Can the President justify the use of a private plane for the Bahamas visit?.
Dear Editor,
It was reported in the Tribune, a Bahamian newspaper, on the 2nd March, 2017, that President Granger and his delegation arrived in The Bahamas for a three-day state visit by private plane. Thinking that there was an error with the report since there was no possible justifiable reason to use a private plane instead of commercial flight (whether first class or otherwise) my further investigation revealed not only this report of the use of a private plane to be accurate but further evidence of insensitive profligacy and waste of taxpayers’ money by President Granger.
The investigation revealed that not only three ministers, one of whom is his son-in-law (Mr Gaskin, the Minister of Business), but a team of speech writers, bodyguards, assistants and media personnel accompanied President Granger in this private plane and for whom daily stipends and accommodation had to be provided at the hotel the rates of which are about US$430 per night. In addition, a number of gifts were purchased and presented to the Bahamian government all bought and paid for with taxpayers’ money. The total spent on this three-day trip was about $18m. The cost of the private plane alone was about $8m.
Two questions ought to have been asked by the media which holds the significant responsibility of being the fourth estate on behalf of the people of Guyana: 1. How could President Granger justify the use of a private plane instead of a commercial flight? 2. What investment did the three-day state visit garner for Guyana?
Of course, the media can be partially forgiven since President Granger assiduously avoids answering questions by dodging and not holding press conferences. But most sections of the media are also complicit by neglecting to ask President Granger the hard questions when the impromptu opportunity arises quietly hoping instead to receive the perks of free travel with the head of state or his ministers. Meanwhile, Guyana continues along a path of visionless high tax submersion and wasteful spending.
With admitted dwindling investment and a reduction in all of the productive sectors except for gold it is now obvious why there has been this urgency to increase taxes and an emphasis on increased tax collection – the “good life for the government”. This, ironically, on the authority of a President who has collected over $50m in salary since his assumption of office as president but pays not a single penny of tax on his income.
Guyanese are feeling the squeeze more than ever and struggle to make ends meet while our president displays his manifest insensitivity to our circumstances in grandiose style by driving around in Lexuses with large entourages and security detail and international travel by private planes. If the Bahamian newspaper did not publish the use of the private plane by President Granger it certainly makes one question how would Guyanese ever have known about it or worse what else do we not know?
When times are hard we expect our leaders to be sensitive to our struggles and not flaunt the “great life” in our faces. The famous Guyanese saying “he who feels it knows it” and with the “great life” the government now enjoys raises the question of whether decisions can be made in the best interest of the Guyanese people who need the support of a government who “knows it”. Leadership begins with responsibility but lasting change happens by example.
Yours faithfully,
Charles S Ramson
