September 25 ,2020
Dear Editor,
Since consideration of the budgetary estimates commenced on Monday 21st September, 2020, I noticed with dismay the attitude of members of the PPP/C Government. There is a discernable desire to criticize, cast doubt and to render nugatory, with suspicions of corruption, the good work of the previous administration. At the same time, they forget an important part of the last sentence in the short prayer said by the Clerk before the commencement of proceedings of the National Assembly. Those few words are, “and where words come from the depth of truth”.
Having read the newspaper reports publishing versions of two Ministers on the Larry London contract to supply birth certificates to the Department of Citizenship, I have detected an issue which deserves intervention to clarify the grossly misunderstood and misrepresented contractual arrangement. Three newspapers covering the same issue reported differently. First, the Guyana Chronicle publication on September 22, 2020 reports “‘Coalition’ gave Larry London $23m to print birth certificates”. Second, Stabroek News of the same date quotes the Honourable Minister of Governance and Parliamentary Affairs as saying, “Teixeira in responding revealed that the APNU+AFC government had entered into a US$150,000 contract with party operative Larry London for the purchase of birth certificates”. Third, Kaieteur News screamed, “Teixeira revealed on Monday that the former Government awarded $30m to a barely discernable US registered company, Universal Procurement Services Inc. for the procurement of 20,000 birth certificates during the period 2019-2020”.
As the former Minister of Citizenship within the Ministry of the Presidency during the last Administration, it is now necessary for me to present the position of the APNU+AFC Government on this matter which is being tarnished by the PPP/C because the birth certificates were single/sole-sourced. It is my wish that you will provide adequate space and prominence to this response following articles published.
Upon assuming office, President David A. Granger, MSS, as he then was, brought to the Minister’s attention the number of approaches made to him during the 2015 General Elections campaign to improve the services offered by the Immigration and Passport Office and the General Register’s Office (GRO) for birth certificates. The Government took the position that all Government services must be taken to the people and “Outreaches” by various Government departments commenced.
At the same time, an assessment of the GRO’s capacity to issue birth certificates for the remainder of the year was conducted. The General Registrar, at that time, wrote to the Minister of Citizenship under the caption “Sole sourcing of Birth Certificates”, stating thus: ”The General Register Office for the past fifteen (15) years has been Sole-Sourcing birth certificates from……….Printery” (name withheld for reason of privacy). Therefore, sole sourcing of birth certificates did not commence with the APNU+AFC Government but with the PPP/C administration it flourished. These newspaper articles above gave the unmistakable understanding to their readers that the APNU+AFC Government corruptly and capriciously gave a contract to Mr. Lawrence London without satisfying the necessary requirements of the Procurement Act. That is not so. The Govern-ment simply agreed to continue sole-sourcing birth certificates as the PPP/C had been doing since that method would have been restricted to a limited number of persons being privy to the security features which were envisioned to secure that document.
The former Minister was aware that two visits were made to the printer in Bel Air, Georgetown and discussions were held with the proprietor. It was clear that though he had the capacity to print the birth certificates he lacked the capacity to do so with an improved quality of paper and the necessary upgraded security features. I note also that the Honourable Attorney General is quoted in Kaieteur News of 22nd instant as querying, “the reasons why the services of the conventional publisher of these documents were not sought”. It remains unknown to this writer who this ‘conventional publisher’ was. If, as was suspected, it was the proprietor of the printery referred to earlier, then he disqualified himself when he admitted being unable to provide a better quality paper and improved, reliable security features. At that time forged birth certificates were rampant and Foreign Embassies in Georgetown raised their concerns about the quality of our birth certificates, necessitating the need to upgrade the document.
I can recall receiving from Foreign Embassies at least four birth certificates tendered as genuine. When examined, they were found to be false and were forwarded to the Commissioner of Police for investigations to commence. It would seem that the suspects are living outside of Guyana, thereby stalling the investigations. This writer also notes that Stabroek News quotes the Honourable Minister of Governance and Parliamentary Affairs recalling that, “as a former Minister of Home Affairs she knows that birth certificates are normally printed locally with security watermarks”. I would most respectfully submit to the Honourable Minister that unlike her apparent expert knowledge on the issue, this neophyte is clearly convinced that watermarking poor quality paper is unacceptable to secure an important document as a birth certificate.
This apparent weakness in our civil registry needed to be addressed and the Department of Citizenship reached out to several persons to provide guidance on correcting our shortcomings. This included Canadian Bank Note but that company was principally in the passport business. It was not until 2018 while on a visit to the Company that they showed an inclination to enter birth certificate production.
These actions paved the way for the entry of Mr. Lawrence London who presented to the Department samples of high quality paper and several security features to protect the document. After several engagements with Mr. London the department agreed to restrict the security features to six because, according to my understanding, additional features would increase the cost of production. Our first order was received in 2016. I am confident that each of our orders received the requisite approval from the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB).
There is a mistaken belief held by persons that our birth rate should dictate or serve as a guide to order birth certificates each year. I have explained then, and would do so now, that there are several considerations, listed hereunder, that seriously militate against taking such a position:
• Registration of births where parents leave the health facilities with a birth certificate;
• Registration of births where parents leave the health institution without a birth certificate but subsequently collect the document;
• Requests through the Ministry of Foreign Affairs from our Embassies/High Commissions;
• Requests from Foreign Embassies/ High Commissions in Guyana;
• Reopening of schools places a heavy demand on the GRO for birth certificates;
• The Election cycles – both Local Government and General and Regional Elections placed an even greater demand by citizens for birth certificates. It must be noted that between 2015 and 2020 there were two Local Government elections and one General and Regional Elections, and the Department’s supply of birth certificates met the increased demand adequately; and
• Our several Outreaches to communities throughout this country increased the demand for birth certificates. The applicants for birth certificates regularly request two or more copies, and this requires GRO to have adequate numbers of the document on hand.
It is no secret that the APNU+AFC Government took its services to the people of Guyana in all ten (10) Administrative Regions. Regions 2,3,4,5 and 6 were visited but our Outreaches featured more particularly in Regions 1,7,8,9 and 10. The need for birth certificates has been overwhelming in the hinterland communities and satisfying the needs of Guyanese was Government’s priority bearing in mind the need to comply with the United Nations Declaration on the Rights of the Child. There were persons who received a birth certificate for the first time and one person publicly made that statement in Region No.1.
Between 2016 and 2020, according to my recollection, Mr. Lawrence London supplied GRO with over five hundred thousand (500,000) birth certificates. He complied with all our agreements including correctness of the order delivered and structural correctness of the documents. When received, personnel at GRO checked the documents and I can recall receiving reports of documents with printing deficiencies and when Mr. London was approached, he gladly corrected the defects and returned the documents.
I have avoided discussion on the security features for obvious reasons to which I have earlier alluded but suffice it to say that there are two features I proffer for examination. Firstly, photocopy the birth certificate currently issued by GRO and look at the printed document, the result would certainly deter a potential fraudster. Secondly, attempt to tear this document and you will encounter a severe challenge to create that damage. The other features remain undisclosed.
I wish to conclude as I commenced to give clarity to false impressions created by politicians who accused the Government of sole-sourcing birth certificates when that method of procurement was in existence over a decade and a half prior to the APNU+AFC Government taking Office in 2015. I am sure to have provided clarity and doubly sure that, as a former Parliamentarian, my words came from the depth of truth.
Yours faithfully,
Winston G. Felix, DSM
