The President needs to pay more attention to fact-checking

Aug 25, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – The President of Guyana finds himself once again ensnared in a web of statistical missteps. His recent address to the National Toshaos’ Council Conference (NTCC) was intended as a resounding proclamation of progress under the PPP/C’s stewardship, particularly in contrast to the previous administrations. But instead of a triumphant affirmation, it became yet another example of his administration’s troubling tendency to produce numbers that are deeply disingenuous upon closer inspection.

The Amerindian Peoples Association (APA), an organization not easily beguiled by political showmanship, was swift to challenge the President’s address, accusing him of presenting misleading statistics. This is not a new charge against the President, whose relationship with data has been, at best, fraught with controversy. Whether it be statistics on child and infant mortality rates or the poverty levels in Amerindian communities, the President’s use of numbers often seems more suited to a campaign rally than to a sober presentation of facts.

The central thrust of the President’s address was the assertion that the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) government has delivered substantial improvements to the Amerindian population—improvements, he implied, that were absent during the rule of the People’s National Congress (PNC) and later the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance For Change (APNU+AFC) coalition. To bolster this claim, he cited the absolute poverty rate among Amerindians, which he placed as almost reaching 80%. Yet, the President conveniently omitted a crucial detail: the current rate of absolute poverty in Guyana, under his very government, is actually higher than it was prior to 1991. This, of course, is largely due to the rapid rise in national income, which has elevated the poverty line and thus altered the statistical scene. But it shows the importance of contextualizing data.

But even more revealing was the President’s silence on the present relative poverty rate—a metric that would provide a clearer picture of how Amerindian poverty compares to national poverty levels. Herein lies the crux of the matter: without updated data from Household Income and Expenditure Surveys, the President’s narrative remains unanchored to the full scope of reality. The lack of this critical information allows him to cherry-pick figures that paint a flattering picture, while sidestepping the more uncomfortable truths.

The APA took issue with the President’s claims regarding hinterland scholarships. According to the President, no hinterland scholarships were granted prior to 1992—a claim as erroneous as it is audacious. The historical record, as documented by the PPP/C’s own Ministry of Amerindian Affairs, tells a different story. Hinterland scholarships date back to 1962 under the Cheddi Jagan’s government. Then they were for Common Entrance Students. The programme was expanded under the PNC government from 1966 onwards to include technical, vocational, and university education. The President’s insistence that no scholarships existed before 1992 therefore is an affront to history and to the many students who benefited from those opportunities long before 1992.

The President’s claim that there were only 12 health clinics in the hinterland during the PNC government’s tenure is another example of his cavalier approach to data. This figure, too, requires closer examination, particularly in light of the medex programme introduced in 1977, which trained hundreds of medical professionals for deployment in rural and hinterland areas. The distinction between health clinics and health posts is crucial here, yet the President glossed over it in his eagerness to cast aspersions on his predecessors. This oversimplification diminishes the complexity of healthcare delivery in the hinterland—a region where access to medical care has always been a multifaceted challenge.

Equally problematic is the President’s discussion of hinterland secondary school enrollment prior to 1992. He correctly notes that the enrollment rate was low, but fails to contextualize this with the limited number of secondary schools in those areas—a limitation that persists to this day. The present PPP/C government is still grappling with the same infrastructural challenges that have long plagued the hinterland.

Data compilation and quality has always been a constraint in Guyana. But this should not have prevented the President from ensuring that the data he was presenting was properly fact-checked and contextualized.  It is not enough to merely cite statistics; one must also ensure that those statistics are accurate, relevant, and presented in a way that genuinely informs the public.

As the President continues to wield statistics like a sword in his political battles, one must ask: what is the cost of this cavalier approach. In the short term, it may win applause and rally the faithful, as it did during his address to the NTCC.  But when leaders do not pay sufficient attention to fact-checking and contextualizing data, the public is left adrift in a sea of confusion. And when this happens, the fallout can be detrimental to the government’s image. The President should be advised to fact-check! Fact-check! And fact-check again!

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

---

• affirmation, inspection, National Toshaos Council Conference (NTCC)., Peeping Tom, Proclamation

---