Jagdeo’s idea of transparency

Nov 24, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

…Peeping Tom

kaieteur News- Transparency, as conceived by Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo, seems to be a peculiar exercise in selective disclosure. For him, it is a performance choreographed to assure the public that what they do not know cannot possibly harm them.

His recent response to a reporter’s inquiry about the power-purchase agreement with the operators of floating powerships is a case in point. For Jagdeo, the “only thing that matters” is the purchase price of the power. That narrow focus conveniently glosses over a plethora of critical concerns that deserve scrutiny.

Why is the public being asked to trust the government’s word rather than being granted access to the full details of the agreement? Are the fiscal concessions offered to the power-ship operators (if any) so generous that revealing them might provoke outrage? Will the profits generated locally be taxed, or are the powership operators’ beneficiaries of the kind of tax immunity that turns fiscal policy into a charitable exercise? These are not peripheral questions but central to understanding whether the deal is in Guyana’s best interests.

The omissions become even more glaring when one considers the potential liabilities that may be lurking within the agreement. What happens if the powerships fail to meet their generation targets? Will the operators face penalties, or will the burden of shortfalls fall squarely on the government and, by extension, the taxpayers? Are there contingency plans for mitigating such risks, or does the government plan to lurch from crisis to crisis, each more expensive than the last?

Such questions expose the hollow core of Jagdeo’s version of transparency, which limits public discourse to what he deigns to disclose. Transparency, by its very definition, demands a full accounting, not selective revelations that shield incompetence or conceal impropriety. The insistence on keeping the contract details under wraps raises an obvious yet damning question: what is the government so desperate to hide?

And why does Vice President Jagdeo skirt the critical issue of whether due diligence was conducted on the company supplying power from the ships? Does the public deserve not to know if the government has thoroughly vetted this entity’s track record, financial stability, and technical competence, especially given the significant implications for the country’s energy security?

The Vice President would have us believe that the price paid to the powerships for electricity is reasonable because it approximates the tariffs charged by the Guyana Power and Light (GPL). But GPL is a poster child for inefficiency. Its high tariffs reflect decades of mismanagement and large technical losses. To benchmark the cost of emergency power against such a flawed standard is an act of economic absurdity.

The government itself has repeatedly proclaimed that the advent of its gas-to-energy project will halve electricity costs. If that promise holds any weight, why anchor the cost of emergency power to GPL’s inflated tariffs? Why not negotiate a price reflective of the future, rather than one tied to past inefficiencies?

The broader implications of this agreement reveal a government unprepared to manage the energy sector effectively. It was no secret that demand for electricity in Guyana would continue to rise. Yet, rather than proactively investing in sustainable infrastructure to meet these needs, the administration now finds itself scrambling to lease power from floating ships. That it must now procure an additional 75 megawatts of power is not evidence of sound planning but of its glaring absence.

This reliance on emergency measures suggests a deeper failure to articulate and execute a coherent energy policy. By focusing on short-term fixes, the government exposes itself to recurring crises, each accompanied by escalating costs and opaque contracts. The powership arrangement is not a victory for energy security but a manifestation of a government caught flat-footed, scrambling to plug holes in a sinking ship.

Ultimately, this episode reveals a pattern in Jagdeo’s governance—a pattern of diminishing the public’s right to know while insisting they trust the government to act in their best interests. This paternalistic approach is antithetical to the democratic principles Jagdeo claims to uphold. Transparency is not an exercise in public relations; it is a mechanism for accountability. A government that hides behind selective disclosure cannot claim to be accountable.

By limiting the conversation to the cost of electricity, Jagdeo sidesteps the larger questions of governance, fairness, and foresight. The public deserves more than his assurances. They deserve access to the facts, to the terms of the agreement, and to the rationale behind decisions that affect their daily lives. Anything less is not transparency; it is obfuscation.

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

(Jagdeo’s idea of transparency)

---

• fiscal concessions, performance choreographed, Transparency, Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo

---