Category: Letters to the editor

A book review by Christopher Ram – Part 1

An Eventful Life, the autobiography of Dr. Maurice Odle, is among those occasional books that cast new light on facts and events with which a declining number of Guyanese are familiar, rekindling old prejudices and arousing nostalgia. This publication which will soon be available to Guyanese, does more than recount the work experiences of one of the Region’s leading economic academics and practitioners, a contemporary and intellectual soulmates of some of the Region’s top economists and leaders. It is a good read – an honest narrative of an individual who overcame personal challenges to earn his PhD in Economics from the London School of Economics (LSE) in 1973 and spent a long life characterised by political activism and professional excellence in Guyana, the Caribbean and on the international stage.

Dr. Odle was born in 1937 in colonial British Guiana and his early education gave no hint of the contribution he would later make as a respected economist and influential figure in Caribbean and what was then referred to as the Third World. The fifth of eight children to parents of contrasting dispositions in which a strict disciplinarian mother and a father who was less visible and influential, Odle entered Queen’s College where he continued what might be considered a solid but not exceptional student career after which he worked in various Ministries as a public servant. This phase witnessed the blackouts and rationing against the backdrop of World War 11, shaping his early life, social development and political awareness influenced by the growing social and political developments which led to universal adult suffrage and the suspension of Guyana’s constitution in 1953.  

Reluctantly Odle took up his six months’ long leave in the Mother Country, determined to return home. Later, persuaded to change his mind by siblings and friends, Odle elected not to return home but to pursue higher education in London which had seen a large influx of Caribbean and Commonwealth citizens exercising their rights as British nationals.

Following a stint at the Board of Trade and aided by some additional studies, Odle gained admission to LSE in 1961, a move which changed his life forever. At LSE, Odle immersed himself in a rigorous economics curriculum, broadening his understanding of political economy and international relations. He became an active participant in campus life, particularly as an office holder in the West Indian Society a feature of which was the hosting of international politicians and academics, as well as organising cultural events. Odle narrates an incident in London in which he had a tense exchange with Mr. Forbes Burnham which Odle described as disturbing and warranting inclusion in the book. This period also saw Odle engaging in political activism, participating in protests against apartheid and the Rhodesian Unilateral Declaration of Independence (UDI), all influencing his left-wing inclination.

His experiences at LSE and in London broadened his worldview, deepened his understanding of global issues, strengthened his commitment to addressing development challenges in the Caribbean and most importantly caused him to rub shoulders with some of the Region’s intellectual giants in the pre-UWI era, such as Clive Thomas, Norman Girvan, Alistair McIntyre and the world-famous Walter Rodney. 

For those who endured life as an immigrant in the UK, the expression  Life in London seems to be a cruel joke and throughout his studies, Odle faced significant financial challenges, balancing his academic pursuits with various jobs to support himself and his growing family. Having myself done weekend work at Lyons at Piccadilly Circus, I think I understand his comment about washing dishes at Lyons in Regent Road, London.

After completing his MSc at the London School of Economics, Odle secured a lectureship at Enfield College of Technology (later Middlesex University) in England. However, the call of home proved irresistible, and in 1967, Odle returned to the newly independent Guyana to take up a position at the University of Guyana (UG).

Odle’s time at UG was marked by both academic pursuits and political activism. He quickly rose through the ranks, becoming Head of the Department of Economics and later Dean of the Faculty of Social Sciences. His research during this period focused on various aspects of economics, including monetary policy, public expenditure and technology transfer.

The political climate in Guyana during the late 1960s and 1970s was tense, with growing authoritarianism under Forbes Burnham’s government. Conditioned by his early life and the growing political consciousness of the era, Odle became involved in political activities, serving as President of the UG Staff Association and participating in the publication of ‘Ratoon’, a critical pamphlet addressing social and political issues.

Throughout this tumultuous period, Odle managed to maintain his academic focus, producing significant research and publications. He completed his PhD from London University in 1973, becoming a full Professor and Director of UG’s Institute of Development Studies in 1974.

A pivotal moment in this period was the denial of a professorship to Walter Rodney, a prominent historian and activist. Odle was part of the committee that reviewed this decision, which was ultimately politically motivated. The subsequent political tension culminated in Rodney’s assassination in 1980, an event that deeply affected Odle and the course of politics in Guyana.

To be continued

By Christopher Ram & Associates – August 16, 2024

Following concerns expressed about the reliability of the records of the NIS and the mounting number of complaints against the body, the Government announced several initiatives to clear the backlog while Budget Speech 2024 claimed that the Government will offer eligible persons with between 700 and 749 contributions a one-off grant.

