Guyana Focus
Guyana’s President David Granger dreams big. He dreams of inclusionary democracy in a country, which according to him, is divided by economic, ethnic, political, religious, and class differences.
It would therefore be a dream come true for all Guyanese – and not only the President – if he can realize his dream of breaking down the barriers that have historically divided the country. Evidently, the odds are stacked against Granger who must first overcome the political divisions that prevent
inclusionary democracy. To give the President credit, he recognizes that he must start the process by engaging the leader of the country’s opposition party – a task that is fraught with challenges. This is not to say that the President might not be successful in engaging the opposition leader. But whether such engagement would bear any fruit is doubtful.
That’s because the bitter struggle for power in Guyana, which itself is marred by undemocratic undercurrents, will most likely get in the way of any potential collaboration between the ruling and the opposition parties. That is, unless the ruling party is willing to make any concessions, which is highly unlikely.
Even then, the opposition party believes it has a right to power – in a similar manner to the ruling party – and might therefore be unwilling to co-operate with the government. Yet there is a real outside chance that external influence from “big brother USA” or ‘big sister England” could force the two parties into collaboration.
Ironically, the prospect for collaboration between the two parties was initiated earlier this year by former US President Jimmy Carter who heads up the US-based Carter Center which has been intimately involved in Guyana’s political landscape since 1990. It was Carter who brokered electoral reforms that led to free and fair elections in 1992, that resulted in the PPP attaining power.
Carter was also involved in ensuring the integrity of the electoral process in 2015 before falling ill shortly before Guyanese went to the polls that resulted in the APNU+AFC winning the elections by the narrowest of margins ever.
Carter has returned to Guyana’s scene this year at a time of heightened political tensions between the ruling and opposition parties over a range of economic, administrative and political issues. Key among the political issues are the composition of the Elections Commissions, the Chairmanship of the Elections Commission, concerns about the integrity of the electoral process heading into general elections in 2020, and constitutional reforms.
In calling for inclusionary democracy, the President, at a Roundtable on Social Cohesion on September 3, 2018, conveniently quoted the Constitution, which he and his party mechanism have invariably subjected to their own interpretation since coming to office, stating: “The principal objective of the political system of the State is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens and their organisations in the management and decision-making processes of the State, with particular emphasis on those areas of decision-making that directly affect their well-being.”
Citing these objectives is indeed laudable on the part of Granger but they are utopian at best, given the history of decision making and social realities in Guyana under both major parties.
While political collaboration is imperative to achieve inclusionary democracy, Granger outlined a five-point plan which mostly emphasizes non-political objectives.
The first component of the plan is to narrow the rich-poor gap which is entrenched in Guyanese society. He contends that the disparity in economic circumstances between the large masses of poor people and the wealthy few is an impediment to cohesion. Therein lies a major challenge. The President could implement strategies to improve the well-being of the poor but at the same time it would be near impossible to reverse the trend of the rich getting richer, leaving the wealth gap pretty much the same.
The second component of the plan is to eliminate inequality, including gender, geographic, and other forms of inequality by providing equal access to developmental opportunities; and to abolish segregated communities which foster ethnic insecurities. The President said that the government, through initiatives such as hinterland electrification and the establishment of capital towns, will facilitate decentralised engines of development to reduce inequality.
While decentralization could broaden the scope for development opportunities, abolishing segregated communities requires a soothsayer to interpret the President’s intention. Perhaps, the army will dismantle certain communities which have been built on racial segregation, which incidentally feeds off political motivations.
The third component of Granger’s plan is quite achievable if democracy is real and not imagined. It calls for political inclusion, starting at the neighbourhoods and extending through regional and national tiers of government. Granger expects that individuals and groups must make use of the opportunities to actively become involved in political activities, and offer themselves as political representatives. Most likely, these individuals would be attached to one of the two major political parties which largely exist on racial loyalties.
