In his latest ‘Future Notes’ column, Dr. Henry Jeffrey offers a critical assessment of the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) government’s long-standing approach to awarding government contracts and its perceived bias toward Guyanese of Indian descent. Dr. Jeffrey examines how the Affirmative Action policies introduced by former President Cheddi Jagan in the early 1990s have shaped the business landscape and created systemic imbalances that persist today.
Dr. Jeffrey recalls a conversation with President Jagan in the early 1990s, where the president expressed concern about the struggles Guyanese contractors, particularly those of African descent, faced when competing for large government contracts. Jagan had asked if the government could break large contracts into smaller packages to make it easier for local contractors to compete. Dr. Jeffrey acknowledged that while such a measure could help, it would require overcoming significant issues related to quality and cost. Ultimately, the decision was made to award more contracts to Guyanese contractors, with a notable increase in the wealth of Indian Guyanese business owners.
Fast-forwarding to 2022, Dr. Jeffrey cites statistics from the National Procurement and Tender Administration (NPTA), which show a disproportionate share of government contracts being awarded to businesses owned or operated by Guyanese of Indian descent. According to the data, 56.9% of the total contracts were awarded to such businesses, and 72.8% of the total value of contracts went to Indian-owned businesses. In comparison, businesses owned by Guyanese of African descent received only 10.4% of the contracts and 7.1% of the total contract value.
Dr. Jeffrey argues that these disparities stem from a history of preferential treatment for Indo-Guyanese contractors, which dates back to the 1990s when Jagan’s government aimed to empower the Indo-Guyanese population. However, Dr. Jeffrey asserts that this approach came at a significant cost to the country. He points out that the early beneficiaries of Affirmative Action lacked the necessary skills and resources, leading to substandard work on many projects. Despite this, the government continued to award contracts to these businesses, with no penalties for poor performance, which, according to Dr. Jeffrey, created a financial burden for taxpayers.
The former academic and political figure contends that while the PPP/C regime has claimed to have created more opportunities for Afro-Guyanese in the private sector, the reality of the situation remains starkly different. The disparity between the value of contracts awarded to businesses of Indian and African descent has only grown wider, and public sector salaries have been stagnating under the PPP/C government’s annual 5% wage increases. The allocation of funds to capital works, which often benefit Indian contractors, has increased, further exacerbating the wealth gap between the ethnic groups.
Dr. Jeffrey criticises the government’s response to these issues, citing Dr. Leslie Ramsammy’s defense of the PPP/C’s record on Afro-Guyanese involvement in business and contracting. Ramsammy claimed that the number of Afro-Guyanese contractors had increased since 2020, but Dr. Jeffrey dismisses this argument as overly simplistic. He contends that the PPP/C’s failure to address the deeper structural issues of ethnic inequality over the past three decades has compounded the problem.
According to Dr. Jeffrey, the PPP/C’s failure to create a truly inclusive and equitable system is evident in the way the government has handled national development. While the PPP/C’s policies have arguably favoured Indo-Guyanese businesses, they have simultaneously failed to provide sufficient opportunities for Afro-Guyanese, particularly in terms of land ownership and public service opportunities.
Dr. Jeffrey also takes issue with the idea that affirmative action alone can address these disparities. He notes that while Cheddi Jagan’s approach was rooted in principles of equity and inclusion, the long-term impact has been one of ethnic division and unequal opportunities. He argues that rather than advancing national development, the PPP/C’s agenda has largely been one of “race empowerment,” benefiting one ethnic group at the expense of another.
In a broader context, Dr. Jeffrey highlights the challenges of achieving national unity in Guyana, where ethnic divisions remain entrenched. He asserts that the PPP/C’s approach to governance has often been exclusionary, and this has only deepened the political and social divisions within the country. The PPP/C’s focus on maintaining the support of its Indo-Guyanese base has prevented the establishment of a truly inclusive national development strategy.
Dr. Jeffrey also draws attention to the need for a more balanced and transparent approach to governance—one that prioritises national development over ethnic empowerment. He argues that Guyana’s future depends on moving beyond the politics of division and building a more inclusive society that offers equal opportunities to all citizens, regardless of their ethnic background. Without significant changes to the way the PPP/C governs, Dr. Jeffrey warns, the cycle of inequality and ethnic division will continue to impede Guyana’s progress.
