he might have wished when instead of smelling
the money-laundering rat in his 2006 Budget Speech, he attributes the
"extraordinary increase in net private transfers (US$152.6 M) to expanded
coverage of the money transfer agencies and the response of the Diaspora to
the flooding last year." On this basis, every household of five received
more than $200,000 from relatives and well-wishers last year. And the
Minister believes!
Robust economy:
Whatever robust means it certainly does not mean declining. The chart
below covers a longer period including the last two years of the PNCR. It is
a depressing tale of incompetence and poor performance, just the opposite of
what the country badly needs. Of course we will hear about oil shocks
(excuses of the past) and sugar price cuts (excuses of the future) but do
other countries not have similar problems? We have more ministers and
advisers receiving huge and unlawful tax-free dollars than the economy can
afford. Can you believe that the head of the Guyana Poverty Reduction
Strategy Programme earns more than the head of the US Federal Reserve Board?
And to make it even better he is paid tax free while the US man who up to
last month was Alan Greenspan - rated one of the best central bankers ever -
has to pay tax. In fairness to Mr Kowlessar, the decision regarding this US$
denominated, tax-free income is the judgment of President Jagdeo.
Quick fix:
In what seems a clear act of desperation, the Government has drafted
legislation to introduce casino gambling. The word is that it is considering
three licences for each of our ten regions - devolution in action - and has
already made promises of casino licences to those who are prepared to save
the Government's embarrassment to provide hotel rooms for the Cricket World
Cup. The naive response to expressions of fears about the social
implications of gambling is 'don't worry, it is not for Guyanese. It is for
the Brazilians.' Are you kidding? Who will bar the big ones and their spoilt
kids who in many cases have dual citizenship, from any of these gambling
houses? And, if it is so bad for the Guyanese how come it is good for our
neighbours, or is it that we consider the Brazilians of a lower species? Do
these people know what they are doing?
Facilitating money-laundering:
Why would a country that boasts an enviable range of natural resources
want to have a casino for every 25,000 people? Or is the thirty (10x3), a
cover to give licences to those the Government favours? Even those who
ignore the religious and moral concerns accept that casino gambling is
hardly a primary development strategy and in any case requires a well
regulated society with laws that are properly enforced. A country where
there are guns and gunmen for sale, where you can pay your friendly
journalist for a favourable news item or column, where lawyers and
accountants are ready to sell their souls, where regulators are scared to
even whisper certain names, where unemployment and trafficking in persons
are rampant and where the police are under-resourced and demoralised, is no
place for casino gambling. Six years after assenting to the Money Laundering
(Prevention) Act, the Jagdeo administration is yet to operationalise that
act which has as its objective 'the prevention of money laundering and for
matters connected therewith.' By the time anything is done, the drug barons
referred to by Ms Teixeira and others of the same ilk would have been well
ensconced at all levels of society.
This is an issue on which all who are concerned about the future of this
country need to take a firm stand. Some major bodies including the Catholic,
Anglican and Muslim Churches and certain trade unions are strongly opposed
to this move which was never part of the PPP/C Manifesto or economic
programme. The Hindu organisation led by retiree Minister of Parliamentary
Affairs and which has failed to take any position on social issues affecting
its membership has, not surprisingly, not responded to two requests for an
indication of its position on casino gambling.
This column has for years been calling for the abolition of the non-bank
cambios which have clearly outlived their usefulness. Those have been major
vehicles for money-laundering and tax evasion. Now we are making it even
easier for the drug barons, smugglers, tax dodgers and money launderers.
Will they now show their appreciation by contributing to the war chests of
the political parties and so buy further immunity from official action? Are
the lessons from other countries where politicians and barons co-mingled not
salutary enough for us to realise that there is nothing good that comes from
that devilish alliance?
The piece on India which was promised last week will be published next
week.

|