ed on the scene as a PPP-bashing letter-writer, Dr. Rose has always appeared as a co-writer with someone else. First, with the rum shop brawling: ‘I hate the PPP because they refused to pay for my Phd’-Sasenarine Singh. And now that he has changed his alliance from the AFC to the PNC/APNU, and made it known that he will no longer be co-writing with Sasenarine Singh, he continues his assault on the government with one Harish S. Singh.
The truth is, Sasenarine Singh and Harish S. Singh, are one and the same person; so much for credibility. This stunt reminds me of the PNC changing its name in 2011 to APNU hoping to gain some credibility by remaking the seriously damaged PNC party, in the hope of fooling the electorate at the 2011 General Election. These individuals appear to have no scruples or credibility and will write anything to make those they oppose look bad.
In a recent letter: ‘Hopefully, writers will be guided by facts, and not half-truths on the Amaila project’ (Kaieteur News, August 28) none other than the treasurer and national executive committee member of Alliance For Change, David Granger’s son-in-law, Dominic Gaskin had this to say: “Ultimately your readers will have to form their own conclusions, and in doing so it is hoped they will be guided by the facts and not influenced by such cleverly assembled half truths as contained in the above mentioned letter by Rose and Singh.”
I will deal with the hypocrisy of Dr. Asquith Rose and Harish S. Singh, aka Sasenarine Singh, later in this letter as it relates to David Granger’s son-in-law, and the lack of credibly of this duo.
But let me deal first with the “half-truths” and smear campaign of Messrs. Rose and Singh.
In a letter: ‘The dangerous precedence of the Geetanjali Singh saga’ (Kaieteur News, October 16), Dr Asquith Rose and Harish S. Singh attacked Education Minister, Priya Manickchand for defending the constitutional rights of Geetanjali Singh to work in a position that she is clearly qualified to hold. In her defence of Mrs. Singh, the minister made it quite clear that in addition to Mrs Geetanjali having all the qualities a woman of yesteryear was expected to possess: Beauty; unassuming character; a good wife and mother, she was also the epitome of what we say women today should be. Geetanjali Singh is a highly qualified professional who should be entitled to choose a career path of her own. There should be no barriers set to impede her professional goals because of the man she married. In a way though, the infantile argument of this duo, makes the point that Minister Manickcand made: They see her as nothing else but a good wife and mother, and so how dare she be appointed as Audit Director.
Both Rose and Singh have a common political agenda. Their goal is to bad mouth the PPP/C administration every chance they get by parroting the opposition’s call for the removal of Geetanjali Singh and/or her Finance Minister husband, Dr. Ashni Singh. They hope to weaken the government thereby allowing the opposition a better opportunity to win the next election.
But if either Dr. Asquith Rose or Harish S. Singh aka Sasenarine Singh were truly interested in ethics and conflicts of interest, how come there was no condemnation by either, of Nigel and Cathy Hughes glaring conflict of interest with the Amalia Falls Hydro Project? Nigel Hughes admission came only after being exposed by Kaieteur News, as being the Company Secretary of Amalia Hydro Inc., and later confessed: “I acknowledge there was a conflict of interest and I assume full responsibility for it.” (KN, October 13). His wife Catherine (Cathy) Hughes was Public Relations Consultant for Sithe Global, the developer/investor in the Amaila Falls project. These prominent appointments were deliberately hidden from the public at a time when the AFC was defiant in its opposition to the construction of the hydro power plant. As a serving Member of Parliament, Cathy Hughes was obligated to vote along party lines on the Amaila Hydro Project. Wasn’t that a conflict of interest? Where is the condemnation by Dr Asquith Rose and his sidekick?
