2026 – Page 26 – 592guardian.com

𝐂𝐋𝐄𝐀𝐍𝐔𝐏 𝐂𝐋𝐀𝐈𝐌𝐒 𝐅𝐀𝐋𝐋 𝐅𝐋𝐀𝐓: 𝐆𝐀𝐑𝐁𝐀𝐆𝐄 𝐒𝐓𝐈𝐋𝐋 𝐋𝐈𝐍𝐄𝐒 𝐆𝐄𝐎𝐑𝐆𝐄𝐓𝐎𝐖𝐍 𝐒𝐓𝐑𝐄𝐄𝐓𝐒 𝐎𝐍𝐄 𝐃𝐀𝐘 𝐋𝐀𝐓𝐄𝐑

April 14, 2026/in Culture & Society/by Staff Writer

Residents of Georgetown are outraged this morning after a highly publicized major garbage cleanup operation — carried out just yesterday, Saturday, April 12 — appears to have had little to no lasting impact on the capital’s streets. By Sunday morning, visible piles of waste and debris remained scattered throughout the city, raising serious questions about the effectiveness of the operation and the accountability of those responsible.

Eyewitnesses report that conditions on the ground look virtually identical to the state prior to Saturday’s cleanup, with garbage lining streets, sidewalks, and public spaces as though no work had taken place at all.

“It’s like yesterday never happened,” said one frustrated Georgetown resident. “What exactly did we pay for?”

No official statement has been issued explaining the apparent failure. Community members are demanding full transparency — including who funded the cleanup, who carried it out, and why the results are nowhere to be seen.This story is developing. The 592 Guardian will continue to follow up as officials are pressed for comment.

𝑇ℎ𝑒 592 𝐺𝑢𝑎𝑟𝑑𝑖𝑎𝑛 — 𝐴𝑐𝑐𝑜𝑢𝑛𝑡𝑎𝑏𝑖𝑙𝑖𝑡𝑦. 𝑇𝑟𝑢𝑡ℎ. 𝐶𝑎𝑟𝑖𝑏𝑏𝑒𝑎𝑛 𝑃𝑒𝑟𝑠𝑝𝑒𝑐𝑡𝑖𝑣𝑒.

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

April 14, 2026/in Editorial/by Staff Writer

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

𝐃𝐨𝐧’𝐭 𝐂𝐚𝐥𝐥 𝐌𝐞 — 𝐔𝐧𝐥𝐞𝐬𝐬 𝐘𝐨𝐮’𝐫𝐞 𝐅𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐲

April 14, 2026/in Opinions/by Staff Writer

When Home Affairs Minister Oneidge Walrond launched her now-infamous crackdown on tinted vehicles, she stood before the nation and told us what was meant to be a defining line in law enforcement reform:

“𝑫𝒐𝒏’𝒕 𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒍 𝒎𝒆.” 𝑵𝒐 𝒇𝒂𝒗𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔, 𝒏𝒐 𝒑𝒉𝒐𝒏𝒆 𝒄𝒂𝒍𝒍𝒔 𝒕𝒐 “𝒃𝒊𝒈 𝒐𝒏𝒆𝒔.” 𝑵𝒐 𝒆𝒙𝒄𝒆𝒑𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒘𝒆𝒍𝒍-𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒏𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒆𝒅. 𝑻𝒉𝒆 𝒆𝒓𝒂 𝒐𝒇 𝒔𝒆𝒍𝒆𝒄𝒕𝒊𝒗𝒆 𝒆𝒏𝒇𝒐𝒓𝒄𝒆𝒎𝒆𝒏𝒕, 𝒔𝒉𝒆 𝒑𝒓𝒐𝒎𝒊𝒔𝒆𝒅, 𝒘𝒂𝒔 𝒐𝒗𝒆𝒓.

But Guyanese citizens are now left asking — did she mean a word of it?

Because for days, social media has been flooded with footage showing a government-issued pickup — a multimillion-dollar taxpayer-funded vehicle — being hauled from a trench. The incident reportedly followed a night out, and according to multiple accounts, the driver was none other than Minister Walrond’s own son. The videos show laughter and levity where accountability should have been.

