𝐏𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐀𝐥𝐢’𝐬 ‘𝐅𝐢𝐫𝐬𝐭 𝐄𝐱𝐩𝐨𝐫𝐭’ 𝐇𝐲𝐩𝐞 𝐋𝐞𝐚𝐯𝐞𝐬 𝐎𝐮𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐒𝐦𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐧 𝐒𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐋𝐚𝐧𝐝, $𝟏.𝟒𝐁 𝐖𝐡𝐚𝐫𝐟 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐏𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐇𝐚𝐫𝐯𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐬”

𝘎𝘶𝘺𝘢𝘯𝘢’𝘴 𝘍𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘚𝘰𝘺𝘢 𝘌𝘹𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵: 𝘞𝘩𝘰’𝘴 𝘙𝘦𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘗𝘳𝘰𝘧𝘪𝘵, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘞𝘩𝘰’𝘴 𝘗𝘢𝘺𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘉𝘪𝘭𝘭?

Guyana is about to ship its first official soya beans to Barbados, and President Dr Mohamed Irfaan Ali could not hide his pride. At the Trinidad and Tobago Chamber of Industry and Commerce, he presented the move as a national milestone—proof that Guyana is “expanding agricultural production” and “strengthening regional food security.”

What he did not say is that the farm behind this export sits on State‑owned land, accessed by a 40‑plus‑kilometre road and a wharf built by the Government at a cost of more than $1.4 billion, and that the venture is run by a private consortium whose members are already well‑known, yet whose terms remain hidden from the public.

The real cost of the “first export”

Government records show that since 2022, over $1.4 billion has been spent on roads, wharves and related infrastructure in the Tacama–Savannah corridor to support large‑scale corn and soya production. In 2024, the Ministry of Agriculture openly budgeted $967.8 million just for the Tacama silo and drying complex alone, adding to the broader infrastructure tab.

𝘛𝘩𝘪𝘴 𝘪𝘴 𝘯𝘰𝘵 𝘢 𝘮𝘰𝘥𝘦𝘴𝘵 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘺; 𝘪𝘵 𝘪𝘴 𝘢 𝘰𝘯𝘦‑𝘸𝘢𝘺 𝘵𝘳𝘢𝘯𝘴𝘧𝘦𝘳 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘤𝘢𝘱𝘪𝘵𝘢𝘭 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘯𝘰𝘸 𝘧𝘦𝘦𝘥𝘴 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦‑𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘭𝘪𝘯𝘦. 𝘛𝘩𝘦 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘱𝘢𝘺𝘴 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘩𝘢𝘳𝘥 𝘢𝘴𝘴𝘦𝘵𝘴, 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦 𝘨𝘳𝘰𝘶𝘱 𝘱𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘵𝘴 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘴𝘩𝘪𝘱𝘴, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘱𝘶𝘣𝘭𝘪𝘤 𝘪𝘴 𝘵𝘰𝘭𝘥 𝘰𝘯𝘭𝘺 𝘵𝘩𝘢𝘵 𝘎𝘶𝘺𝘢𝘯𝘢 𝘪𝘴 “𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵𝘪𝘯𝘨” 𝘧𝘰𝘳 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘧𝘪𝘳𝘴𝘵 𝘵𝘪𝘮𝘦.

State‑owned land, private leases

The Tacama–Savannah farmland is State‑owned and leased, not free‑hold. The Ministry of Agriculture has publicly advertised that over 25,000 acres in the intermediate savannahs are being leased to agro‑investors, with clauses for lease renewals and conditions for farmers operating in the area.

Among those named in the corn–soya project are Guyana Stockfeeds Ltd, Royal Chicken / Royal Animal Products, Edun Farms, SBM Wood & Dubulay Ranch, Bounty Farm Ltd, and NF Agriculture. Yet the Government has not disclosed lease terms, rental rates, or whether these companies enjoy preferential conditions over other applicants.

Private consortium, public subsidy

The grouping is repeatedly described as a private‑sector‑led initiative or “consortium.” The companies put up the working capital, equipment and management; the State puts up the road, the wharf and the enabling policy framework.

But that is not a PPP in the classic sense. There is no public‑sector equity stake, no clearly disclosed revenue‑sharing mechanism, and no published agreement showing how the Government recovers value from the $1.4B infrastructure. What exists instead is a one‑sided subsidy model: the taxpayers pay for the assets, the consortium reaps the export margins.

Unanswered questions behind the “first export”

President Ali’s announcement about exporting soya to Barbados has not closed the loop; it has opened a fresh set of questions the public deserves to see answered:

1.𝗟𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗹𝗲𝗮𝘀𝗲𝘀

•What are the lease terms (duration, rent, renewal clauses) for the State‑owned land underpinning the Tacama–Savannah soya–corn project? Are any of these companies paying below‑market rates, and on what basis?

2.𝗜𝗻𝗳𝗿𝗮𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝘀𝘁‑𝗿𝗲𝗰𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝘆

•How does the Government intend to recover or offset the $1.4B+ infrastructure spend? Are there user‑fees, wharf charges, or carve‑outs on export proceeds attached to this project? Or is this simply a straight‑up subsidy with no clawback?

3.𝗘𝘅𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁 𝘀𝘁𝗿𝘂𝗰𝘁𝘂𝗿𝗲 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗯𝗲𝗻𝗲𝗳𝗶𝗰𝗶𝗮𝗿𝗶𝗲𝘀

•Through which legal entity or joint‑venture is the soya being exported to Barbados, and who ultimately captures the export margins? Are small local farmers and contract growers guaranteed a fair share, or will the bulk of the value stick to the integrated corporate group?