Leader of the AFC, Khemraj Ramjattan stated publicly that both Nigel and Cathy Hughes recused themselves from discussions and decisions involving the Amalia Falls Hydroelectric Project (AFHP) although they were both AFC executive members. By their silence on this matter, Ramjattan’s explanation was obviously accepted by Dr. Rose and Sasenarine Singh. Neither saw it as a conflict of interest. Yet, despite being told repeatedly, and reiterated in Minister Manickchand’s letter which stated: “It has been made clear, however, that Geetanjali Singh does no work that involves her husband or any of the agencies he is involved in, heads or manages. She has recused herself and is recused from doing any work (audits, supervision of audits, management of audits, review of audits&hellip
regarding agencies in which her husband is involved. She said that all the officers in the office are prevented from auditing accounts of agencies where their spouses or relatives are head or even work. In other words no woman can audit, supervise an audit, manage an audit or review an audit if her husband works at a place that is being audited. I believe her.” The opposition’s accusation of a ‘conflict of interest’ is still being parroted by this duo.
When it was disclosed that Nigel Hughes wilfully remained silent as the Lusignan jury foreman, Vernon Griffith failed to inform the court that Hughes was his lawyer for six years, despite being asked specifically by the trial judge, Justice Navindra Singh, if he ever had a relationship with any attorney associated with the Lusignan Massacre trial, neither Rose nor Sasenarine Singh accused Hughes of jury tampering. As a result, James Anthony Hyles, a former member of the notorious Rondell Rawlins (Fine Man) gang walks free of murdering 11 persons, including women and children in their Lusignan homes as they sleep. Nigel Hughes was the attorney that represented James Hyles.
In their letter, Rose and Singh wrote: “Let us cut all the hogwash about attack on women since that is a gross untruth; this issue is about ethics, integrity and morality and it has nothing to do with Ms. Geetanjali Singh as a woman or a person.” If this was true, and they’re so concerned about ethics and morality, wouldn’t they have joined in my call for Nigel Hughes to be reprimanded? I believe Mrs Singh was targeted because they wanted to get something, anything on Dr. Ashni Singh, and also because this pair seems to have little or no respect for women, period.
Now back to Dominic Gaskin. This man is the treasurer and executive member of the Alliance for Change. He is the son-in-law of David Granger, Leader of the Opposition and Leader of PNC/APNU. There is no evidence that he leaks inside information to Granger over dinner. But if we are to apply the same yardstick that is used to judge the Finance Minister’s wife, Mrs. Geetanjali Singh, shouldn’t the AFC treasurer, Dominic Gaskin decline an executive position in a political party that competes for the same voting bloc as his father-in-law? Is this not a conflict of interest? And if not, why is this still being kept a secret by both AFC and PNC/APNU?
Sasenarine Singh is the last person that should be talking about credibility, accountability and ethics. There is an old saying: A thief always believes another person to be a thief.
In a YouTube video published on March 15, 2011 (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ke4M9O-_rYs), a High Street flour distributor admitted to bribing Sasenarine Singh, the person then in charge of the distribution and allocation of flour at the National Milling Company. He claimed he had to give a bribe of $100,000 every week in order to receive his quota of flour. The year was 1991. The money was (allegedly) delivered each week to Singh’s home in Third Street, Alexander Village. The businessman also said he had to deliver 3 bags of flour to Singh’s mother who operated a stall at La Penitance Market. In addition, the businessman said he paid $450,000 to purchase a Honda Accord car for Sasenarine Singh, and helped to pay his UG tuition. All demands made by Singh.
The reason he recorded and published the video was to warn Guyanese that the same man who accuses the PPP/C government of corruption, was himself corrupted.
Although I cannot verify these allegations, there are simply too many specifics mentioned in the video to completely dispel this as lies. The fact that this businessman was not sued for slander is evidence that some or all of the accusations made may very well be true. Singh was later fired from the flour mill.
Dr. Rose should be cognisant of the friends he keeps. If he is not the main architect of these hate letters, he does not need the likes of Sasenarine Singh to tarnish whatever credibility he has left, let Harish S. Singh, aka Sasenarine Singh, do his own writing.
If on the other hand he is the architect, he should be man enough to stand alone and not hide behind a known scumbag like Sasenarine Singh.
written by: Harry Gill