The fourth element of the President’s plan is also achievable if the government could be true to its word. It calls for employment and social protection, which will be achieved by the government working at the legislative level to promote fair employment practices, equitable opportunities, safe workplaces, and environmentally sustainable practices across both the private and public sectors. This would be a dream for those educated individuals who work the fields because they cannot find employment, whereas less qualified individuals secure decent jobs in the public sector.
Equal access to education, regarded by the President as a great equaliser is the fifth element of his plan. Perhaps that already exists. But Granger himself recognizes that it is not equal access that contributes to the high drop-out rate but rather that children must be fed, clothed and housed. So monitoring the enrolment rate will not prevent poor children from quitting school to assist their families with meeting the requirements for survival. Addressing this issue involves a dramatic reduction in poverty, which has remained a pipe dream for the poor.
The President’s intentions are obviously good. He has repeatedly emphasised that greater integration among social groups will foster a sense of belonging. He has also called for the respect of all cultures.
But what he preaches is different from what his administration practices. There's a wide gap between reality and expectations. It's relatively easy to dream of utopian conditions but fulfilling such dreams would take more than talk. Then again, changing the entrenched social dynamics in a divided nation would not happen in our lifetime, if at all.
Granger hopes that while the government pursues its agenda of inclusionary democracy that opposition leaders would also commit to actions which will engender cohesion at all levels.
But the government and the opposition in Guyana have had a history of non-cooperation. They never seem to be able to reach consensus on issues because their expectations are different.
This is largely due to the fact that political power in Guyana has always superseded the interest of the people. Therefore, the dream of inclusionary democracy can only be realized if the power structure changes, which is not about to happen.
That’s because the bitter struggle for power in Guyana, which itself is marred by undemocratic undercurrents, will most likely get in the way of any potential collaboration between the ruling and the opposition parties. That is, unless the ruling party is willing to make any concessions, which is highly unlikely.
Even then, the opposition party believes it has a right to power – in a similar manner to the ruling party – and might therefore be unwilling to co-operate with the government. Yet there is a real outside chance that external influence from “big brother USA” or ‘big sister England” could force the two parties into collaboration.
Ironically, the prospect for collaboration between the two parties was initiated earlier this year by former US President Jimmy Carter who heads up the US-based Carter Center which has been intimately involved in Guyana’s political landscape since 1990. It was Carter who brokered electoral reforms that led to free and fair elections in 1992, that resulted in the PPP attaining power.
Carter was also involved in ensuring the integrity of the electoral process in 2015 before falling ill shortly before Guyanese went to the polls that resulted in the APNU+AFC winning the elections by the narrowest of margins ever.
Carter has returned to Guyana’s scene this year at a time of heightened political tensions between the ruling and opposition parties over a range of economic, administrative and political issues. Key among the political issues are the composition of the Elections Commissions, the Chairmanship of the Elections Commission, concerns about the integrity of the electoral process heading into general elections in 2020, and constitutional reforms.
In calling for inclusionary democracy, the President, at a Roundtable on Social Cohesion on September 3, 2018, conveniently quoted the Constitution, which he and his party mechanism have invariably subjected to their own interpretation since coming to office, stating: “The principal objective of the political system of the State is to establish an inclusionary democracy by providing increasing opportunities for the participation of citizens and their organisations in the management and decision-making processes of the State, with particular emphasis on those areas of decision-making that directly affect their well-being.”
Citing these objectives is indeed laudable on the part of Granger but they are utopian at best, given the history of decision making and social realities in Guyana under both major parties.
While political collaboration is imperative to achieve inclusionary democracy, Granger outlined a five-point plan which mostly emphasizes non-political objectives.
The first component of the plan is to narrow the rich-poor gap which is entrenched in Guyanese society. He contends that the disparity in economic circumstances between the large masses of poor people and the wealthy few is an impediment to cohesion. Therein lies a major challenge. The President could implement strategies to improve the well-being of the poor but at the same time it would be near impossible to reverse the trend of the rich getting richer, leaving the wealth gap pretty much the same.
