Passing on convenient information to the nation

Jun 20, 2022 Features / Columnists, Freddie Kissoon

Kaieteur News – Former Minister of Public Infrastructure (now known as Public Works) David Patterson published a letter in the newspaper to inform the public that the imminent construction of the Linden-Mabura highway funded by external sources was the brainchild of the previous APNU+AFC government.
Here is the crucial section of his letter: “So, while everyone should rightly be pleased to see this long talked about road linkage come to fruition, don’t be fooled or misled that it is only now being considered and implemented. The indisputable facts are that today’s signing is a result of the vision of the previous administration.”
David made it clear in his letter that the acceptance of the project by the British Government began with his government. At the time of writing, I am not in possession of material to contradict the former minister. There is a good and bad side to the revelation.
The good side is that if his details are true then they should be made public because they become part of history. When the PPP government from 1957 to 1964 lost power, it was only natural many of its projects listed for funding by the colonial government continued under the coalition administration of PNC/UF.
Likewise, when the Hoyte regime lost the 1992 election, IDB funding for infrastructural development continued under the Cheddi Jagan presidency. The trend would have continued with the APNU+AFC in power in 2015 after the Ramotar presidency went out of office.
Many foreign aid programmes for the police, the army, the countryside, road construction, etc., that were born under the presidencies of Bharrat Jagdeo and Mr. Ramotar were completed after 2015. Not only this highway project but others may have started under APNU+AFC and history is richer when those informational outputs are made known.
The bad side to David’s letter is the convenience method by all members of the APNU+AFC’s Cabinet after 2020. By the convenience method, I mean the strategy of taking credit as David did in his letter for accomplishments when in government, but the deliberate approach to not saying a word about the downside dimensions of power when the APNU+AFC ruled.
One evening outside the snackette of my friends, Raymond and Dawn Persaud, which is located right next door to the AFC office, David rebuked me for being critical in my current analyses of the AFC but I do not say a word about Kwame McCoy who was charged and tried for throwing a miasmic substance on me.
I am not going to repeat the contents of our exchange because that is published material. See my two columns – Sunday, August 15, 2021, “Big verbal clash with David Patterson last Friday evening,” and Tuesday, August 17, 2021, “The David Patterson accusation.” To summarise those two articles, I asked David why that should be of concern to him to discuss with me and not the ocean of wrong, hurtful and undemocratic pathways when his government was in power. That is what I mean by the convenience approach.
Since the loss of power, a number of bigwigs have resigned from AFC, two of which gave me interviews. See my column of Saturday, August 26, 2021, “Recording historical notes for posterity,” in which Rajendra Bissesar made damning accusations against the AFC’s leadership when it was in power. Then there is my interview with Karan Chand of Saturday, May 21, 2022 titled, “Interview with Karan Chand, formerly of the AFC.” Like Bissesar, Chand was scathing in his condemnation of the AFC when in power.
But we never see AFC leaders responding to these indictments made by persons who worked closely with them between 2015 and 2020. The public never gets any word or sentence or paragraph muchless elaborations on the ocean of controversies that enveloped the AFC when that party was in power.
So the question to David and other AFC leaders is – just as you enlighten us on your accomplishments when in government, can you explain some persistent queries with clarifications. The enumeration will run into thousands of questions but here is just a sample.
I start with one that has become a stuck record for me. The telephone call to a certain non-AFC person during the AFC’s meeting to decide on selection of ministers. Why was she offered the position of Environment Minister over qualified and trusted stalwarts who were in the room when the call was made? Stalwarts who have spoken to me on this include Rajendra Bissesar, Michael Carrington, Trevor Williams, Marlon Williams, among others.
What were the factors that caused Nigel Hughes to resign as chairman? What are the secret sections of the renewed Cummingsburg Accord? Where is Moses Nagamootoo? Is he still with the AFC? If not, why? Over to you to Dave.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)