Government crippling local government systems to maintain dependency – Sharma Solomon

Aug 13, 2026 News

---

(Kaieteur News) – The central government is systematically crippling local democratic organs, stripping them of revenue streams, and fostering a culture of dependency under the guise of its new “model village” and community development initiatives, according to APNU Member of Parliament (MP) and former Mayor of Linden, Sharma Solomon.

On August 3^rd, President Irfaan Ali unveiled the Model Village initiative saying that it will transform communities across Guyana into modern, economically vibrant and socially connected spaces where citizens can live, work and thrive. The initiative, begins with consultations in 23 villages.

Speaking exclusively in an interview with Kaieteur News, Solomon drew sharp parallels between current State interventions and the historic attempts by the British Crown to undermine the post-emancipation Village Movement in Guyana. Solomon pointed to the historic Village Movement, launched after the purchase of Victoria Village by former enslaved Africans, as a gold standard of self-determination, self-governance, and local economic independence. Drawing on historical analysis, he noted that early freed Africans established thriving, self-managed communities encompassing local agriculture, religious life, education, and social infrastructure.

However, this initial success threatened the labour supply and land interests of plantation owners, leading the Crown to systematically undermine village autonomy through State-imposed infrastructure, centralised control over drainage and clearing, and severed taxation that starved local councils of their revenue.

Solomon argued that history is repeating itself under the current administration’s central government strategy. “The village movement is where I really want to take a look at where government is taking away freedoms,” Solomon stated.

“What the government is doing is what we saw after that sort of success… Central government is taking away the capacity of local government to generate revenue, acquire assets, develop housing schemes, and create economic opportunities,” he told Kaieteur News.

The MP emphasised that the administration’s top-down approach violates explicit constitutional mandates designed to guarantee local autonomy and participatory democracy. Specifically, he highlighted Articles 71, 72, and 75 of the Constitution of Guyana. Article 71, declares local government a vital aspect of democracy intended to involve as many citizens as possible in managing and developing their own communities. While Article 72 outlines the core functions of local democratic organs in engaging directly with community stakeholders, senior citizens, and local leadership to identify needs. Article 75, mandates that local democratic organs (NDCs, Regional Democratic Councils, and Municipalities) must remain autonomous and possess the legal power to make binding decisions for their jurisdictions.

“Instead of doing that, they are designing these programmes in Georgetown and then coming to the communities with big, fine pictures and presentations,” Solomon explained. He added that the central government’s failure to maintain a functioning Local Government Commission leaving it vacant or inactive for years, further demonstrates a blatant disregard for local authorities and constitutional obligations.
To illustrate how central control deliberately incapacitates local councils, Solomon pointed to the specific fiscal constraints imposed on the Linden municipality. The municipality was stripped of $77 million in revenue generated from the Linden toll bridge, a loss that severely crippled its ability to provide basic services such as waste management and community maintenance. Furthermore, the council has been prevented from conducting property re-evaluations, forcing them to collect property rates based on outdated 1972 valuations (often as low as $2,000 per year).

Additionally, thousands of housing schemes developed by the government have not been formally turned over to the municipality, preventing the council from generating rates and taxes from these properties while leaving residents demanding services the starved council cannot afford to provide. “They emasculate the councils, make them look dysfunctional and incapable of doing work, so that citizens see no alternative and are forced to rely strictly on central government’s oil-wealth resources,” Solomon said, calling it a classic “dependency piper syndrome.”

Solomon rejected the notion that local regions lack the vision or technical capacity to manage their own economic growth. He recalled how former Minister of Finance Dr. Ashni Singh argued during 2012 budget discussions that Linden should not receive an agricultural budget based on the economic theory of “comparative advantage”, claiming Linden was not an agricultural region and should simply purchase food from other regions.

Leaders from Linden rejected this argument, continuously advocating for their own agricultural vision. Five years ago, the region successfully secured a dedicated agricultural budget, demonstrating that local communities know their own potential far better than central planners.

Solomon also criticised the government’s approach to local infrastructure projects, referencing the rehabilitation of the Mackenzie Sports Club. Rather than supporting the community’s primary sporting interests, such as football, the central government took total control of the facility and converted it primarily into a cricket centre, despite Linden historically falling under Demerara without its own independent cricket board.

“Support shouldn’t be confused with control,” Solomon stressed. “When government steps in to control facilities rather than support local design, it leaves a bad impression on the community.”

When asked whether the administration’s actions amount to legal violations, Solomon affirmed that a strong legal and principled case exists against central government’s overreach. However, he acknowledged the public relations trap set by the State: questioning central government overreach is often twisted into a narrative that local leaders are “fighting against development.” Beyond constitutional violations, Solomon warned of darker long-term socio-economic consequences resulting from central State control, including social engineering, gerrymandering, and gentrification. Pointing to developments like the Seawall area, Solomon observed that instead of empowering local small-business owners and upgrading their capacity to compete, State-directed redevelopments risk priced-out displacement or complete economic marginalisation.

“There are bigger plays in some of these things that stick with just the undermining of local democracy,” Solomon concluded. “It is an effort to undermine the very spirit and self-determination of the people.”

---

• APNU, Sharma Solomon

---