The second component of the plan is to eliminate inequality, including gender, geographic, and other forms of inequality by providing equal access to developmental opportunities; and to abolish segregated communities which foster ethnic insecurities. The President said that the government, through initiatives such as hinterland electrification and the establishment of capital towns, will facilitate decentralised engines of development to reduce inequality.
While decentralization could broaden the scope for development opportunities, abolishing segregated communities requires a soothsayer to interpret the President’s intention. Perhaps, the army will dismantle certain communities which have been built on racial segregation, which incidentally feeds off political motivations.
The third component of Granger’s plan is quite achievable if democracy is real and not imagined. It calls for political inclusion, starting at the neighbourhoods and extending through regional and national tiers of government. Granger expects that individuals and groups must make use of the opportunities to actively become involved in political activities, and offer themselves as political representatives. Most likely, these individuals would be attached to one of the two major political parties which largely exist on racial loyalties.
The fourth element of the President’s plan is also achievable if the government could be true to its word. It calls for employment and social protection, which will be achieved by the government working at the legislative level to promote fair employment practices, equitable opportunities, safe workplaces, and environmentally sustainable practices across both the private and public sectors. This would be a dream for those educated individuals who work the fields because they cannot find employment, whereas less qualified individuals secure decent jobs in the public sector.
Equal access to education, regarded by the President as a great equaliser is the fifth element of his plan. Perhaps that already exists. But Granger himself recognizes that it is not equal access that contributes to the high drop-out rate but rather that children must be fed, clothed and housed. So monitoring the enrolment rate will not prevent poor children from quitting school to assist their families with meeting the requirements for survival. Addressing this issue involves a dramatic reduction in poverty, which has remained a pipe dream for the poor.
The President’s intentions are obviously good. He has repeatedly emphasised that greater integration among social groups will foster a sense of belonging. He has also called for the respect of all cultures.
But what he preaches is different from what his administration practices. There's a wide gap between reality and expectations. It's relatively easy to dream of utopian conditions but fulfilling such dreams would take more than talk. Then again, changing the entrenched social dynamics in a divided nation would not happen in our lifetime, if at all.
Granger hopes that while the government pursues its agenda of inclusionary democracy that opposition leaders would also commit to actions which will engender cohesion at all levels.
But the government and the opposition in Guyana have had a history of non-cooperation. They never seem to be able to reach consensus on issues because their expectations are different.
This is largely due to the fact that political power in Guyana has always superseded the interest of the people. Therefore, the dream of inclusionary democracy can only be realized if the power structure changes, which is not about to happen.
in 2017 referred for therapy:
ChildLink study
Georgetown – In 2017, only 30 percent of 841 cases of child sexual abuse were referred for therapy, which means that it is possible that “close to 600 victims… may never receive trauma-focused therapy to heal from the trauma,” according to ChildLink Forensic Interviewer Nicole Whaul.
During a presentation at the University of Guyana’s 14th Turkeyen and Tain Talks, on September 21st under the theme “A Better Life for Youth: Juvenile Justice in Guyana,” Whaul pointed out that those who do not receive therapy are “likely to grow into adulthood struggling to suppress their childhood trauma.”
She noted that child sexual abuse victims are in urgent need of trauma-focused therapy and other psycho-social interventions.
Whaul related that a recent study, “Crises in the Dark – Child Sexual Abuse in Guyana Today,” which was conducted by ChildLink, showed that an abused child is at increased risk of experiencing the same form of abuse by multiple perpetrators. She said that some of the children who participated in the study reported being abused by at least five different persons.
Whaul noted that the study found a number of consequences of sexual abuse, including health issues. Four out of 338 children, whose cases were referred to the Centre from 2014 to present, suffered ruptured uteri as a result of the abuse and needed to be hospitalized. Some abuse also resulted in pregnancy and childbearing. Other victims contracted HIV, gonorrhea, syphilis and other sexually transmitted infections.