And what has been the official response? Silence.

Not a word from the Ministry of Home Affairs. Not a statement from the police hierarchy, which operates under her authority. Not even an acknowledgment from the Minister herself — despite journalists having put the question directly to her within the same Police Media Group she oversees.

If it were an ordinary citizen caught recklessly misusing public property, the Minister’s tint-crackdown swagger would have reappeared in full force. There would be arrests, charges, and public shaming. Instead, the institutions that exist to enforce standards seem paralyzed under proximity to power.

This is not just hypocrisy — it is a constitutional distortion. The police, reportedly instructed to step back when she appeared at the scene, raise the troubling specter of executive interference.

𝑾𝒉𝒆𝒏 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒐𝒇𝒇𝒊𝒄𝒊𝒂𝒍 𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒑𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒊𝒃𝒍𝒆 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒍𝒂𝒘 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒐𝒓𝒅𝒆𝒓 𝒃𝒆𝒏𝒅𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒐𝒔𝒆 𝒍𝒂𝒘𝒔 𝒇𝒐𝒓 𝒑𝒆𝒓𝒔𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒗𝒆𝒏𝒊𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒆, 𝑮𝒖𝒚𝒂𝒏𝒂’𝒔 𝒅𝒆𝒎𝒐𝒄𝒓𝒂𝒕𝒊𝒄 𝒊𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒔 𝒔𝒖𝒇𝒇𝒆𝒓 𝒂 𝒘𝒐𝒖𝒏𝒅 𝒇𝒂𝒓 𝒅𝒆𝒆𝒑𝒆𝒓 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒏 𝒂𝒏𝒚 𝒕𝒓𝒆𝒏𝒄𝒉.

So yes, let’s address this anomaly — this glaring betrayal of the “One Guyana” promise. The Minister of Home Affairs cannot credibly lead a ministry dedicated to impartial justice while selectively shielding her own family. The standards she demands of the public must extend to her household.

When it comes to Family, Friends, and Favourites, it seems the Ministry of Home Affairs has one unwritten rule: silence is the policy.

Reports identify the driver as the Home Affairs Minister’s son, allegedly after leaving a nightclub. What followed was not transparency, but a wall of silence thick enough to hide a scandal.

That silence raises urgent questions of public accountability:

•𝐖𝐡𝐲 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫’𝐬 𝐬𝐨𝐧 𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐢𝐧𝐠 𝐚 𝐯𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐜𝐥𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐛𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐧𝐠𝐬 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐨𝐯𝐞𝐫𝐧𝐦𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐨𝐟 𝐆𝐮𝐲𝐚𝐧𝐚? 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐬𝐞 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐬𝐨𝐧𝐚𝐥 𝐭𝐨𝐲𝐬 𝐟𝐨𝐫 𝐟𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐮𝐬𝐞. 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐲 𝐚𝐫𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐞 𝐚𝐬𝐬𝐞𝐭𝐬 𝐞𝐧𝐭𝐫𝐮𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐝 𝐭𝐨 𝐩𝐮𝐛𝐥𝐢𝐜 𝐬𝐞𝐫𝐯𝐚𝐧𝐭𝐬, 𝐧𝐨𝐭 𝐟𝐚𝐦𝐢𝐥𝐲 𝐜𝐡𝐚𝐩𝐞𝐫𝐨𝐧𝐞𝐬.

•𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐚 𝐛𝐫𝐞𝐚𝐭𝐡𝐚𝐥𝐲𝐳𝐞𝐫 𝐭𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐚𝐝𝐦𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝 𝐚𝐭 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐬𝐜𝐞𝐧𝐞? 𝐈𝐟 𝐬𝐨, 𝐰𝐡𝐚𝐭 𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐮𝐥𝐭𝐬? 𝐈𝐟 𝐧𝐨𝐭, 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐰𝐚𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚𝐫𝐝 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐢𝐠𝐧𝐨𝐫𝐞𝐝 — 𝐚𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐨𝐮𝐥𝐝 𝐚𝐧𝐲 𝐨𝐭𝐡𝐞𝐫 𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐳𝐞𝐧 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐞𝐞𝐧 𝐚𝐟𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐝𝐞𝐝 𝐬𝐮𝐜𝐡 𝐢𝐧𝐝𝐮𝐥𝐠𝐞𝐧𝐜𝐞?

