A national clean-up initiative launched by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP/C) administration is facing sharp criticism from former minister and parliamentarian Annette Ferguson, who argues the programme raises “serious concerns” about governance, transparency, and respect for local democratic institutions—concerns that have also been echoed by other stakeholders, including the Georgetown Mayor and City Council.
In a letter published in Village Voice News, Ferguson—who previously served under the A Partnership for National Unity + Alliance for Change (APNU+AFC) coalition government—questioned whether the campaign represents a meaningful policy intervention or a politically driven initiative that sidelines constitutionally mandated local authorities.
“The ongoing National Clean-Up Campaign being advanced by the PPP/C administration raises serious concerns regarding governance, accountability, and respect for Guyana’s local democratic framework,” she wrote.
Concerns Over Centralisation
Ferguson argued that the campaign appears to bypass Local Government Authorities (LGAs), which are legally tasked with maintaining sanitation within their jurisdictions. She warned that such an approach risks undermining the autonomy of municipalities and neighbourhood democratic councils—a position that has also been raised by members of the Georgetown City Council, who have complained of increasing central government encroachment.
“The Constitution and the statutory framework… clearly envisage that municipalities and neighbourhood democratic councils are primarily responsible… Yet, the current approach appears to bypass these institutions,” she stated.
Her concerns come amid broader tensions between central government and local democratic organs, particularly in Georgetown, where disputes over authority and control have intensified in recent months.
Military Involvement Raises Questions
The campaign has also drawn attention for its reliance on members of the Guyana Defence Force (GDF), who have been deployed to haul garbage, clear parapets, and clean drains in several communities.
While the government has framed the involvement of the GDF as a demonstration of national mobilisation, critics—including Ferguson and city officials—argue that such tasks fall squarely within the remit of civilian municipal services. They warn that using military personnel for routine sanitation work risks blurring the lines between civil governance and defence responsibilities.
Observers note that diverting trained soldiers to garbage collection and drainage maintenance could strain already limited defence resources, particularly in a context where the GDF is expected to focus on border security, disaster response, and national defence preparedness. In a small state with finite human resources, sustained deployment of troops in non-core functions may impact operational readiness, disrupt training schedules, and weaken the force’s ability to respond to strategic or emergency needs.
Questions Over Sustainability
Beyond governance, Ferguson raised doubts about the long-term effectiveness of the clean-up exercises, describing them as sporadic and lacking measurable outcomes—another concern shared by critics who argue the efforts are more cosmetic than systemic.
“What the public continues to witness are episodic, highly publicised activities that lack continuity, measurable outcomes, and community ownership,” she wrote.
She pointed to the absence of structured waste management systems, behavioural change programmes, and institutional strengthening, arguing that without these elements, any improvements are unlikely to be sustained.
“This raises the inevitable question: are these campaigns about optics rather than outcomes?”
Transparency and Spending Under Scrutiny
A central issue highlighted in the letter is the lack of clarity surrounding public expenditure on the initiative. Ferguson noted that Budget 2026 does not include a specific allocation for a national clean-up campaign, raising questions about how the activities are being financed.
“To date, there has been no clear disclosure of the total sums expended… Under which budgetary allocations are these initiatives being financed?” she asked.
She suggested that funds may be drawn from other programmes—such as the government’s “Men on Mission” initiative—without prior disclosure, a practice she said would undermine fiscal transparency and parliamentary oversight.
Ferguson further called for scrutiny by the Auditor General, questioning whether there will be a comprehensive audit of the expenditure.
Political Context and Historical Comparison
The former minister also contrasted the current approach with the record of the APNU+AFC coalition while in office, highlighting the holding of Local Government Elections in 2016 and 2018 and arguing that communities were better managed during that period.
“Today, instead of strengthening these institutions, we are witnessing increasing centralisation, political interference, and the marginalisation of local democratic organs,” she asserted.
Her remarks reflect ongoing political divisions over governance models in Guyana, particularly regarding the balance of power between central government and local authorities.
Call for Long-Term Policy
Looking ahead to Guyana’s 60th Independence Anniversary on May 26, 2026, Ferguson questioned whether the country would see another round of short-term clean-up efforts rather than sustained policy solutions.
“Guyana deserves better. We deserve policies that are transparent, accountable, and sustainable… policies that empower communities rather than sideline them.”
The letter adds to a growing national debate over the PPP/C government’s approach to governance, with concerns raised not only by Ferguson but also by city officials and other critics who warn that the expanding role of central government—and even the military—in municipal functions could undermine both local democracy and institutional balance.
