‘Minister Bharrat Is Wrong — Guyanese Deserve Direct Oil Benefits’ -Forde

By Roysdale Forde S.C- The recent pronouncement by the Honourable Minister of Natural Resources, Vickram Bharrat, that direct cash transfers from Guyana’s oil revenues constitute a “failed model” and would render the nation “poorer than it started” is not merely an economic misjudgment; it is a profound moral failing. This statement represents a stark betrayal of the trust reposed in the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) by the Guyanese people, who were promised tangible benefits from the nation’s newfound oil wealth. Such rhetoric is not a mere policy adjustment; it is an abandonment of a solemn covenant with the citizenry, particularly the marginalised and working-class families who dared to hope that Guyana’s oil boom would usher in an era of shared prosperity.

Recall that during its campaign, the PPP/C dangled the prospect of direct cash transfers and equitable wealth distribution before a populace weary of economic hardship. These pledges resonated deeply with families grappling with stagnant wages, soaring utility costs, and the unrelenting burden of inflation. Still, with oil revenues now flowing into the nation’s coffers, the administration’s pivot – epitomised by Minister Bharrat’s dismissive remarks – reveals an extremely troubling reality: the promises of prosperity were, for many, little more than political bait. This reversal does not merely undermine public confidence; it erodes the very foundation of democratic accountability, leaving the most vulnerable to bear the weight of broken promises.

Minister Bharrat’s assertion that direct cash transfers are inherently flawed is not only misleading but contradicts global evidence. Numerous nations, renowned for their fiscal prudence and economic foresight, have successfully implemented mechanisms to distribute oil wealth directly to their citizens, balancing immediate relief with long-term stability.

Consider Alaska, where the Permanent Fund Dividend (PFD) has, since 1982, provided annual payments to every resident, offering financial respite while preserving robust fiscal reserves. Norway, steward of the world’s largest sovereign wealth fund, leverages its oil revenues to enhance public services, infrastructure, and intergenerational savings, ensuring that every citizen benefits.

The United Arab Emirates channels its oil wealth into subsidised education, healthcare, housing, and interest-free loans, fostering a social contract that prioritises citizen welfare. These models – far from impoverishing their nations – demonstrate that equitable wealth distribution can coexist with economic discipline. If these nations, lauded for their governance, can deliver such benefits, why does Guyana’s leadership deem its own people unworthy of similar consideration?

The answer lies not in economics but in the politics of exclusion. In Guyana, the spoils of oil wealth appear reserved for a privileged few; those with proximity to power who benefit from lucrative state contracts, patronage networks, and opaque dealings. Meanwhile, ordinary citizens face a relentless cost-of-living crisis, with escalating utility bills, unaffordable rents, and prohibitive interest rates stifling aspirations for homeownership or entrepreneurial ventures.

The government’s refusal to implement direct cash transfers reflects a deeper truth: those in power have little need for such measures, as their allies already enjoy the fruits of Guyana’s wealth. The masses, however, are urged to “wait for development” or accept a narrative that equates their empowerment with national ruin.

To invoke the wisdom of Thomas Sankara, the revolutionary leader of Burkina Faso: “He who feeds you, controls you.” The PPP/C’s reluctance to share Guyana’s oil wealth with its people suggests an intent to maintain control rather than foster empowerment. This is not governance in the public interest but a calculated prioritisation of elite interests over the common good.

Minister Bharrat’s remarks expose a dangerous disconnect between Guyana’s political elite and its citizenry. The widening chasm between those who govern and those they purport to serve is evident in the stark contrast between the prosperity of a select few and the struggles of the many. As Angela Davis poignantly stated, “I am no longer accepting the things I cannot change. I am changing the things I cannot accept.” The Guyanese people must reject the narrative of scarcity amid abundance; a narrative that justifies hoarding wealth at the top while families languish in poverty. The oil beneath Guyana’s soil belongs to its people, not merely its powerbrokers.

This is not a plea for handouts but a demand for justice. Guyana’s oil wealth is a national patrimony, not the private preserve of boardrooms or ministerial offices. A transparent, equitable, and rigorously overseen system of direct cash transfers can deliver immediate relief to struggling families while empowering them to invest in education, small businesses, or home improvements. Such a policy would not deplete the nation’s coffers but enrich its human capital, fostering resilience and opportunity.

A nation’s wealth is not measured solely by its bank balances but by the well-being of its people. Guyana stands at a crossroads: it can choose a path of justice, ensuring that every citizen shares in the promise of oil wealth, or it can perpetuate a system where prosperity is the privilege of the few. The latter is not merely a policy failure; it is a betrayal of the Guyanese dream.

Let us build a Guyana that is rich in both oil and justice. Anything less is unconscionable.