Is phantom all over the place in that ‘jumbie’ regime?

Nov 21, 2010 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The “phantom of the regime’s” November 19, 2010 commentary in response to my letter captioned, “A serious message sugar workers must consider”, is surely a pathetic attempt to defend the track record of the confused Jagdeo regime.
First of all it is most unfortunate and unfair I do not know if I am speaking to Bheret, Monty or Irfaat. Is phantom all over the place in that “jumbie” regime?
Further my core principles guide me in a fashion to not engage with phantoms unless it is necessary.
It is most sad that these creeps do not have the testicular competence to stand up behind their words, but choose the path of hiding behind the shadow of someone’s skirt.
This dialogue would have been so much more beneficial to the readers if we were willing to engage our brains – mano y mano.
But one just cannot let slush propaganda from another “phantom of the regime” go unanswered, albeit I will not treat such missive with the sort of respect a real letter writer deserves from me.
Unfortunately, these jokers failed to realise that all of GuySuCo challenges and for that matter all of Guyana’s problems have solutions. But to arrive at solutions, the challenges have to be studied and acknowledged. Then firm strategic action has to be taken and funded.
All the regime has been doing was outsourcing the entire project to the Chinese with limited local capacity in place to assess progress. From the regime’s perspective they have revealed themselves as professional “guess workers” like if the lives of the sugar workers and their families is one Russian roulette.
The Chinese are laughing all the way to the bank since the Guyanese taxpayers will have to fund these Chinese loans whether the factory is operationally successful or not.
I will not steal the thunder of the AFC’s presidential candidate Mr. Khemraj Ramjattan since he is the one that will lead the advocacy in the sugar belt to enlighten the sugar workers of the AFC’s solutions. However, I am aware of the actions that will be taken by an AFC government when the people empower them to act.
Even if the AFC give our action plan to these incompetents it is absolutely clear they do not possess the common sense to implement it. If the people give the AFC a chance, we will put these jokers to pasture in no time and start rebuilding the sugar belt, but it is all in the people’s hands. We are clear in our mind who we will be engaging in getting the challenges in the sugar belt sorted once and for all.
I have one correction to make in my last letter. Based on my estimation I stated that China will be disbursing US$7.7 million this year to the regime. Well my contact in the regime has just sent me facts to demonstrate that China is scheduled to disburse U$20 million in 2010 to this corrupt regime. More money for Pradoville 2! The good people in the regime have revealed to me that China has committed loans to Guyana to the tune of G$25 billion (US$126 million) as 48% funding to total projects worth G$52 billion (US$261 million).
These four projects are:
• Telecommunication Cable Project from Lethem to GT with the associated Data Centre and Network from Corriverton to Charity;
• The rehabilitation of the T&D and generation capacity in Berbice and the hinterland power supply from Solar Panels;
• Completing the Skeldon Factory (only god knows);
• Those two roll on ferry, which are still waiting on the Supernaam wharf.
I restate here, Guyana is China’s guinea pig for testing their evolving technology from sugar technology to electricity to telecommunication to cheap computers. They have no problem with releasing funds once Guyana’s natural resources are accessible to them and Guyana’s support for the one China policy is intact.
Thus, only God knows how much of the Chinese money has leaked from the system into these Pradoville 2 projects and overseas personal bank accounts of the Czars and Czarinas.
This “pagalee regime” would not have been in this position if they had followed international best practice in tendering for the works to be done at Skeldon. No Chinese company to date can build a better sugar factory than the Indians, Brazilians, the Americans, the Australians and the British. I can put money on those facts. If Guyana had followed international best procurement practice, we would have had a functional Skeldon Sugar Factory today. The responsibility for this mess rests only on one desk, that of the Head of State of Guyana, His Excellency President Bharrat Jagdeo.
It does not rest with Minister Robert Persaud or the Board of GuySuCo or any other place else. The President should be mature enough to put his hand up and relook at the problem, ask for help in devising the solutions oriented action plan so that the industry can be saved. This is not the time for sound bites but real action.I want to clarify a misconception of this phantom of the regime. I never blamed sugar workers for this mess. I have made that clear over and over and only the dumb and the deaf will not comprehend this.
If more sugar workers were consulted on the actions that were needed to be taken at GuySuCo, the problem would have been solved “lang time”.
This mess was singularly conceived by the “Kabaka” and his henchmen, some of whom sit on a malfunctioning Board at GuySuCo.
Unfortunately, GuySuCo problems do not need a fairly wand; it requires hard work, intellectual fortitude, a clear strategy, stakeholder consultation and buy-in, and most importantly focused care and attention to the details by the top decision makers in Guyana.
But as we all know this is alien language for the ruling class in Guyana.
One last clarification for the phantom of the regime; Skeldon Sugar Factory is very important to the future of GuySuCo and that is why your demi-gods in New Garden Street should have taken their time in getting it right in the first place, but Skeldon alone is not in the AFC plan of action.
Our sugar action plan has much more, but as I said before, our dialogue is not with you, it is with the sugar workers as we discuss the real, implementable and practical alternatives to this “kangalang” regime.
Too much said to a phantom of the regime and in keeping with my principles, I have no choice to bring this dialogue to a close until the phantom of the regime brings himself out from under the skirt.
As such this is my last communication with the phantom on this issue.
Sasenarine Singh

---

---