It is disturbing that an Ambassador to two major international blocs presents himself merely as a “citizen” while making flawed interpretations of fiscal legislation involving billions in taxpayers’ dollars. While Mr Sasenarine Singh, Guyana’s Ambassador to the European Union and the Organisation of African, Caribbean and Pacific States, can express opinions about the Vice President’s competence, his letter would have better served the public with transparency rather than hagiography and factual analysis rather than selective legislative citations.
His letter’s technical deficiencies are manifold:
1. It cherry-picks the definition of “entitlement payment” while ignoring Section 2 of the FMAA’s full context: “a payment to any person under a social security programme, unemployment programme or poverty alleviation programme or who meets eligibility criteria for payment set out in any other programme or under any law.” A one-off cash grant payable to non-resident Guyanese cannot be considered an “entitlement payment” merely because it has eligibility criteria.
2. It disregards section 30(1)’s mandate that “No contract or other arrangement providing for the payment of public moneys shall be entered into unless there is a sufficient unencumbered balance available in the appropriation.” Where is the appropriation for this grant, including payment to non-residents, and under what Agency and Programme will it be paid?
3. Despite citing payment authorities, it overlooks Section 31(2)’s requirement that “Each requisition for a payment of public moneys out of the Consolidated Fund shall be in such form, accompanied by such documents and certified in such manner as the Minister may by regulation prescribe.” What regulations exist or are proposed for distributing these grants?
4. It ignores section 48: “A Minister or official shall not misuse, misapply, or improperly dispose of public moneys.” Without proper legislative framework, how can compliance be assured?
Mr. Singh’s praise of the VP’s “31 years executive experience” contradicts his previous criticism of the Vice President’s financial management record as Minister of Finance, President, Vice President, oil czar and super minister, before his AFC departure. He must know that even exemplary experience does not override the need for proper legislative authority and adequate procedural measures.
Specific to his diplomatic role, Mr Singh should address these crucial questions:
1. How can Guyanese in EU and ACP countries claim this benefit?
2. What mechanisms will verify eligibility?
3. Will non-residents receive payment in foreign currency, and how will foreign bank accounts be verified?
4. What prevents double-dipping between local and overseas claims?
5. Can Guyanese receive their payments at overseas embassies, given their status as national territory?
6. As Section 56 (1) requires, what accounting standards will govern payments to resident and non-resident Guyanese?
The irony of a senior diplomat advocating loose fiscal management while presenting himself as an ordinary citizen undermines the integrity of our financial legislation. As Ambassador, Mr. Singh represents all Guyanese, not just the government. With Venezuela threatening our territory, his energies would be better spent building diplomatic support for Guyana among his 100+ accredited countries rather than writing partisan opinions on domestic financial matters, of which he seems to have only a partial understanding.
Such positioning serves neither Guyana’s interests nor his diplomatic credibility.
Yours faithfully,
Christopher Ram
