Jagdeo is being inconsistent

Sep 03, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo has long mastered the art of dodging uncomfortable issues with a smirk. His recent performance at last Wednesday’s press conference, where he dismissed the need for a feasibility study for the proposed high-span bridge across the Berbice River, was yet another display of his signature flippancy.

In Jagdeo’s world, the feasibility of a new bridge across the Berbice River is apparently as self-evident as the sky being blue—no need for studies, consultations, or evidence. This casual disregard is as troubling as it is telling. What Jagdeo strategically chose to ignore—is that the very Berbice River already hosts a floating bridge. It was he who built it. This existing structure is not only in excellent condition but is also well-maintained. Despite these factors, the traffic flow across the bridge was found to be insufficient to meet its financial obligations, leading to a proposed tariff increase and subsequent APNU+AFC government intervention.

If the existing bridge struggles to sustain itself, what logic underpins the construction of a new one? If a floating bridge cannot attract the necessary volume of traffic to be viable, what makes a far costlier high-span bridge a better idea? Will the economy of Berbice be able to justify another bridge, this time a high-span structure. If, as reported in the media, the government plans to pay the owners for the bridge – a mysterious decision in itself – why build a new bridge?

One would think that these questions are both reasonable and essential. Any responsible government, before plunging headfirst into another costly endeavour, would conduct a feasibility study to examine not only the need for the bridge but the broader implications of such a project. The need for infrastructure does not automatically translate to feasibility. The dreams of a populace—for instance, for a state-of-the-art light rail system—must be tempered by the hard realities of economic and practical limitations. To ignore this is not just negligent; it is a disservice.

A feasibility study is not merely an exercise in calculating returns on equity and ability to repay creditors. It is an exploration of the myriad factors that contribute to the success or failure of a project. It considers economic, social, and environmental costs and benefits, determining whether these justify the endeavour. It evaluates the optimal type of structure, the best design for maximizing benefits, and the most strategic location. It delves into technical specifications, cost estimates, and risk assessments. In short, a feasibility study provides a comprehensive blueprint, a guide to ensure that public funds are not squandered on bridges to nowhere.

Yet, Jagdeo’s response to these concerns was dismissive. His nonchalance was all the more ironic given that, in the same press conference, he flaunted a voluminous feasibility study for the existing floating bridge across the Berbice River, using it to highlight its thoroughness in contrast to the feasibility study for the high-span bridge across the Demerara River which was proposed by the former government.

This contradictory stance—displaying reverence for one study while belittling the need for another—exposes a glaring inconsistency. Jagdeo’s casual dismissal of the necessity for a feasibility study for the new Berbice Bridge also contradicts his own previously stated positions.

Back in 2017, Jagdeo, then the Leader of the Opposition, was vocal about the importance of feasibility studies. Speaking at a meeting in Adelphi Village, East Canje, he emphasized that a proper feasibility study into the sugar industry would yield a different result from the then government’s narrative. Again, in the National Assembly in 2018, Jagdeo criticized the then government for announcing a new model for the Demerara Harbour Bridge without conducting a feasibility study on that model. His arguments then were steeped in logic and responsibility—traits that seem to have conveniently vanished in his current role.

It is one thing for a politician to evolve in their thinking; it is quite another to flip-flop on fundamental principles of governance and accountability. Jagdeo’s newfound disregard for feasibility studies raises uncomfortable questions.

The Vice President’s current stance suggests a shift, not merely in perspective, but in the very values that should guide public office. If the feasibility of a bridge is so self-evident, why not prove it with a study? Why not provide the evidence that would dispel doubts and reassure the public that their government is acting in their best interest?

The flippancy with which Jagdeo and the PPPC government approach such critical issues does a disservice to the people of Guyana. Infrastructure projects, especially ones as significant as a new bridge across the Berbice River, demand careful consideration and detailed planning. Anything less is irresponsible. The people of Guyana deserve better than flippant dismissals and hollow reassurances. They deserve leaders who not only hear their concerns but address them with the seriousness and integrity that their office demands.

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

---

• Bharrat Jagdeo, Government, Peeping Tom, signature, Vice President

---