•𝐖𝐚𝐬 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐝𝐫𝐢𝐯𝐞𝐫 𝐝𝐞𝐭𝐚𝐢𝐧𝐞𝐝 𝐨𝐫 𝐭𝐚𝐤𝐞𝐧 𝐭𝐨 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐧𝐞𝐚𝐫𝐞𝐬𝐭 𝐩𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐬𝐭𝐚𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐚𝐬 𝐩𝐫𝐨𝐜𝐞𝐝𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐝𝐞𝐦𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐬?

•𝐀𝐧𝐝 𝐰𝐡𝐲 𝐡𝐚𝐯𝐞 𝐛𝐚𝐬𝐢𝐜 𝐪𝐮𝐞𝐬𝐭𝐢𝐨𝐧𝐬 𝐟𝐫𝐨𝐦 𝐣𝐨𝐮𝐫𝐧𝐚𝐥𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐬 𝐢𝐧𝐬𝐢𝐝𝐞 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚 𝐆𝐫𝐨𝐮𝐩 — 𝐭𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐢𝐧𝐢𝐬𝐭𝐞𝐫’𝐬 𝐨𝐰𝐧 𝐟𝐨𝐫𝐮𝐦 — 𝐠𝐨𝐧𝐞 𝐮𝐧𝐚𝐧𝐬𝐰𝐞𝐫𝐞𝐝?

It is difficult to avoid the stench of double standards. The same woman who spent the past year lecturing the public about responsibility, road safety, and accountability has gone mute when those principles touch her own doorstep.

Last year, at the launching of Road Safety Month, Minister Walrond warned against “carelessness, speed and distraction” and pledged that even a single death caused by a drunk driver was “one too many.” She later stood beside a grieving mother at an event for victims of road accidents, her voice thick with empathy as she spoke of “tragedies we have the power to prevent.”

In December, she thundered about transparency, promising to bring an end to the “selective practices of the past.”

Today, those very words have returned to challenge her credibility. By allegedly interfering in the crash scene and remaining silent while the police hold their breath, she has done exactly what she accused others of doing — bending the law for convenience and privilege.

𝑻𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒊𝒔 𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒎𝒆𝒓𝒆𝒍𝒚 𝒂 𝒎𝒂𝒕𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝒐𝒇 𝒐𝒑𝒕𝒊𝒄𝒔. 𝑰𝒕 𝒊𝒔 𝒂 𝒒𝒖𝒆𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏 𝒐𝒇 𝒊𝒏𝒕𝒆𝒈𝒓𝒊𝒕𝒚 𝒂𝒏𝒅 𝒄𝒐𝒏𝒔𝒕𝒊𝒕𝒖𝒕𝒊𝒐𝒏𝒂𝒍 𝒆𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒄𝒔.

When the Minister responsible for law and order fails to submit herself and her family to the same standards she is mandated to apply to ordinary citizens, she undermines every police officer, every prosecutor, and every citizen who still believes in equal justice under law.

No minister can credibly lead a portfolio dedicated to “safe, transparent, and enforceable” governance while embodying the opposite.

The time for silence has passed. Minister Oneidge Walrond must go — not because of the circulation of a video, but because she has forfeited the moral authority to lead. The people’s desire is clear: Guyana deserves a Home Affairs Minister who serves the law, not one who bends it.

𝑰𝒇 𝒔𝒉𝒆 𝒄𝒂𝒏𝒏𝒐𝒕 𝒖𝒑𝒉𝒐𝒍𝒅 𝒕𝒉𝒂𝒕 𝒑𝒓𝒊𝒏𝒄𝒊𝒑𝒍𝒆, 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝒉𝒐𝒏𝒐𝒓𝒂𝒃𝒍𝒆 𝒄𝒐𝒖𝒓𝒔𝒆 𝒊𝒔 𝒄𝒍𝒆𝒂𝒓: 𝑴𝒊𝒏𝒊𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒓 𝑶𝒏𝒆𝒊𝒅𝒈𝒆 𝑾𝒂𝒍𝒓𝒐𝒏𝒅 𝒎𝒖𝒔𝒕 𝒔𝒕𝒆𝒑 𝒅𝒐𝒘𝒏.

