Guyana Focus
destination, but...
Guyana does not boast the features of traditional tourist destinations – blue water, white sandy beaches, surf and all-inclusive resorts like many of its Caribbean counterparts. However, it is a haven for eco-tourists and a nature lover’s paradise.
This fact was confirmed earlier this month, when the country was recognized as the “Best Eco-Tourism destination in the world” at the ITB Global Travel Trade Fair held in Berlin, Germany – beating out some 100 other countries for the coveted recognition.
Incidentally, the country is blessed with characteristics that eco-tourists crave for – exotic fauna and flora, pristine rainforests, resplendent waterfalls, diverse wildlife, safaris, and a myriad of other natural and cultural features.
Eco-tourists are different from traditional tourists. They are environmentally sensitive, culturally aware and do not follow the herd. They look for individual expression and relaxation and to nature away from concrete jungles. They have a different mindset. To them, beaches are boring, they love adventure.
Alan Adamson, writing in his book, Sugar Without Slaves, probably describes Guyana’s natural beauty in a most stunning manner. “For most people who have never lived there or are unfamiliar with its history, Guyana is a name saturated with romantic connotations. This is the delightful land of W.H. Hudson’s Green Mansions, the exotic setting of Conan Doyle’s Lost World, the El Dorado of Sir Walter Raleigh’s tragic hopes.”
Guyana is also the land its British colonizers called the "Magnificent Province" and the "Jewel in Victoria’s Crown". But on the darker side, cut into the heart of the north-west hinterland, Guyana is the country which offered the scenes for the movies, Crime of the Century and Jonestown Massacre.
The country’s potential for eco-tourism has long been recognized, although the ITB award reinforces it on a global scale. A few years ago it was identified as the best eco-region in the Caribbean by the travel magazine, Caribbean World, coming out ahead of competitors such as Belize, Dominica and Venezuela.
Yet after more than a quarter of a century since the country started developing its tourism sector, it has failed to make substantial gains in the sector. Arguably, there has been no shortage of effort, including cheap talk and plans written in the sand – only to be washed away by political waves, and redrawn periodically.
According to the Caribbean Tourism Organization (CTO), the country needs to aggressively pursue new and emerging markets in order to leverage its true potential. The CTO recognized that Guyana is one of the region’s most diverse destinations and is in a great position to promote sustainable development tourism to the world.
When the current government came to power in 2015, it blamed poorly-resourced marketing initiatives for the sluggish growth in the industry which it described as “young in years and maturity.” Then, the government stated that it intended to at least double the marketing budget for tourism over the next 5 years with the aim of increasing its presence in various target markets and media. But that is yet to happen in a significant way.
In 2016, the government announced that it had completed a National Tourism Policy (NTP) which focused on developing market-ready tourism products, enhancing the quality of service, generating increased employment, and improving tourism’s contribution to economic growth. It is expected the NTP will guide the sector’s development over the next two decades.
The government also stated that it will focus on creation of a plan to attract more visitors; develop and enforce service standards; provide hospitality training to boost the quality of visitor experience; and offer an expanded menu of tourism products and services.
As part of its overall tourism plan, the government also developed a Hinterland Tourism Development Plan to leverage the country’s eco-tourism potential. In developing this plan, the government has proposed a review of the cost of internal travel, including air travel to improve accessibility to the various regions.
And in the country’s ever changing direction, the government outlined new initiatives for tourism in its 2018 budget. It stated that the Guyana Tourism Authority, in the coming year, will focus on the following areas: (i) promoting the Guianas Shield as a tourism product; (ii) deepening links with industry operatives and investors; (iii) supporting the execution of cultural, heritage, and sports events; (iv) strengthening diaspora relations to develop and exploit tourism opportunities; and (v) preparing and implementing a Tourism Development and Destination Marketing Plan.
Now, Guyana’s somewhat meaningless green strategy has been added to the country’s marketing pitch. This strategy is hardly likely to have an impact on attracting eco-tourists.
President David Granger noted that with a strong public-private sector partnership, tourism can be developed into a competitive world-class industry. This, he said, would require increased investment, innovation, improved infrastructure and the penetration of international markets.
It is essential for the country to adopt a multi-pronged strategy to promote tourism. It must demonstrate its belief in Guyana’s tourism potential by making appropriate investments in the sector – both human and financial. Tourism cannot be left entirely to the private sector and increasing the marketing budget alone will not drive its success.
In addition to its National Tourism Plan, the government must also establish a regulatory framework to facilitate the development of the sector. Promoting awareness about tourism among the population should share the government’s vision. Tourism cannot prosper without the blessing of the population which must in turn understand the benefits they will get in return.
