The Government of Guyana and Canada sold the One Guyana Digital Skills Development Programme as a bold investment in the future: thousands of young Guyanese trained for high-value jobs in the global digital economy.
But at the end of the program, a harder question is emerging; Do these 2,000 developers exist and where are they supposed to go?
Canada’s official grants database lists the One Guyana Digital Skills Development Programme at approximately C$9.2 million, with Guyana’s Ministry of Finance named as the recipient and the project running from September 2024 to March 2026. The programme’s stated purpose is to train 2,000 Guyanese as full-stack developers and increase their employability and employment opportunities in the ICT sector. Toronto Metropolitan University has also described the initiative as a two-year effort through which 2,000 Guyanese citizens would complete its Full Stack Developer certificate.
The promise sounded attractive. A developing oil economy. A young population. A shortage of advanced skills. A Canadian-funded pathway into technology work. On paper, it was a modern development story. But people inside Guyana’s technology sector say the local reality is far more complicated.
A person familiar with the project said the core problem is not whether coding is useful. The problem is whether Guyana has a functioning labour market capable of absorbing 2,000 new developers.
“The public was told that 2,000 young Guyanese would be trained for the digital economy,” the person said. “But nobody has explained where these jobs are. The local IT industry is already under pressure. The government is hiring its own developers, often at relatively low wages, and using internal teams, templates, low-code tools and now AI-assisted development to build many of its own applications. So where exactly are these 2,000 developers going?”
That question goes to the heart of the programme.
The Government of Guyana has increasingly been recruiting software developers and technology staff directly into ministries and agencies. In October 2024, for example, the Ministry of Education advertised for software developers to support web-based applications and services, including the Education Management and Information System. The job description listed PHP, .NET, JavaScript, React, Angular, MySQL, PostgreSQL, APIs and Git among the desired skills.
That kind of hiring may help ministries build internal capacity. But it also changes the shape of the local technology market. If the state is building its own systems internally instead of contracting local firms at commercial rates, the private software industry loses one of its largest potential clients.
A person familiar with the sector said the impact is already being felt.
“The bottom has essentially fallen out of the local IT market as it is currently designed,” the person said. “The government has become the biggest buyer, the biggest builder and one of the biggest employers. But if the government builds most systems in-house, and pays developers public-sector or semi-public-sector wages, then private IT firms are squeezed. That means fewer companies are available to hire these graduates, mentor them, or give them real project experience.”
The rise of AI-assisted coding makes the issue more urgent. “Vibe coding” is now widely used to describe a style of software development in which users describe what they want in plain language and AI tools generate, refine and debug the code. IBM describes vibe coding as using plain speech so AI can transform intent into executable code, while Google describes it as a workflow where the developer’s role shifts from writing code line by line to guiding an AI assistant through a conversational process.
For Guyana, that raises a serious policy question. If AI tools now allow a smaller number of experienced developers to build applications faster, then does the country need 2,000 junior full-stack developers in the traditional sense? It may instead need a smaller number of highly trained software architects, cybersecurity specialists, data analysts, AI workflow designers, product managers, QA testers, business analysts and digital entrepreneurs.
“Training 2,000 people to code in 2026 is not the same proposition it was in 2016,” the person familiar with the project said. “AI has changed the economics of software development. The country needs digital talent, yes. But it needs the right talent matched to real demand. Otherwise, this becomes another certificate programme with no employment pipeline.”
There is also a basic accountability question. Do the 2,000 developers actually exist? How many have enrolled? How many have completed the programme? How many dropped out? How many graduated with a recognized credential? How many are employed in technology roles? How many are earning the promised level of income?
TMU reported in July 2025 that since the programme launched in May 2024, 92 learners had successfully completed the Full Stack Developer certificate fully online and officially graduated. That figure is notable because the public promise was 2,000 learners over two years.
A person familiar with the project said that number demands explanation.
“If the public promise was 2,000 developers, then the public should not have to guess how many have actually completed,” the person said. “Canada’s taxpayers deserve answers. Guyana’s taxpayers deserve answers. The students deserve answers. This is not a small pilot. This is a multimillion-dollar international development project.”
The programme also exists alongside other government-backed coding initiatives. The Guyana Coders Initiative, for example, describes itself as a joint initiative between the Government of the United Arab Emirates and the Government of Guyana, offering free online certification tracks in programming fundamentals, Android Kotlin development and data analysis.
That makes the accountability issue even larger. Guyana is not merely running one digital training programme. It is building a pipeline of coding graduates across multiple initiatives, while the structure of the local IT industry remains weak, government-dominated and increasingly disrupted by AI, and we haven’t even mentioned Exxon’s purported $100M STEM spending plan. Clearly Irfaan Ali is a master salesman as he’s clearly been able to convince multiple countries to invest in an industry which if flailing globally and more so locally.
Another person familiar with the Canadian project said the responsible thing now is to publish the facts.
“At minimum, the government and its partners should publish enrolment numbers, completion numbers, dropout numbers, certification numbers, employment numbers, salary bands and the list of sectors absorbing these graduates,” the person said. “They should also explain whether the programme has been adjusted for AI-assisted development, because the market has changed.”
The issue is not whether young Guyanese should be trained for the digital economy. They should. The issue is whether public money is being used to train people for real opportunities, or for a labour market that does not exist at the scale advertised.
A serious digital economy strategy would do more than produce full-stack certificates. It would support local IT companies, reserve appropriate public-sector contracts for Guyanese technology businesses, build apprenticeship pipelines, connect graduates to real employers, help them form startups, train them in cybersecurity and AI operations, and report outcomes honestly.
Without that, One Guyana Digital risks is just another one of Irfaan Ali’s beautifully branded (scam) programmes with weak public evidence behind it.
The Canadian government funded this programme to improve employability and employment opportunities. Those words matter. Employability is not the same as employment. Certificates are not the same as income. Training is not the same as transformation.
If 2,000 young Guyanese were trained, the country should know who they are, where they are, what they completed, where they are working and what value the programme has created.
And if the local IT industry has already been weakened by low-wage public hiring, in-house government development and AI-assisted application building, then the public deserves an even more urgent answer.
Where will the 2,000 developers (if they even exist) go?