Properly understood, the one-off grant is nothing more than the current legal framework provides. It has not addressed an outdated, harsh and unfair arrangement. In the Speech, the Minister also referred to the 14,000 claims outstanding at August 2020 which had been resolved. Our experience tells a less positive story. Here are a few examples.

You will recall that we met in November 2023, after the Court had ruled that the National Insurance Scheme pay an NIS pension to a 73-year-old former employee of Toolsie Persaud Limited. Apparently, under pressure from the Government, the NIS appealed the decision and on 26 January of this year, the Full Court of the High Court referred the matter back to the Trial Judge. The matter is still pending while Mr. Zainul is deprived of a modest pension for which he contributed for over decades. Mr. Zainul is with us again today.

The other person here with us today is Ms. Julia Clarke, aged sixty-eight who, according to the records of the NIS, has 739 contributions – eleven short of the 750 to qualify for an NIS pension. Ms. Clarke disputes the poorly kept records of the NIS, providing evidence that her employment with one employer alone, qualifies her for a pension and not a one-off grant. Like Mr. Zainul, Ms. Clarke submitted to the NIS copies of her pay slips.

Sadly, these are not isolated cases. We have been trying to help another person who worked with the Special Constabulary in the late seventies, but the Special Constabulary cannot locate records which they had once admitted to having. And of course, the poor man cannot find one person, let alone two, who can give a sworn statement that they worked together at the Constabulary some forty years ago. Like so many employers from the state interventionist era, the employers no longer exist.

As a final example, a case was also brought to our attention where persons willing to sign affidavits were scared out of doing so after being cautioned about their failing memories.

Notwithstanding the promises by the Administration, the letters in the press indicate a continuing high level of public dissatisfaction with the NIS, largely due to past inefficiencies and failures by both the NIS and employers, as its former General Manager Patrick R. Martinborough admitted in his book The NIS in Guyana – Its Conception, Development and Future.

Those associated with the NIS and its administration must recognise that the payment of a pension is less about insurance and more about social security while the receipt of a pension is often the difference between poverty and extreme poverty. The ‘floodgate’ argument used in the Zainul matter is unsupported by facts and completely ignores the real human cost to workers who have contributed for decades.

It is incumbent on the Administration to restore public confidence in the NIS by making it more transparent, accountable and responsive to members of the public generally and to contributors and claimants in particular. The conditions for long term benefits under the Scheme have not changed since the Scheme was established in 1969.

Insistence on strict, inflexible and outdated rules which seek to transfer the responsibility for the maintenance of records from the NIS to workers is unlawful, unreasonable, unjust and inhumane. After 55 years, it is more than time for the Government to commission a comprehensive review with a view to modernising the Scheme, providing adequate security and fairer outcomes.

The advent of oil has provided the Scheme with both a financial and actuarial windfall that allows for more generous benefits, and to address inequities. We call on the Administration to immediately publish its Annual Reports and Financial Statements for the years 2022 and 2023 and the long overdue Actuarial Report. It is ironic that the NIS, which holds contributors to strict standards and legal compliance, does not think that such standards apply to itself.

We implore the Government to Immediately withdraw its appeal against the court’s decision in the Zainul matter and to review cases like Julia Clarke’s in an enlightened, humane manner. We also call for the immediate implementation of a sliding scale or partial pension system for persons who have made more than 500 contributions, the equivalent of ten years.

The NIS is one issue that can be objectively and impartially addressed outside of political affiliations or legal technicalities. It is about our values as a society and our commitment to those who have worked hard for their entire productive lives. We cannot stand idly by while our fellow citizens, who have contributed so much, are left without support in their golden years.

I want to show my personal commitment to the cause by making a small token of goodwill to Ms. Clarke and Mr. Zainul by donating to each of them on an ongoing basis, the equivalent of an NIS Old Age Pension out of my NIS and Old Age Pension.

I will be happy to answer your questions.

Christopher Ram
16 August 2024

Dear Editor,

Pension Funds, Institutional and even small shareholders  in Banks DIH Limited have been thrown into turmoil as a result of the arrogance and inexcusable insensivity of the directors of the company, the legacy of Guyana’s pioneering entrepreneur Peter D’Aguiar. For months, those shareholders and the public were confused by the decision of the directors to make the food and beverage giant into a private company, away from public scrutiny. To achieve this Machiavellian objective, shareholders of the company were expected to exchange their shares in the company for an equivalent number of shares in a newly established holding company, Banks DIH Holdings Inc.

Then followed a lawsuit brought by the two companies against the Guyana Securities Council – the Regulator  of public companies – for its failure or refusal to delist the old operating company and list the new company as the public company. The Court rejected the application and ordered the companies to provide the Council with the information it required within a specified timeline and a deadline for a decision by the Council to respond to the companies.