Information about the tourism resources of the country must be effectively communicated by both the public and private sectors to the marketplace. The focus has to be on selling specific attributes unique to defined target groups, meaning marketing what the country has to offer in eco-tourism.
The country must also have formal infrastructure which functions in an organized manner - including accommodation, transportation, telecommunication, tour and travel operators, financial services, food service companies, etc. The existing supporting infrastructure, though emerging, leaves much to be desired.
Internal air transportation to tourist destinations must also be dramatically improved. And so should land and water transport critical for facilitating travel to areas of interest for eco-tourists.
Political conditions and crime are also important considerations for tourists. A US travel advisory on Guyana notes: “violent crime, such as armed robbery and murder, is common. Local police lack the resources to respond effectively to serious criminal incidents.” In fact, crime is one of the biggest deterrents for tourists.
Consultations earlier this year with stakeholders from the Guyana Tourism Authority (GTA), the Tourism and Hospitality Association of Guyana (THAG), the Private Sector Commission (PSC), the Financial Intelligence Unit (FIU), the Ministries of Public Security, Citizenship and Business revealed differing views from the various agencies on how safe Guyana is for visitors.
Without a doubt, tourism creates its own challenges. There is no homogeneity in what tourists want, given individual tastes and preferences and discriminating spending patterns. It is also the industry most sensitive to economic, political and social patterns.
Therefore, developing and maintaining a competitive advantage in its core competency – ecotourism – is the only thing that will ensure the industry’s viability.
In released excerpts of the final report by ERC, it was disclosed that former Deputy CEO, Vishnu Persaud, who was one of the candidates applying for the position last year, had scored higher than Myers during the interviewing process.
“By all objective criteria, Mr. Persaud was, on the available evidence, the most qualified candidate for appointment to the position of DCEO. By long established practice, the candidate acquiring the highest score secured the appointment. Save and except for the case of Mr. Gocool Boodoo, all appointments were made upon the unanimous vote of all of the Commissioners,” the report said.
It was pointed out that before Myers’ vote by the commission, the vote of the Chairman to break a voting deadlock happened only once before in GECOM.
“In all other cases, the appointments were made following a consensus between all of the Commissioners: that is to say the three Commissioners appointed by the President acting in his own deliberate judgment together with the three Commissioners appointed by the President acting in accordance with the advice of the Leader of the Opposition.”
The ERC said that Persaud whose contract was not renewed a few years ago as DCEO, was the first candidate in the history of GECOM who had obtained the highest score and had not been appointed.
“Because of the way that our population is distributed over the country, it is inevitable that in some areas where there is a preponderance of Guyanese of a given ethnicity, there is likely to be a majority of employees in those areas of the majority ethnicity.”
ERC found that there are no institutional rules or practices in GECOM, which allows for ethnic discrimination in hiring. In fact, at GECOM, there are people who are vigilant enough.
“The six Commissioners are all vigilant to ensure that no such discrimination can be practised without challenge. The unavailability of key personnel did not allow for extensive deliberations to arrive at a more informed conclusion.”
With regards to hiring practices, ERC said there was not enough cooperation from key GECOM staffers to have been able to conclude that there was a problem.
“As such, from the material placed before us, it cannot be said that there has been any evidence of deliberate hiring of Guyanese of one ethnicity rather than of another.”
Opposition members of the GECOM in a letter to the ERC, dated July 17, 2018, asked it to conduct an inquiry into the employment practices at GECOM in general and the recent vote by the Chairman of GECOM in favour of a second-ranked candidate in particular.
ERC invited three persons to serve as members of a sub-committee of the Commission.
They include Stanley Moore, LLM, Justice of Appeal (Ret’d) –Chairman; Jairam Petam – Human Resources Consultant and Lloyd Alvin Smith, DSM, Deputy Commissioner of Police (Ret’d) – Investigator. Additionally, Major General (Ret’d) Norman Mc Lean and Norris Witter also served on the Sub-Committee as representatives of ERC.
Among other things, ERC was supposed to conduct interviews with the Chairman, Commissioners, and the Chief Elections Officer. It was suggested that interviews were supposed to be held with the Human Resources practitioners of GECOM, to ascertain the employment and performance appraisal procedures and practices.
ERC also had wanted the copies of the advertisements for the position of DCEO to ascertain whether the position was advertised internally and subsequently externally to the local Guyanese population as well as overseas applicants.
The Commission said it was advised through the media that a score sheet was prepared that showed a score of 76 for Persaud and 72 for Roxanne Myers.
The Sub-Committee said its work was considerably handicapped by the non-appearance before them of Myers, Marcia Crawford, Human Resources Manager, GECOM, and Justice Patterson.