Whaul also warned that children who are sexually abused and receive no intervention are likely to engage in juvenile delinquency behaviour, such as truancy.
Some of the victims referred to the centre, she said, were unable to focus in school. “Some said their school performance suffered. Others said they began getting into trouble at school. Many stopped attending school,” she said.
She added that 82 of the children referred to the centre revealed that the perpetrator of their abuse was either a family member or a non-family member who was known and trusted by them or their relatives.
She said some victims were forced to move out of their homes to live with other family members or at an institution, while most times their abuser continued to live with the immediate family after the abuse.
While noting that children are less likely to identify perpetrators who are close to them, she said that family members are likely to protect other family members.
Despite the harrowing statistics, however, Whaul acknowledged that there has been some progress with addressing the issue. Whaul stated that since the launch of the sexual offenses court last year, there has been approximately an 80% success rate of prosecution of child sexual abuse cases.
“The children of Guyana are fed up and disgusted with us, as adults, who are in the position of trust. If we are not held accountable as professionals, then our children will continue to be vulnerable. Often, we are the only hope that children have after they were not believed by their families and our approach to the case can either give the child hope and pave the path of justice and healing or it can add to the destruction of that child,” Whaul added.
Whaul said that what is needed is a national plan for the prevention of child sexual abuse, as well as child advocacy centres established in all 10 administrative regions so that victims can access specialised counselling. Additionally, she said there is need for enhanced training of prosecutors and the commitment of the opposition, civil society and other stakeholders to sustained, preventative initiatives.
Social worker Nicole Cole, during the question and answer segment, would later reveal that statistics show that for the first six months of 2018, 393 girls and 88 boys, a total of 481 cases, were victims of abuse, while there were 238 reported cases of child sexual abuse for the same period. She described these as staggering statistics.
During a presentation at the University of Guyana’s 14th Turkeyen and Tain Talks, on September 21st under the theme “A Better Life for Youth: Juvenile Justice in Guyana,” Whaul pointed out that those who do not receive therapy are “likely to grow into adulthood struggling to suppress their childhood trauma.”
She noted that child sexual abuse victims are in urgent need of trauma-focused therapy and other psycho-social interventions.
Whaul related that a recent study, “Crises in the Dark – Child Sexual Abuse in Guyana Today,” which was conducted by ChildLink, showed that an abused child is at increased risk of experiencing the same form of abuse by multiple perpetrators. She said that some of the children who participated in the study reported being abused by at least five different persons.
Whaul noted that the study found a number of consequences of sexual abuse, including health issues. Four out of 338 children, whose cases were referred to the Centre from 2014 to present, suffered ruptured uteri as a result of the abuse and needed to be hospitalized. Some abuse also resulted in pregnancy and childbearing. Other victims contracted HIV, gonorrhea, syphilis and other sexually transmitted infections.
Whaul also warned that children who are sexually abused and receive no intervention are likely to engage in juvenile delinquency behaviour, such as truancy.
Some of the victims referred to the centre, she said, were unable to focus in school. “Some said their school performance suffered. Others said they began getting into trouble at school. Many stopped attending school,” she said.
She added that 82 of the children referred to the centre revealed that the perpetrator of their abuse was either a family member or a non-family member who was known and trusted by them or their relatives.
She said some victims were forced to move out of their homes to live with other family members or at an institution, while most times their abuser continued to live with the immediate family after the abuse.
While noting that children are less likely to identify perpetrators who are close to them, she said that family members are likely to protect other family members.
Despite the harrowing statistics, however, Whaul acknowledged that there has been some progress with addressing the issue. Whaul stated that since the launch of the sexual offenses court last year, there has been approximately an 80% success rate of prosecution of child sexual abuse cases.