Earlier reports in the press indicated that the Court ruled that the Securities Council was in its right to demand information on the transaction to enable the Council to make a proper decision. The date set out in the Court’s decision was 8 September 2024. There is no public information that the Council has given the companies its approval.

Yet, in surprise announcements in the national newspapers on Thursday and Friday of this week, the companies published two advertisements: one to shareholders and the other to “To whom it may concern” respectively. While the notices are confusing in their details, what is clear is that the directors have deemed the shares held by every holder of shares in the beverage company to be invalid, i.e., until a shareholder exchanges her/his current shares for new ones, those shares have no value. In other words, shareholders are deprived of their property which they thought the Guyana Constitution protects.

It is true that the views of the minority cannot prevail over a decision by the majority, but Company Law has made gigantic strides in the protection of minority shareholders, including a buyout of dissident shareholders. But I do find it hard to believe that the directors of both companies are so simple-minded to think that an exchange of an equal quantity of shares between companies carries an equivalent value. Think of it: even countries which engage in barter use value as the medium of exchange.

To confirm that frightening situation, the Guyana Stock Exchange, in a publication in the press of August 3 has suspended trading in Banks DIH shares with grave implications for all shareholders. I think it most unfortunate that the Guyana Securities did not respond publicly to the initial advertisement by the company which not only sought to preempt the decision of the Council but also seems to be in contempt of the Court’s ruling in the Council’s favour.

The decision by the two companies is irrational, abhorrent, unlawful, contemptuous and unconstitutional. Our country is replete with instances where persons refuse to act even when their interest is threatened. This is evidently such a case, and shareholders cannot let this pass.

In the more general to whom it may concern notice, emphasis seems to be placed on. She held interest or shares held on lean by institutions, requiring such institutions to return the share certificates to facilitate the issuance of the new shares.

It might have escaped attention that that was effectively backdating a deprivation of property guaranteed by the constitution of Guyana.

To add to the confusion, this Saturday’s edition of the Stabroek news, in addition to the republication of the general notification by the Company concerning shares held in in trust and on lien the Guyana Stock exchange Announced that in the circumstances of Banks DIH holdings Inc. issuing a newspaper notices to the effect that banks GIS Limited shares will no longer be valid effective July 19, 2024, stock exchange has suspended trading in BIH shares. It probably comes as no surprise to everyone, but to the directors and officers of BANKS DIH Limited, that the confusion brought about by the irrational decision whereby the beverage and hospitality giant is converted into private company whose shareholdings are transferred to a new hauling company.

Dear Editor,

At the request of the Ukrainian President, the Swiss government organised a Peace Summit last weekend. The Summit, attended by around 100 countries and multilateral organisations from around the world, had as its purpose, finding a path to peace in Ukraine which for over two years has been battling to repel the Russian invasion of its territory.

Attendees included leading countries of the world such as Brazil, Canada, France, France, Germany, India, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, the UK and the USA, as well as organisations such as the EU, OAS and the United Nations. Russia which had opposed the idea of such a Summit was not invited and there is no indication that its enablers China, Iran and North Korea were invited. For completeness, it is noted that several of these named  countries did not sign the Summit’s closing statement. That however is not entirely relevant to the purpose of this letter.

Guyana was not among the countries attending the Summit, meaning that it was a missed opportunity by the Government to engage in bilateral discussions with other countries on the Venezuelan threat to Guyana. Guyana must recognise that no amount of military spending will allow the country to repel any invasion by that country. In as much that we were impressed by the US fighter jets flying across Guyana as a show of strength and support, Guyana’s best guarantee in its controversy with Venezuela is to canvas and garner diplomatic support of countries that matter. Guyana shares with Ukraine and Taiwan the danger of being overrun by a neighbouring bully.

The country has not one but two foreign ministers and has recently made two diplomatic appointments to Europe. The failure must therefore be seen not as unavailability of personnel but of policy and intent. Indeed, having delegated to his Vice President the task of managing the fallout from the US announcement of sanctions against its former friends and members, President Ali should have been free to represent Guyana at the Summit.  

In my view, Guyana should be seeking membership of the Inter-American Treaty of Reciprocal Assistance (the Rio Treaty) signed in 1947. The essential features of this Treaty are similar to those of the NATO Agreement signed in 1949, both providing for mutual defence, collective security and the peaceful resolution of disputes. Venezuela is a member of the Treaty having reactivated its membership in 2019 after a withdrawal in 2012. It may object to Guyana’s application, but we must at least try.