“This failure cannot be described as anything other than deliberate and willful. At first, the excuse was that elections were pending and that they could not spare the time. After the elections were concluded, Justice Patterson (Ret’d) suggested that “perhaps you all have bring (sic) some terror into the lady.” Justice Patterson had earlier appeared before the Ethnic Relations Commission. Mr. Lowenfield the Chief Election Officer also appeared before us. No session lasted for more than an hour approximately. The failure of these persons to assist the Sub-Committee in this inquiry is nothing but a clear and inexcusable dereliction of their public duty.”
The ERC said that Myers knew that her appointment was one of the principal subjects of the enquiry.
“She was aware that her qualifications and experiences would be considered by the Sub-Committee. Ms. Marcia Crawford knew that the GECOM Human Resources management protocols and procedures lay at the very heart of the enquiry. Their refusal to assist the enquiry by their presence or by written submissions amounted to a deliberate hobbling of the Sub-Committee in the production of an informed report. It can also be seen as putting their own personal interests above their public duty.”
The ERC said that the Sub-Committee was left to do its own research, and that on paper, Persaud was by far the more suitable candidate for appointment to the post of Deputy CEO of GECOM.
In October, Myers was sworn in as the new DCEO.
GECOM commissioners for the opposition, Robeson Benn, Sase Gunraj and Bibi Shaddick had favoured Persaud, who held the post up to 2017 when his contract expired.
Using the existing process at the Commission, Chairman Patterson used his casting vote on the seven-member Commission, against Persaud’s appointment.
The number-two ranked applicant, who was Myers, received support from Patterson and the Government Commissioners, Desmond Trotman, Vincent Alexander and Charles Corbin.
according to GECOM Chair
The letter from Patterson is in response to Granger’s request that the commission provide him with a timeline for credible elections as well as an outline of its financial needs.
“I urge you to present your plans, programmes and financial needs which will guide my proclamation of a suitable date for elections,” Granger said in his correspondence to Justice Patterson on March 13.
The opposition has insisted that GECOM had enough time for the holding of elections within three months of the December 21 motion of no confidence in Parliament and certainly by the April 30th, 2019 expiration date for the current voter's list. Without the opposition agreeing to an extension of the 90-day deadline for the holding of elections, the government would be considered to be illegal after March 21st.
with AG, Jagdeo
A press release from Williams’s office said that a team of “high profile” representatives from the Carter Center visited the AG and discussed the current situation in Guyana, in light of the passage of the No-Confidence Motion. No details were provided on the outcome of the discussion.
The members of the Carter Center team were identified as David Carroll, Brett Lacy and Jason J. Carter.
The appearance of the Carter Center team is a sign that a last-ditch effort is being made for a solution before Thursday. The period for holding elections can only be extended if it is supported by a vote of two-thirds of the National Assembly.
The government and opposition are at odds over an early election date and if Thursday arrives and there is no extension, legal and political analysts say that the government would have to be considered as illegal. Stabroek News reported that the Carter Center team has met and plans to meet with key stakeholders in the country. There is no indication of a planned meeting with the seven-member Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM).
Two months after the December 21st no-confidence motion vote which triggered the fall of the government and the three-month timeframe for general elections, a team from the Carter Center came to Guyana for what it called an exploratory mission. The two representatives, Associate Director Lacy and Legal and Electoral Advisor Anne Marlborough, had met with government, the opposition and members of GECOM to gather information on preparations for the holding of polls.
GECOM’s Public Relations Officer Yolanda Warde had explained that the reason for the organisation’s presence. “They indicated that they have been following developments in the country in relation to the no-confidence motion and wanted to meet with the commission to find out about the laws governing preparations for general and regional elections. It was just for information – a fact finding mission – after which they would prepare a report for their seniors,” she had said.
Last September, following months of no engagement between Granger and Jagdeo, former US President Jimmy Carter, who heads the center, intervened, calling both sides to try to get them to hold discussions on the country and seemingly paved the way for the long-awaited talks.
However, that engagement did not get far.
Jagdeo last Thursday, while not proving details, informed that he had had a conversation with former United States President Carter the previous week. He informed too that Carter was expected to speak to President Granger. There has been no word from Granger’s camp as to whether there was indeed a conversation between the two. The president is currently in Cuba where he is undergoing treatment for Non-Hodgkin Lymphoma and is expected back in Guyana later this week.
Carter, 93, has had a long history of association with Guyana, dating back to the 1990s, when he brokered sweeping electoral reforms between the administration of the late President Desmond Hoyte and the opposition PPP. These reforms included counting at the place of poll and an expanded elections commission where the Chairman was selected on the basis of what came to be known as the Carter-Price formula. That formula was discarded in 2017 by President Granger.
To advertise in ICW call
Call 905-738-5005