Support Village Voice News With a Donation of Your Choice.
And like echolalia parrots, the tunnel vision enclosure they exited, to brainlessly repeat as instructed. Where foremost, was the elite Uitvlugt University valedictorian, struggling to articulate the most elementary-The people denied reparation aren’t enduring discrimination. Hereinafter, was the Prime Token, who of self-hate, gleefully whips any reflecting him. As a result, distrusted he was, and so was his message- Discrimination allegations are being politically weaponised. Thereafter, was the Blasphemous Bishop, who with a Freudian slip, confessed roads not repaired are remediable with a PPP vote. Then from afar, was the ataxic silhouetted figure of Dr. Alcoholic Singh, who overcome by slurred speech, demanded the ethanol, when he meant the evidence.
However, despite robust efforts, the National Hoodwinking excercise was an abysmal failure. As a result, Fabricating Kissoon, in usual goblin mode, redefined the truth- King Kong like discrimination are all lies. But discredited he is, as one paid to pen, thus at the right price, would’ve penned a narrative of Dr. Martin Luther King being White. However, throughout the charade, one was unheard, until news broke, trying for their first, an extended honeymoon was being relished with Su. Thus, an encapsulation of their position, our discrimination is imaginatively nonexistent.
The evidence
But our discrimination, akin to stepchildren abused in their parents’ home, is alive and real. As a result, many far and near, bore witness, thus spoke to counsel. But PPP denied, asserting the masses saw what never existed; victims of mass hallucination. However, none concurred, convicting the pathological liars, on account of their evidently elongated noses. Which meant, reprimands they faced. A need for inclusivity. Racism shan’t be tolerated. A need for inclusivity. No to discrimination. A need for inclusivity. That many spoke. That Ambassadors spoke. That Congressmen spoke. That the US Vice President spoke. That the Secretary of State spoke. That the NY Attorney General spoke. Nonetheless, PPP remained unshifted, of an obstinate Egyptian mindset, with the audacity to demand evidence.
Then the evidence was brought to their eyes, chronicled in the double V’s, under the caption “An ethnic analysis of contracts awarded by the National Procurement and Tender Administration.” Of which, that delivered was familiar, even to the discrimination deniers.
• 56.9% of contracts awarded were to businesses owned or operated by Guyanese of Indian descent
• 72.8% of the total dollar value of awards went to businesses owned or operated by Guyanese of Indian descent
• 10.4% of contracts awarded were to businesses owned or operated by Guyanese of African descent
• 7.1% of the total dollar value of awards went to businesses owned or operated by Guyanese of African descent
• Contracts were awarded 5 times as often to contractors of Indian descent as those of African descent
• The dollar value of contracts awarded to Guyanese firms with Indian descent ownership or management was 10 times greater than that awarded to firms owned or managed by Guyanese of African descent
• According to the 2012 census, Guyanese of Indian descent represent 39.8% of the population and Guyanese of African descent 29.3%
• It is interesting to note that the value of tenders awarded to foreign companies exceeds that rewarded to Guyanese of African descent
• “There is clear evidence of ethnic discrimination in the award of tenders in Guyana. The National Procurement and Tender Administration (NPTA) lists on its website Guyana’s annual tender awards and an analysis of these awards provided a clear pattern of discrimination. Companies owned or operated by Guyanese of Indian descent are awarded contracts at a rate far exceeding their representation in the broader demographic statistics of the country. Additionally, this pattern is even more evident when the dollar value of the contracts is considered”
Methodology
Thus, the methodology- How the research was undertaken.
• “288 awards listed on NPTA’s website, where ownership or management of tender awardees could be determined, were examined. Awards examined were from the year 2022. The ethnicity of owners or managers of businesses for these awards was first determined, as well as whether they are local or foreign businesses, and then an analysis [was] conducted. This was done through 3 methods:
1. Business names that were of South Asian origin were identified.
2. Where business names were generic in nature, news articles where owners and managers were mentioned were identified,
3. Photographic evidence from contract signing ceremonies where businesses were identified was utilised.
Businesses owned by Guyanese of African descent, or other ethnicities, were similarly identified. Businesses that are internationally owned and operated were also noted.”
The forewarning
And the forewarning, a discredited PPP will seek to denigrate the discrimination findings. However, with the credible research methodology, such an endeavour is likely to be futile.
As a consequence, they will likely argue, the Contract Awarding processes are above board, transparent and blinded, with the best bidders, as would be expected, ultimately winning. Where they will further argue, Afro-Guyanese failed, having not satisfied the criteria. However, with minimal critical thinking, such a fallacious argument is easily repudiated- Why are Indo-Guyanese disproportionately winning contracts?
And herein is the answer- For over 25yrs, Afro-Guyanese faced economic marginalisation, even as PPP economically empowered, through contract allocations, supporting Indo-Guyanese. However, initially they lacked the requisite skills and machinery, which meant, their work was consistently substandard (Fip Motilal Amailia Falls Hydro Project). But PPP agenda wasn’t Nation development, rather they were of race empowerment. As a result, inferior quality work went without penalty, creating a financial burden for tax-payers. The result is, dating back to 1992, the PPP Indo-Guyanese base was provided a 25yrs head start, over Afro-Guyanese. Thus, even with transparent processes, a 25yr unfair advantage to Indo-Guyanese, mean Afro-Guyanese are inherently disadvantaged.
In fact, a similar phenomenon is evident in post-Apartheid South Africa, which mandated positive action and other restitutive policies, for the disadvantaged Blacks. However, PPP will boast of One Guyana, but their One Guyana represent the one ethnic group being empowered.
