Dear Editor,
Listening to the debate of the 2026 budget was an exposure to crass bilge, revisionism and vulgarity. An appropriate headline for an article on the debate would be Lord Nelson`s –King Liar: “Yu hear Lie, that is lie”. In that lying competition James Bond was a prime exponent. The PNC Government under Burnham`s leadership instituted scholarships for citizens to study for the law degree and the Certificate in Legal Education. The PPP, in 1992, initially continued the offering.
In his contribution to the debate on the budget Bond thanked the PPP for granting him such an opportunity as if they instituted that policy and granted him a personal favour rather than it being the fulfilment of the right to free education as instituted under the Burnham regime.
In doing so, he sought to erase from our memories the PPP`s termination of such scholarships for law degrees and the Certificate of Legal Education under the Bharrat Jagdeo regime, and the deleterious effect on hundreds of students, who could no longer proceed to Barbados to complete the degree, and go on to the Hugh Wooden Law school to acquire the professional qualification.
And, for those who could afford to pay to enroll in the Law School, they were made to pay the economic rate, in order to pursue studies at the Hugh Wooden Law School, because the PPP Government stopped paying its contribution to the revenue line of the School, hence Guyanese students could no longer benefit from paying the lower fee that students from contributing countries were charged.
The APNU Government reinstituted scholarships for citizens who wished to pursue law degrees and the Certificate in Legal Education.
That is but one exposure of Bond`s affinity with Lord Nelsons` King Liar. His contention that the PPP offered him contracts thus enabling him to become an “entrepreneur” is another.
Bond ventured into business when the APNU was in Government. He acquired large tracts of land and engaged in reselling land (this is public knowledge); and opened an entertainment establishment in Melanie (this is also public knowledge), all of which predated his so-call rescue by the PPP.
His contention that the PPP granted him contracts raises the question as to whether those contracts were favours or contracts acquired through due process. He might well be embracing the Vice President`s mantra: ‘looking after my people’, which is the granting of favours to kit and kin, while others are denied the opportunity. Bond may well be an exponent of that practice which has been elevated as the preeminent culture of governance, in the conduct of public affairs, in Guyana.
What is at stake here is the propagation of ‘Bad Governance’ from the hallowed halls where Good Governance should be articulated and enforced.
Yours truly,
Vincent Alexander