“The children of Guyana are fed up and disgusted with us, as adults, who are in the position of trust. If we are not held accountable as professionals, then our children will continue to be vulnerable. Often, we are the only hope that children have after they were not believed by their families and our approach to the case can either give the child hope and pave the path of justice and healing or it can add to the destruction of that child,” Whaul added.
Whaul said that what is needed is a national plan for the prevention of child sexual abuse, as well as child advocacy centres established in all 10 administrative regions so that victims can access specialised counselling. Additionally, she said there is need for enhanced training of prosecutors and the commitment of the opposition, civil society and other stakeholders to sustained, preventative initiatives.
Social worker Nicole Cole, during the question and answer segment, would later reveal that statistics show that for the first six months of 2018, 393 girls and 88 boys, a total of 481 cases, were victims of abuse, while there were 238 reported cases of child sexual abuse for the same period. She described these as staggering statistics.
Georgetown – Since the announcement of significant oil finds in 2015, many have questioned if there is any way Guyana can turn this resource into a blessing or at the very least, escape many of the associated risks.
For Nick Butler, a visiting professor at Kings College London, the answer is yes. He stressed however that Guyana can only escape the “oil curse” with “strong leadership.” Butler said that the active support of ExxonMobil as the main operator and investor in the Stabroek Block would also be needed.
The Energy Commentator said that the first and most important step for Guyana is to set the pace of development with a Depletion Policy. Butler said that this would phase production over a long period, avoiding a rush and allowing local companies to build up their capabilities to enable them to win a share of any oil-related activity.
Butler, who has worked with BP for 29 years, said that this covers everything from the development of a new port, infrastructure, engineering support and all the other essential onshore services from food to accommodation for the oil workers. Done too quickly, Butler said that the development of natural resources can easily become overwhelmingly dependent on expatriate labour.
The second issue Butler pointed to is how to spend the money that oil will bring. He said that the demands for immediate spending will be strong but should be resisted. In Butler’s opinion, it would be much better to devote a large proportion of the new money to the development of infrastructure.
He said, “Guyana needs everything from roads to schools to ensure that the rest of the economy can continue to develop and that the local population does not become accustomed to the sort of rentier economy that has done so much damage in the Middle East. Beyond that, the government of Guyana should establish a Sovereign Wealth Fund with strong withdrawal rules so that a proportion of the revenue earned each year is put aside for the medium- and longer-term future.”
Butler added, “The oil, even assuming that many more discoveries will be made, will not last for forever. The most successful oil economies around the world such as Norway and Abu Dhabi are notable for having saved for the future. Guyana is not yet in the league of the leading oil producers but the lessons are still valid.”
The third challenge the UK Professor said is for the government to develop its own skills and not only in the area of negotiation with the international companies. In the oil business, and many other parts of the energy sector, Butler said that companies are highly skilled and all too capable of exploiting the weakness of inexperienced authorities.
The UK Professor said, “Guyana needs to bring in expertise and, more importantly, must develop its own capacity to manage the process of licensing, regulation and the taxation of its new oil sector. The role of the international companies involved in this process is crucial. Exxon is highly professional but in areas such as Guyana, something more is needed. Again, that something is strong leadership. The leader of Guyana needs to ensure that oil operators align their activity to local needs.”
He added, “Exxon and others should be supporting a Depletion Policy and helping Guyana to develop its own capabilities. Successful sustainable development is a matter of mutual advantage not a zero sum game. In too many areas, the companies have stood aside, obeying to some extent, the letter of the law, but doing too little to limit the risks of the oil curse.”
For Nick Butler, a visiting professor at Kings College London, the answer is yes. He stressed however that Guyana can only escape the “oil curse” with “strong leadership.” Butler said that the active support of ExxonMobil as the main operator and investor in the Stabroek Block would also be needed.
The Energy Commentator said that the first and most important step for Guyana is to set the pace of development with a Depletion Policy. Butler said that this would phase production over a long period, avoiding a rush and allowing local companies to build up their capabilities to enable them to win a share of any oil-related activity.