4.𝗣𝗣𝗣 𝗼𝗿 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝗶𝗱𝘆 𝗺𝗼𝗱𝗲𝗹?

•Is this formally classified as a PPP, and if so, under what Cabinet‑approved framework or statute? If it is not a PPP but a subsidised private venture, why were these companies chosen without competitive tender, and what criteria guided the selection?

5.𝗧𝗿𝗮𝗻𝘀𝗽𝗮𝗿𝗲𝗻𝗰𝘆 𝗮𝗻𝗱 𝗰𝗼𝗻𝘁𝗿𝗮𝗰𝘁𝘀

•Why have the project agreement, MoU, land‑use contracts, and infrastructure‑access deals between Government and the consortium not been published? Will the State commit to releasing these documents in transparent, redacted form as part of its “open‑for‑business” narrative?

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝗯𝗼𝘁𝘁𝗼𝗺 𝗹𝗶𝗻𝗲

Guyana may be shipping its first soya beans to Barbados, and that is a moment worth noting. But that moment should not be allowed to paper over the fundamental imbalance: 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦‑𝘰𝘸𝘯𝘦𝘥 𝘭𝘢𝘯𝘥, 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦‑𝘣𝘶𝘪𝘭𝘵 𝘪𝘯𝘧𝘳𝘢𝘴𝘵𝘳𝘶𝘤𝘵𝘶𝘳𝘦, 𝘢𝘯𝘥 𝘚𝘵𝘢𝘵𝘦‑𝘧𝘶𝘯𝘥𝘦𝘥 𝘴𝘶𝘣𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘪𝘦𝘴 𝘧𝘭𝘰𝘸𝘪𝘯𝘨 𝘪𝘯𝘵𝘰 𝘢 𝘱𝘳𝘪𝘷𝘢𝘵𝘦‑𝘴𝘦𝘤𝘵𝘰𝘳 𝘦𝘹𝘱𝘰𝘳𝘵 𝘤𝘩𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘸𝘩𝘰𝘴𝘦 𝘵𝘦𝘳𝘮𝘴 𝘳𝘦𝘮𝘢𝘪𝘯 𝘭𝘰𝘤𝘬𝘦𝘥 𝘪𝘯𝘴𝘪𝘥𝘦 𝘵𝘩𝘦 𝘤𝘰𝘳𝘳𝘪𝘥𝘰𝘳𝘴 𝘰𝘧 𝘱𝘰𝘸𝘦𝘳.

𝗨𝗻𝘁𝗶𝗹 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗚𝗼𝘃𝗲𝗿𝗻𝗺𝗲𝗻𝘁 𝗮𝗻𝘀𝘄𝗲𝗿𝘀 𝗵𝗼𝘄 𝗶𝘁 𝗶𝘀 𝘂𝘀𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗮𝘅𝗽𝗮𝘆𝗲𝗿𝘀’ 𝗯𝗶𝗹𝗹𝗶𝗼𝗻𝘀 𝘁𝗼 𝘀𝘂𝗯𝘀𝗶𝗱𝗶𝘀𝗲 𝗽𝗿𝗶𝘃𝗮𝘁𝗲 𝗵𝗮𝗿𝘃𝗲𝘀𝘁𝘀, 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗽𝘂𝗯𝗹𝗶𝗰 𝘄𝗶𝗹𝗹 𝗯𝗲 𝗹𝗲𝗳𝘁 𝘄𝗼𝗻𝗱𝗲𝗿𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘄𝗵𝗼 𝗶𝘀 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗹𝗹𝘆 𝗿𝗲𝗮𝗽𝗶𝗻𝗴 𝘁𝗵𝗲 𝗴𝗮𝗶𝗻𝘀 𝗳𝗿𝗼𝗺 𝗚𝘂𝘆𝗮𝗻𝗮’𝘀 “𝗳𝗶𝗿𝘀𝘁 𝗲𝘅𝗽𝗼𝗿𝘁” 𝘁𝗼 𝗕𝗮𝗿𝗯𝗮𝗱𝗼𝘀.

𝗧𝗵𝗲 𝟱𝟵𝟮 𝗚𝘂𝗮𝗿𝗱𝗶𝗮𝗻 — has once again uncovered another instance of our Government’s sophisticated opacity, which we will continue to pursue in the furtherance of the Public Interest.

𝗦𝘁𝗮𝘆 𝗹𝗼𝗰𝗸𝗲𝗱 𝗳𝗼𝗿 𝗣𝗮𝗿𝘁 𝟮.

𝙏𝙝𝙚 592 𝙂𝙪𝙖𝙧𝙙𝙞𝙖𝙣 — 𝙏𝙧𝙪𝙩𝙝 , 𝘼𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙪𝙣𝙩𝙖𝙗𝙞𝙡𝙞𝙩𝙮, 𝙄𝙣𝙩𝙚𝙜𝙧𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙄𝙣 𝙂𝙪𝙮𝙖𝙣𝙖 𝘼𝙣𝙙 𝘾𝙖𝙧𝙞𝙗𝙗𝙚𝙖𝙣 𝙋𝙚𝙧𝙨𝙥𝙚𝙘𝙩𝙞𝙫𝙚𝙨