Ramotar slams EU Ambassador for comments on sugar industry

…says conditions for EU support grants were met

By Kristen Macklingam

Former President Donald Ramotar has discredited the statement made by the Ambassador of the European Union (EU) to Guyana, Jernej Videti?, with regards to the withholding of budget support grants due to the EU’s suggestion that these grants were withheld because Guyana was not in compliance with the conditions required for disbursement.

According to Ramotar, he deems this “most regrettable”, adding that the Ambassador did not acquaint himself fully with the facts of this matter before pronouncing on it.

The former Head of State told Guyana Times International on Tuesday that in January of this year, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic Administration had publicised the communication between the EU and Guyana dated September 8, 2014 which clearly indicated that Guyana had met the eligibility criteria required to qualify for disbursements totalling €25,858,025.

It was further stated that the same delegation had recommended disbursement of this sum to the EU Budget Support Steering Committee in Brussels, which was due to meet on September 17, 2014, Ramotar noted.

“At the time of making that release, my Government pointed out that the EU Delegation had stated in writing that the conditions were fulfilled and had further stated in writing that they were recommending the disbursement of €25.9 million on the basis of their satisfaction with fulfilment of the required conditions,” Ramotar said on Monday.

He added that the time the statement was issued by the EU was January 2015, adding that Parliament was not prorogued until November 10, 2014. As such, the prorogation of Parliament could not possibly have been a basis for withholding a disbursement due since September 2014.

The former President added that Guyana had qualified for the grants and encountered the first delays in their disbursement as a result of concerns over the anti-money laundering legislation.

“I was advised that the reason for the delay was the impasse over the anti-money laundering legislation,” the former President explained.

He told Guyana Times International that there was no mention about the prorogation of Parliament and this did not come as a surprise because the prorogation period occurred much later. Also, no mention was made about any conditions not being met.

“The sole matter mentioned was the delay in passage of the anti-money laundering legislation. The indisputable fact is that Guyana did meet the conditions required for disbursement, the technical officers at the EU Delegation and the EU’s contracted technical experts were satisfied that these conditions