Butler, who has worked with BP for 29 years, said that this covers everything from the development of a new port, infrastructure, engineering support and all the other essential onshore services from food to accommodation for the oil workers. Done too quickly, Butler said that the development of natural resources can easily become overwhelmingly dependent on expatriate labour.
The second issue Butler pointed to is how to spend the money that oil will bring. He said that the demands for immediate spending will be strong but should be resisted. In Butler’s opinion, it would be much better to devote a large proportion of the new money to the development of infrastructure.
He said, “Guyana needs everything from roads to schools to ensure that the rest of the economy can continue to develop and that the local population does not become accustomed to the sort of rentier economy that has done so much damage in the Middle East. Beyond that, the government of Guyana should establish a Sovereign Wealth Fund with strong withdrawal rules so that a proportion of the revenue earned each year is put aside for the medium- and longer-term future.”
Butler added, “The oil, even assuming that many more discoveries will be made, will not last for forever. The most successful oil economies around the world such as Norway and Abu Dhabi are notable for having saved for the future. Guyana is not yet in the league of the leading oil producers but the lessons are still valid.”
The third challenge the UK Professor said is for the government to develop its own skills and not only in the area of negotiation with the international companies. In the oil business, and many other parts of the energy sector, Butler said that companies are highly skilled and all too capable of exploiting the weakness of inexperienced authorities.
The UK Professor said, “Guyana needs to bring in expertise and, more importantly, must develop its own capacity to manage the process of licensing, regulation and the taxation of its new oil sector. The role of the international companies involved in this process is crucial. Exxon is highly professional but in areas such as Guyana, something more is needed. Again, that something is strong leadership. The leader of Guyana needs to ensure that oil operators align their activity to local needs.”
He added, “Exxon and others should be supporting a Depletion Policy and helping Guyana to develop its own capabilities. Successful sustainable development is a matter of mutual advantage not a zero sum game. In too many areas, the companies have stood aside, obeying to some extent, the letter of the law, but doing too little to limit the risks of the oil curse.”
estates privatization
Georgetown – Fourteen potential bidders have met a privatisation team on the three closed sugar estates that are up for divestment and privatization, as the process winds down to submissions of critical documents outlining offers.
According to the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited/Special Purpose Unit (NICIL/SPU), a meeting, convened by the privatization team led by Wilfred Baghaloo from PricewaterhouseCoopers, Jamaica, was held at the Marriott Hotel on Sept 25, with potential bidders for the three sugar estates the Government has agreed to privatize and divest.
The estates are East Demerara Estates (Enmore); Skeldon Estate and Rose Hall Estate.
Baghaloo stated the purpose of the meeting was to hear the concerns, questions or any inhibitions from the potential bidders so that they can be addressed to ensure a successful privatization.
The 14 potential bidders came from Guyana, Trinidad and Canada.
NICIL/SPU disclosed that among the concerns were the status new regulatory environment/framework required to facilitate fair competition between the Government and private sector in an industry that was predominately led by the Government.
Also discussed were the taxation benefits and exemptions that the Government will provide in the risky and challenging industry.
The potential bidders also wanted information on Government’s energy policy and possible assurance that new products especially ethanol and electricity can be guaranteed in a market through public policy.
There were also discussions on the tenure/duration of the leases and about work permits.
The potential bidders were also briefed about the evaluation criteria to be used to select the preferred bidder.
“The potential bidders were extremely concerned about the state of the equipment and factory and whether they are being asked to buy essentially scrap metals,” NICIL/SPU disclosed.
On the issue of the continuing operations of the factories, Baghaloo said: “The government has gone through great pain to have a scheduled reopening of all three factories. East Demerara Estate operated in the last crop and I understand that Skeldon is now being prepared to reopen in November.”
In respect of Rose Hall, the PriceWaterhouseCoopers official said that preparations are being made to open operations in first quarter of 2019.
