AFC dismisses PPP’s comparison of voters list with cash grant recipients

Last Updated on Saturday, 14 June 2025, 18:50 by Writer

The Alliance For Change (AFC) on Saturday said there could be no logical comparison between the more than 600,000 recipients of the GY$100,000 cash grant and the number of persons on the voters list, amid persistent opposition concerns that the electoral roll is bloated with the names of emigrants and deceased persons.

PPP General Secretary Bharrat Jagdeo on Thursday made the comparison, citing the fact that there would be more than 700,000 persons on the voters list while just over 600,000 persons received the cash grant. “One would assume that the others are abroad; they are on the voters list; they can’t, but those who are here now are about just over 600,000 real persons 18 years and above,” he said.

No mention was made of deceased persons. GECOM earlier this week said the preliminary voters list currently stands at 757,066 names but that was projected to increase at the end of the upcoming claims and objections period.

AFC General Secretary, David Patterson on Saturday deemed Mr Jagdeo’s reasoning “hogwash” based on a number of claims.

Those claims were that a family of deceased persons was allowed to collect their children’s grant, and non-registered persons were informed that their money was ready. He also said there was a huge difference between cheques printed and uplifted. “If he is saying that number was uplifted – clear indication of massive fraud,” Mr Patterson said. A government official, who is familiar with the cash grant process, did not immediately respond.

The opposition People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR), Working People’s Alliance (WPA) and the AFC have maintained that the size of the voters list is fertile ground for voter impersonation and multiple voting, but the GECOM and the PPPC continue to maintain that there are tight rules, procedures and other mechanisms to minimise voter fraud.

GECOM Chairman, Claudette Singh earlier this year acknowledged for the first time that digitalised biometric registration is legally possible but logistically impossible for the 2025 polls. She had also ruled out sole digitalised biometric verification for voting because that would be unconstitutional.