Political opposition or obstruction? – a perspective by Harry Gill (Part 1)

The former British prime minister, the great Sir Winston Churchill once said, “The duty of the opposition is to oppose.” There is no doubt that to oppose is part of keeping the administration accountable for its actions. Ensuring checks and balances is fundamental to democracy.
The opposition’s main role is to expose weaknesses in government policies and remain a vigilant watchdog over the action and inaction of the government by playing the oversight role: ensuring that the actions of government are in the best interest of the people.
The two bills relating to the Amaila Falls Hydro Electric Project (AFHEP), presented by the government last Thursday in Parliament, required such scrutiny. Were these legislative amendments in the best interest of the Guyanese people? And if so, why were they shot down?
Benefits
Despite the blunder of awarding Makeshwar “Fip” Motilall the initial contract to build the AFHEP service road, there is no doubt that Guyana stands to benefit tremendously from a cheaper, more reliable source of electricity: the nation will save an estimated Gy$ 40 billion annually by reducing the importation of fossil fuel now being used; residential electricity rates will be reduced by 25-40 per cent; blackouts will be significantly reduced or become extinct; overall production within the manufacturing and commercial sectors will be increased; burglaries of homes during blackouts will be reduced; schoolchildren will have more productive hours to study; the loss of refrigerators and other electrical appliances caused by unstable electricity will become a thing of the past; and Guyana will be able to attract more foreign investors that would create jobs for more of our nationals.
Already, we have seen a significant increase in the production cost of this project from US$ 675 million, to US$ 840 million. This is tied to a rise in commodities, the appreciation of the Chinese currency against the U. S. dollar, and the Debt Political Risk Insurance costing US$ 55.7 million as is demanded by the Chinese.
Obviously, they know just how uncooperative and obstructive the opposition in Guyana can be.
Financial closure for the project hinges on the approval of a US$ 175 million loan from the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB). A major concern of the IDB is the assurance that the Guyana Power and Light (GPL) has the ability to manage the project and to make the necessary repayments. Hence the motion to raise the debt ceiling to secure the IDB loan.
Funding for the project comes from a variety of sources.
The Guyana government is committed to US$ 100 million in equity. This comes from the US$ 250 million Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) initiatives such as the Memorandum of Understanding signed with Norway. It is being used in part for the construction of the access road.
Loan approval
With the IDB’s approval of the loan for the hydroelectric project, it is also expected that the World Bank would be more open to the release of Norway funds.
The China Development Bank will be providing some US$ 413.2 million, and the IDB US$ 175 million. Sithe Global Group will be providing US$ 152.1 million, bringing the total project cost to US$ 840.3 million.
However, the longer this project takes to be built, the anticipated increase in the cost of construction materials may very well make it unprofitable to pursue. As a Build Own Operate and Transfer (BOOT) project, the hydroelectric plant will be fully owned by the Guyanese people after 20 years, and is expected to last for at least 75 years, and quite possibly much longer.
As it relates to the critical nature of the financial closure, Sithe Global Chief Executive Officer Bruce Wrobel said should this not become a reality soon, Guyana could see the project being put on the back burner for the next five to 10 years.
Time is of the essence
Time is of the essence, but one would never know that, judging from the joint opposition’s reckless, unpatriotic, and vindictive vote against a bill to amend the hydroelectric act and a motion to raise the debt ceiling to secure the US$ 175 million loan from the IDB for this project. This was done with full knowledge that a July 30 deadline looms for submission to the IDB as a prerequisite for the funding for the Amaila project.
In an effort to justify his party’s vindictive and irresponsible act, and contrary to admitting his support for the AFHEP, leader of the Alliance For Change (AFC), Khemraj Ramjattan blamed PPP/ C parliamentarians for not supporting the four local government bills that were presented before, and said in a press conference, “The bullyism and attempt to dominate the National Assembly by the minority PPP/ C government forced the AFC to withhold its support for the hydroelectric bill.”
Is that so, Ramjattan? Since when does a retaliatory vote that holds the country to ransom, a justifiable act? I have no doubt that most Guyanese, and indeed those in the diaspora who funded the AFC campaign for “change” during the last election, would strongly reject this explanation from a man who aspires to be the leader of this nation.
Indeed, this view was eloquently expressed by an AFC supporter, Reza Holladar, who wrote in a letter: “Please allow me some space in your newspaper to explain the total disappointment myself and colleagues feel with the party of our choice at the 2011 election. We are young professionals, the so-called future of Guyana and we truly believed Moses Nagamootoo and Ramjattan when they declared that they are going to usher in a new type of politics, one that is based on principles, with the young generation at the centre of Guyana’s development.
“We believed them, switched from the PPP/ C and campaigned feverishly for the AFC, sparing no time and resource, because we truly believed that Guyana finally has a chance of creating a new political culture with young people at the centre of it all. We were sure that with the AFC holding the balance of power in the Parliament, the era of constructive engagement would become an important part of Guyana’s politics, and that the national, and not individual or group interests, will determine the order of the day.
Disappointments
“But alas, we were in for great disappointments. Our first disappointment was when our leaders Nagamootoo and Ramjattan abused our votes and supported the residents of Linden demand for free electricity without giving a thought to the fact that it is we who are saddled with the burden of Linden’s electricity bill.
“The second disappointment was when the AFC instigated and encouraged the Agricola mayhem. The third was the chopping of all of the government’s major development projects from which the young generation stands to benefit the most.
“And now, the biggest disappoint of them all, the denial of all Guyanese, especially the young generation, of the lifeline of development – cheap, reliable and abundant energy, by voting down the hydro project. We could have expected anything, but not this, especially since there is not one single valid reason for this action.”
Holladar added, “We used to be proud to be associated with the AFC, but now with the voting down of the hydro project, we are ashamed to be so identified. How can Nagamootoo, Ramjattan, and other leaders of the AFC, who promised the young people of Guyana a better future, by their irrational and vindictive actions seek to destroy the very foundations upon which that promised future must be built?”
Obstructive force
And I may add, how can these people sleep at nights knowing that they are guilty of not fulfilling the role the electorate gave them – that of a constructive opposition, rather than the obstructive force they have now become.
The AFC was not alone in this defiant and unpatriotic act. David Granger’s People’s National Congress (PNC)/ A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) demonstrated once again that because they failed while in power, they are not prepared to give the PPP/ C an opportunity to succeed.
This is evident by the lack of support given to major national development projects such as AFHEP, the Cheddi Jagan International Airport (CJIA) expansion, and the Marriott Hotel.
Hell, they even blocked security measures that would prevent money laundering and make Guyana safe from criminals. How much more irresponsible can they be? The PNC/ APNU is determined not to support any project that would further enhance the popularity of the ruling PPP/ C, regardless of how much the entire nation stands to benefit.