“I fully understand your concerns…Buying a factory that is not a going concern and most importantly a factory that has been closed for a long period of time (is not an option).”
On the matter of the evaluation criteria, it was explained that a technical proposal will carry 70% of the score and the remaining 30% will focus on the price and economics to country.
Baghaloo said: “The primary objective of the government is to get a qualified, experienced, competent and a well structured proposal to operate the factories for the foreseeable future and that is why the technical component is more weighted in the scoring process.”
After hearing the many requests, the privatization team agreed to extend the bid submission date from Sept 28, 2018 to Oct 31, 2018, which many other bidders thought was too short.
Baghaloo said, “We would have to evaluate the status and options as we get closer to the bid date but the primary concern was to ensure there was a level playing field particularly for those who showed interest in early stage of the privatization process.”
There are also a few major offers to buy the three estates, from the Middle East and India.
A Saudi Arabia group has reportedly also teamed up with a local food company, offering to buy the 6 estates, including the 3 operating ones.
NICIL/SPU had a meet and greet with the prospective investors at the recently renovated SPU LBI staff compound.
According to the National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited/Special Purpose Unit (NICIL/SPU), a meeting, convened by the privatization team led by Wilfred Baghaloo from PricewaterhouseCoopers, Jamaica, was held at the Marriott Hotel on Sept 25, with potential bidders for the three sugar estates the Government has agreed to privatize and divest.
The estates are East Demerara Estates (Enmore); Skeldon Estate and Rose Hall Estate.
Baghaloo stated the purpose of the meeting was to hear the concerns, questions or any inhibitions from the potential bidders so that they can be addressed to ensure a successful privatization.
The 14 potential bidders came from Guyana, Trinidad and Canada.
NICIL/SPU disclosed that among the concerns were the status new regulatory environment/framework required to facilitate fair competition between the Government and private sector in an industry that was predominately led by the Government.
Also discussed were the taxation benefits and exemptions that the Government will provide in the risky and challenging industry.
The potential bidders also wanted information on Government’s energy policy and possible assurance that new products especially ethanol and electricity can be guaranteed in a market through public policy.
There were also discussions on the tenure/duration of the leases and about work permits.
The potential bidders were also briefed about the evaluation criteria to be used to select the preferred bidder.
“The potential bidders were extremely concerned about the state of the equipment and factory and whether they are being asked to buy essentially scrap metals,” NICIL/SPU disclosed.
On the issue of the continuing operations of the factories, Baghaloo said: “The government has gone through great pain to have a scheduled reopening of all three factories. East Demerara Estate operated in the last crop and I understand that Skeldon is now being prepared to reopen in November.”
In respect of Rose Hall, the PriceWaterhouseCoopers official said that preparations are being made to open operations in first quarter of 2019.
“I fully understand your concerns…Buying a factory that is not a going concern and most importantly a factory that has been closed for a long period of time (is not an option).”
On the matter of the evaluation criteria, it was explained that a technical proposal will carry 70% of the score and the remaining 30% will focus on the price and economics to country.
Baghaloo said: “The primary objective of the government is to get a qualified, experienced, competent and a well structured proposal to operate the factories for the foreseeable future and that is why the technical component is more weighted in the scoring process.”
After hearing the many requests, the privatization team agreed to extend the bid submission date from Sept 28, 2018 to Oct 31, 2018, which many other bidders thought was too short.
Baghaloo said, “We would have to evaluate the status and options as we get closer to the bid date but the primary concern was to ensure there was a level playing field particularly for those who showed interest in early stage of the privatization process.”
There are also a few major offers to buy the three estates, from the Middle East and India.
A Saudi Arabia group has reportedly also teamed up with a local food company, offering to buy the 6 estates, including the 3 operating ones.
NICIL/SPU had a meet and greet with the prospective investors at the recently renovated SPU LBI staff compound.
To advertise in ICW call
Call 905-738-5005