Christopher Ram

A book review by Christopher Ram – May 28, 2024

Introduction

This is the sixth and final part of the review of Moses Nagamootoo’s autobiographical account of his political career starting in 1961 until the fall of the Coalition Government in 2020, of which he was the Prime Minister.

Under the title The New Normal, chapter 23 traces the history of the relationship between Guyanese of African and Indian descent, claiming that there was racial discrimination of both sides of the major ethnic divide which existed long before the 1953 elections. The chapter notes as an incontestable fact, that Indians suffered from racial violence, discrimination and alienation under the PNC rule. It highlights his parents’ choice to marry under Christian rites, then predominantly Afro Guyanese,  even as they continued their Hindu religious practices, and the role and contribution of the Afro village nurse and schoolteachers. Controversially, he sees as a response to the “anti-Indian dilemma,” the formation of the Indian Peoples’ Revolutionary Associates (IPRA) by Moses Bhagwan, described as Jagan’s successor-in-waiting, and the teaming-up of Dr. Fenton Ramsahoye, Doodnauth Singh, Ayube McDoom and Gunraj Kumar to form the Guyana Anti-Discrimination Movement.

Burnham policies and elections

According to Nagamootoo, the import substitution policies of Forbes Burnham, the struggle for trade union recognition by sugar workers, and the closure of the Cuban rice market, formed part of the racially charged backdrop for distrust between the two communities. In this context he also recalls the transfer of a murder charge from the mainly Indo-Guyanese Corentyne to the mainly Afro-Guyanese Georgetown in which Arnold Rampersaud was charged with the murder of an Afro-Guyanese policeman, increasing the odds of a conviction. Nagamootoo gives little or no recognition to the role of the multiracial WPA and Dr. Walter Rodney in helping to secure the acquittal of Rampersaud.

Demonstrating the ethnic cleavage in electoral politics in Guyana, Nagamootoo writes that the PNC received just over 40% of the votes cast in 1992, the same it got in 1964 when transparent elections were last held. Similarly, the support for the PPP was also unchanged, while the WPA, whose activism had resulted in widespread multiracial support in its campaign against the PNC, and for a government of national unity, received little support in those elections.

The chapter closes with comments on the emergence of “resource nationalism” where corrupt management and appropriation of the wealth of countries by foreign companies have led to the intervention of the army. Yet, in the very next chapter, he writes of “misconceptions of and about the process that ended in the 2016 petroleum.”

The hardliners

Even as he looks forward in chapter 24, Nagamootoo reminds readers of the infamous “kith and kin”, and “slo fire, mo fire” comments by Desmond Hoyte, former President as well as Leader of the Opposition, as being both “irresponsible and repugnant”. Interestingly, the name Hoyte does not appear anywhere in the book, nor does Hamilton Greene. On the other hand, he notes that his own publication The Political Situation And The Way Forward In Guyana was consigned to the bonfire by PPP hardliners, and that when he suggested to Janet Jagan the possibility of Cheddi Jagan being buried or his ashes interred in the Botanical Gardens, her response was: “No, no Moses they will dig up his bones and drag them in the streets of Georgetown”.

On the issue of Constitutional Reform, the book notes the work of the Ramkarran Commission (1999) and Nigel Hughes Sub-committee on Constitutional Reform as having started a dynamic process, but which needs political will to achieve the necessary changes, especially for a possible government of national unity, a most unlikely prospect. Yet, he expresses, double-handedly, that President Ali would keep his many promises and beat back “the perception that he is just a figurehead in the leadership troika”, which possibly includes the Prime Minister.

Chapter 25 returns to internal PPP matters under the caption Crooked Selection Process, the purpose of which was to give a full explanation for his walking from the PPP. The chapter features a letter he wrote to the General Secretary of the party in response to an invitation for him to address the Executive Committee of the Party. There were clearly irreconcilable differences.

My take on the book

While truth is indeed of virtue, for those who occupy the political space, it hardly ever wins friends. In the case of Nagamootoo’s Dear Land of Guyana, nothing can be more truthful. Whether he intended it or not, he is particularly harsh on several persons, including those who came lately to the PPP, and those with whom he had differences. These, and others, should find this book of interest, if not comfort. Nagamootoo accuses the PPP of engaging in military training; of rigging internal elections; of destroying the dreams of its founder leader Cheddi Jagan; and has exposed a different side of the late Janet Jagan.

The book is a contribution to the country’s political history by a contemporary writer, in his style and as he sees himself. It is not without its controversies and might therefore have been expected to generate debate and response from the persons named, even if only to defend their reputation. That has not happened. If no one else, President Granger owes it to the nation to confirm or deny the role of the Americans in the conclusion of the 2020 elections debacle.