Minister’s Son Damages Government Vehicle in Late-Night Incident

April 14, 2026/in Special Report/by Staff Writer

Georgetown, Guyana — Questions are swirling around the Ministry of Home Affairs after the son of Minister Oneidge was reportedly involved in an accident that left a brand new, multimillion-dollar government vehicle damaged, raising serious concerns about the misuse of taxpayer-funded assets.
According to sources close to the matter, the Minister’s son was seen leaving a club shortly before the incident occurred. The vehicle, which belongs to the Government of Guyana, sustained damage — prompting immediate public outcry over who authorised its use by a private individual.
Opposition party WIN puts the following questions directly to the Honourable Minister:

First — Why was your son in possession of and operating a vehicle that is the property of the Government of Guyana? Government vehicles are publicly funded assets intended strictly for official use, not personal or recreational purposes.
Second — Given that your son was reportedly seen leaving a club prior to the accident, was a breathalyzer test administered at the scene? The public deserves transparency on whether standard police procedures were followed.
Third — Was the Minister’s son taken to the nearest police station following the incident, as would be required of any ordinary citizen involved in a vehicular accident under similar circumstances?

Sources further indicate that reporters within the Police Media Group, of which Minister Oneidge is a member, have already raised questions about the incident — questions that have gone unanswered to this day.
The silence from the Ministry is deafening.

Guyanese taxpayers, who funded the purchase of this vehicle, deserve full accountability. WIN Party— calls on Minister Oneidge to address reporters promptly, provide a detailed account of the circumstances surrounding the accident, and clarify what disciplinary or legal actions, if any, have been taken.
𝐓𝐡𝐢𝐬 𝐬𝐭𝐨𝐫𝐲 𝐢𝐬 𝐝𝐞𝐯𝐞𝐥𝐨𝐩𝐢𝐧𝐠.𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝟓𝟗𝟐 𝐆𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐰𝐢𝐥𝐥 𝐜𝐨𝐧𝐭𝐢𝐧𝐮𝐞 𝐭𝐨 𝐟𝐨𝐥𝐥𝐨𝐰 𝐮𝐩.

The Theft of Thanks: How Another Guyanese Gift Became A Government Stageshow

April 14, 2026/in Featured, Special Report/by Staff Writer

Last evening, as the state cameras panned across neatly manicured lawns and fireworks stitched the air, the country was told a familiar story — one of “presidential vision” and “regional transformation.” But beneath the glow of the drone lights and the edited applause lies an inconvenient truth: this is not the government’s creation. It is a repackaged act of private generosity and foreign philanthropy, rewritten into a political triumph.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐨𝐞 𝐕𝐢𝐞𝐢𝐫𝐚

Before the plaques, before the speeches, there was Joe Vieira — a man whose life bridged agriculture, recreation, and public service. The land on which the new “Guyana–China Friendship Park” now stands was once part of Plantation Meer Zorgen — and it was not seized, bought, or assigned by any ministry. It was given, outright, by Joseph Rudolph Vieira, AA, to the people of Guyana.

Yet, his name is nowhere in the new narrative. No marker of his generosity stands beside the president’s podium. No mention of his gift survives the government’s public relations machinery. Instead, state media now presents the space as a “vision realized” under the current administration. A more precise term might be appropriated legacy.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 $𝟏𝟐 𝐌𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐌𝐢𝐫𝐚𝐠𝐞

As headlines trumpet the “government’s investment in recreation,” few citizens are told that not a single Guyanese taxpayer dollar funded this $2.5 billion transformation. The entire park — design, construction, and finish — was financed through a grant from the People’s Republic of China.

