OPINION: Editorials need to be more balanced

Last Updated on Wednesday, 11 September 2024, 19:32 by Writer

By Dr. Randy Persaud, Professor Emeritus

I read with interest Stabroek News’ recent editorial under the title “The need for deeper dialogue on the economy” (9/9/2024). The core idea of the editorial is that multilateral financial institutions ought to meet with civil society organizations and the Opposition during the loan consultation process. This is an inherently good idea. Yet, by all the evidence available, this kind of magnanimity only surfaces when the PPP is in office.

The concern appears to be that the current PPPC administration of Dr. Mohamed Irfaan Ali does not engage in broad enough consultation with the people of Guyana. It is rather ironic that on the one hand, the editorial wants policies to be made through evidence-based analysis by highly trained experts, while on the other, without any evidence, the same editorial has rushed to conclusions about a number of major infrastructural projects currently under way.

Here are some ‘punch-lines’ from the SN editorial, and my response to them.

“First, does Guyana really want to be tied to dirty fuels for the next four decades or more considering the primacy of containing carbon emissions? If not what should have been the mix of green energies to be relied on even if the upfront investment had to be extensive?” My answer is this: why should small, developing states, all of them in the Third World, stop producing hydrocarbons for the world market, while the established states that have been producing oil and gas for 100 years continue to drill baby drill, and pump baby pump? What is the ethical, moral, or even economic basis for this kind of stupid recommendation?

“Second, is this largest ever expenditure on a public sector project financially feasible? Will it indeed cut electricity bills in half utilizing associated gas from oil platforms instead of Heavy Fuel Oil? What about its running costs over the life of the plant and won’t this make inroads into the savings?”

My answer is this – you seem to know before any analysis of your own what the answers are? That is why they are rhetorically posed. But where is your data, your method, your analysis? You should also know that the bits and pieces of data flung around in the letter sections by OGGN and a handful of unqualified critics, cannot be the basis for the sweeping generalizations that so often surface in social media and in opposition press conferences.

“Third, can the public be certain of the managerial and oversight prowess necessary for the success of this project when PPP/C governments haven’t demonstrated such a track record? These are some of the discussions that should have engaged Parliament and civil society before the government set off in great haste.” My answer here is for readers to carefully examine the shallowness of the editorial in its final attempt at being rigorous.

The editorial asks a question and then proceeds to provide an answer, one that is predictably critical of the PPP, without providing the most minimally acceptable evidence for what it claims. Where is the expert analysis? The editorial wants to be the neutral representative of civic conscience, the prosecutor, the judge, and also the jury, all at once. This kind of biased editorializing must stop.

Here is another instance of calling for depoliticized expert analysis only to proceed to do the exact opposite. Thus the editorial states “[t]he obstinacy of the government on the gas to energy project will likely require more self-financing in the near future on top of the dizzying spending and project launches that are being announced on a regular basis…” Does this sound like depoliticized expert knowledge to you?

No one is stopping civil society from engaging in discussions and offering critiques of infrastructure projects. In fact, Stabroek News has given exceptional space to civil society groups and individual critics in its letter sections and columns. The idea that multilateral financial institutions should meet with civic groups and the Opposition is at best redundant. That is already happening.

Finally, the editorial makes the dubious claim that “Amaila Falls Hydropower Project disintegrated…” The truth is the Opposition was set against it for political reasons, and the AFC came on board when it had no other viable option.

Democracy is based on individual rights, and one of the most important of these rights is free expression. Another key aspect of democracy is that those elected have the responsibility to govern. The people of Guyana elected the PPP to govern. While multilateral financial institutions have an important role to play, our sovereignty is sacrosanct. In the meantime, editorials need to be more balanced. Biased editorials have become too routine.

Dr. Randy Persaud is Adviser in the Office of the President.