AFC’s Cathy Hughes asks…With no Procurement Commission, who will benefit from ICT $B contracts?
“Why after spending billions of taxpayers’ money over the last twenty-two years, NCN does not have the capacity to carry the Learning Channel? Where did the money go? Was it deposited into private accounts like the payment from GT&T, which seems to have been swept under the carpet and for which no charges have been brought?”
“Information Communication Technology (ICT) is not just about running cables, putting up towers and distributing laptops, it is about making information available and we can’t help but wonder who will benefit from the billion-dollar ICT contracts in the absence of the Public Procurement Commission.”
AFC’s Cathy Hughes
Those were assertions of the Alliance For Change (AFC)’s, Cathy Hughes, who in her presentation to the 2014 Budget, pointed out that the 2012 Auditor General Report illustrates that a difference of $1.2B was expended under the One Laptop Per Family Programme for the acquisition of 27,000 laptops, which were received in 2013.
“At the time of audit, 4,149 of those laptops were issued but more remarkably, 2,649 were damaged, and 2,011 were returned to the supplier due to defects.”
According to Hughes, there is also still no word on 103 laptops that were stolen.
“Now this government is asking us to approve $2B for more laptops. The AFC fully supports every school, not only secondary schools, but every school having fully functional IT labs… but at the rate these laptops are being damaged, even before they get to the people, leaves a lot to be desired.”
NCN/GINA
Turning her attention to the sore matter of the National Communications Network (NCN) and the Government Information Agency (GINA), Hughes said that since the “return to democracy”, that mode of operation seems to have escaped the NCN.
Hughes said that in the Budget, Government has set aside $81M for the NCN and $139M for GINA, “a total of $220M of taxpayers’ money that this government has set aside to promote itself.”
According to the AFC Member, that is a lot of tax dollars for ‘bare talks’.
“Not only is it ‘bare talks’ but it is only ‘PPP talks’. No one really knows what GINA does and how whatever it does is supposed to benefit the people of Guyana, but the people are being asked to give them $139M.”
The parliamentarian stressed that while government plans to spend $220M tax dollars on self-aggrandizement, “imagine our main agency for attracting investment to our country, the Guyana Office for Investment (GOINVEST), received by comparison $119.7M, approximately $20M less than GINA. “
“Therein lies the problem…How can this house be asked to approve $220M for NCN and GINA when we have waited patiently for two years to see some change in the mandate and focus on these entities. If they remain propaganda agencies of the PPP then we say no problem, let the PPP pay for this, as none of the opposition political parties in this House have asked that Guyana’s tax dollars be used to pay for their in-house PR campaigns… that could never be right.”
She also pointed out that non-governmental organisations (NGOs) that are actually helping abused women and children to put their lives together, centres that are helping drug addicts to get over their addiction and homes for orphans and neglected children, are receiving paltry handouts in comparison to the two entities.
TVG owner, Dr Ranjisinghi ‘Bobby’ Ramroop
“I say 50 per cent of this allocation for government talks would be of better use if given to these institutions…It would have more of an impact on improving persons’ lives if it was allocated to our NGOs.”
LEARNING CHANNEL
She noted too that in addition to the $220M that the government has allocated to “blow its own trumpet”, another $43.2M will be paid as fees at the rate of $3.6M per month to TVG for services provided for the Learning Channel.
TVG is owned by Dr. Ranjisinghi ‘Bobby’ Ramroop, best friend of former President Bharrat Jagdeo, under whose stewardship the deal was negotiated and inked.
According to Hughes, “while the Government is providing $81M of taxpayers’ money to NCN, we note that none of that money is used to broadcast learning material.”
She added that while the government claims that the monies are paid to TVG because NCN lacks capacity to carry the Learning Channel, it must explain such an investment was not made.
“Why after spending billions of taxpayers’ money over the last twenty-two years, does NCN not have the capacity to carry the Learning Channel? Where did the money go? Was it deposited into private accounts like the payment from GT&T, which seems to have been swept under the carpet and for which no charges have been brought?”
“We are not vengeful when it comes to NCN but it has to do with the abuse of a public entity for partisan benefit… It is the watchdog function of this House to guard against such abuse,” Hughes asserted.