Twelve Minutes, Few Answers: Why the President Irfaan Ali’s Response Falls Short

I have listened to the President’s video release that the nation was presumably eagerly waiting for after his return from the Caricom Heads of Government meeting. I will say from the outset that the President’s address to this nation does not assist him in the least.

Before I address the more serious matters, I am minded to observe that the ‘cat-got-your-tongue affliction’ has affected not only Ministers Mustapha with his account of the President’s “de-clothes-ing” his wealth to the Integrity Commission, and McKoy’s account of the government rolling out “Own Homership” on the Highway, but the President himself in his not being “instres-ted” in the side show and distraction, and his spending some time to address “with car-i-ty” this issue.

The thing about untruths, when addressed with haste, they lack conviction.

The President has effectively told this nation nothing to remove the stain of the public’s perception that his sprawling farm has been developed (if not procured as well) by less than honourable means. This is what the President has said to this nation in his 12-minute video:

1. Most persons in Guyana know about his farm.
2. His farm carry “A HUGE LOAN”.
3. His farm is not the size that Mohamed alleged.
4. His farm is not valued the amount Mohamed speculated, and that he would be happy if he could get for it even 20 percent of what Mohamed supposed its value to be.
5. He is proud of his farm and it is the product of hard work.
6. When he goes to the farm he will go live because he wants people to learn, and to show them Mohamed’s misrepresentation.
7. Everyone around him on the Highway and all of the major investors know about the farm.
8. It is hypocrisy to allege that his farm is making huge amounts of monies while at the same time questioning where he is getting the monies from to invest.
9. He received messages and recordings. The messages in part said, “If you don’t end all this madness”.
10. The messages disclose matters of national security.
11. Mohamed is a hypocrite masquerading as the conscience of the nation.
12. Mohamed was complicit in (if not guilty of) murder, kidnapping and beating people, smuggling, and robbing Guyana.

These disclosures, or de-clothesures, if we may, by the President warrant some observations:

1. The President’s farm was never public knowledge. The masses of Guyanese were unaware that he has a farm. And, I suspect, even those who knew, might be as shocked as the rest of us as to the extent of its development- and especially within such a short period of time.
2. The President needs to make up his mind as to whether the development of the farm is the product of ‘a huge loan’ or ‘loans upon loans’.
3. While the farm may or may not be the size that Mohamed alleged, what is the hesitation of the President in saying what the actual size is and how much of it is developed; instead of simply telling this nation that the farm is not even half the size claimed.
4. By the same token, why simply tell us that the value of the farm or its investment is not as much as Mohamed claimed. If the President truly recorded that video in the name of accountability, as he has stated, then be accountable. In the President’s earliest response to Mohamed’s disclosure, the President did not seek to challenge the scope of the investment.
5. Anyone with a farm like the President’s would be proud of their holdings as the President is. What I am more curious about is the nature and content of the hard work that the President claims has produced that outcome.
6. I would expect the major investors, of course, to know about the fact and size of the President’s farm. He would need market for his goods after all. And, in any event, a persuasive faction of the major investors referred to might be those in the President’s inner circle who too benefit from the favour the President would have us believe that God bestows upon him and his Cabinet.
7. It is a school-boyish suggestion that it is hypocrisy to say that the farm is making significant monies while simultaneously wondering where the monies are coming from to invest. Isn’t it elementary that returns usually follow successful investment? Wouldn’t the investment be what comes first? But if the suggestion is that the investment was gradual as returns come in from phases, then this too can be interrogated to reveal its weakness. I will leave here just one concern. If the returns over such a short period facilitated an investment of this scope and magnitude, would it mean that the President has been benefitting from preferential markets (possibly characterised by conflicts of interests)- perhaps inclusive of the provision of meat and farming produce for local, national, regional, and international events?
8. If the President wanted Guyanese to learn from his industriousness and success in the farming sector, shouldn’t he had walked us through every step of the way so we can be both inspired and amass the practical knowledge in both the skill of farming and the procurement of funds for same, and the acquisition of market for the produce? Why wait until now when this is a national and international issue to educate us in this endeavour? Some brave and smart soul might contend that the President had to succeed first before he exports that model to the Guyanese people. I’ll save that aspirant the trouble by urging that you take all matters into consideration before you venture into such futility.
9. The President did not say who the recordings came from. He did not disclose the full conversation. And if the most damning except of those messages that the President chose to read simply said “If you don’t end all this madness”, then the President might have done himself a greater favour by not sharing that madness.
10. Isn’t the President testifying to a neglect of his duty as the Chief Citizen of this country, Commander in Chief of our Armed Forces, and our ultimate protector by failing to disclose and take the necessary action/s to address the security matters those messages raise?
11. Why hasn’t the State prosecuted Mohamed (and others who might be responsible) for the murder, kidnapping, and beatings the President has spoken of. Isn’t this a most glaring acknowledgement of the failures and preferential deployment of our criminal justice system? Do you know how many predominantly young Afro Guyanese males are picked up, locked up, brought before the courts, remanded for extended periods of time, and jailed on a daily basis on trumped up charges and flimsy accusations?

Perhaps the following questions and proposed courses of action would assist the President in treating with this matter with the seriousness it deserves, and I engage here in view of the President himself saying that he is committed to accountability:

1. When were the farmlands acquired?
2. What is the acreage of the farmlands?
3. What acreage of these lands are developed?
4. When did the development of the farmlands commence- inclusive of infrastructure work (road, electricity, water)?
5. What are the phases and timeline of the development?
6. Where were the monies for the development of these lands sourced from?
7. How much monies were injected into these lands?
8. What documentary proof do you have of these monies? Produce same.
9. Did you benefit in anyway in your capacity as president and as a public servant in the acquisition and development of these farmlands?
10. Where are the produce of the farm marketed?
11. Does the farm supply local, national, regional, and/or international events?
12. What are these security matters referred to?
13. When would these be acted upon?
14. Who did the messages and recordings come from, and what are the full contents and context of these? Produce same.

Just as the President has stated, we must have the ability to read through these lines and what is at stake here. Might I assure you that we do. The President and government would do well to stop treating us like the “stupid people” we were declared to be.

Ronald J. Daniels