Yet, the government has positioned itself as both benefactor and builder, turning ribbon-cutting into performance art. It’s a sleight of hand as old as propaganda itself: when you control the narrative, you don’t need to control the facts.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐨𝐥𝐢𝐭𝐢𝐜𝐬 𝐨𝐟 𝐄𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞

Why does the public not know? Because truth is inconvenient when you’re busy choreographing glory. The omission of Joe Vieira’s contribution weakens the myth of state-driven progress. The silence about the Chinese grant undermines the narrative of “responsible fiscal management.” To admit that this was a gift would be to expose the administration’s reliance on external benefactors and inherited assets — a revelation that punctures the illusion of economic self-reliance and domestic vision.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚’𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲

It’s not merely what’s said, but what’s unsaid, that writes history. When the nightly newscast breathlessly reports “another government milestone,” it becomes a participant in what can only be called accolade theft. The truth is simple: this park exists not because of allocation, but because of donation. The government’s role was custodial, not

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝟓𝟗𝟐 𝐆𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭

True leadership honors provenance. It builds upon the gifts of predecessors with humility and transparency.

𝙏𝙤 𝙚𝙧𝙖𝙨𝙚 𝙅𝙤𝙚 𝙑𝙞𝙚𝙞𝙧𝙖 𝙛𝙧𝙤𝙢 𝙝𝙞𝙨 𝙤𝙬𝙣 𝙡𝙚𝙜𝙖𝙘𝙮 𝙖𝙣𝙙 𝙥𝙧𝙚𝙨𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝘾𝙝𝙞𝙣𝙖’𝙨 𝙜𝙚𝙣𝙚𝙧𝙤𝙨𝙞𝙩𝙮 𝙖𝙨 𝙙𝙤𝙢𝙚𝙨𝙩𝙞𝙘 𝙖𝙘𝙘𝙤𝙢𝙥𝙡𝙞𝙨𝙝𝙢𝙚𝙣𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙢𝙤𝙧𝙚 𝙩𝙝𝙖𝙣 𝙙𝙞𝙨𝙩𝙤𝙧𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣 — 𝙞𝙩 𝙞𝙨 𝙣𝙖𝙩𝙞𝙤𝙣𝙖𝙡 𝙜𝙖𝙨𝙡𝙞𝙜𝙝𝙩𝙞𝙣𝙜.

If governance becomes theater, then public memory must become resistance. Because naming the truth — who gave, who built, who claimed — is the only way to reclaim integrity in a country drowning in its own propaganda.

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

The Sovereignty of The Symbol

April 14, 2026/in Local News, Culture & Society, Featured/by Staff Writer

As Guyana approaches its 60th Independence Anniversary—our Diamond Jubilee—the branding we choose is more than just “art.” It is a statement of who we are.

The preliminary logo currently in circulation has sparked a necessary conversation, first highlighted by observers like Village Voice. To the forensic eye, the parallels are undeniable: the specific saffron hue and the 24-spoke navy wheel mirror the national symbols of India.

While we honor our ancestral roots and global ties, a Jubilee is a celebration of the home we built here, on this soil. In 1966, the Forbes Burnham government and the founders of our Republic established the Golden Arrowhead as a sacred contract. It was designed to be a singular, unifying aesthetic for a plural society—red for zeal, gold for wealth, and green for our vast land.

When national branding drifts toward the iconography of another sovereign state, we risk diluting our own unique “Guyanese-ness.” For a milestone as heavy as sixty years, our symbols must be a mirror where every Guyanese—of every descent—sees themselves reflected without explanation or defense.

As a voice of Indian descent writing from a purely nationalist prism, I believe we must guard the integrity of our sovereign identity. We are not a footnote in another nation’s history; we are a “One People” success story sixty years in the making.

Is this logo a “test fire” of a new direction, or a departure from the foundation of 1966? A national symbol should unite, not divide. We call for a return to the colors that define us all: the Red, the Gold, and the Green.

𝑻𝒉𝒆 592 𝑮𝒖𝒂𝒓𝒅𝒊𝒂𝒏 𝒘𝒂𝒏𝒕𝒔 𝒕𝒐 𝒌𝒏𝒐𝒘: 𝑫𝒐𝒆𝒔 𝒕𝒉𝒊𝒔 𝒍𝒐𝒈𝒐 𝒓𝒆𝒑𝒓𝒆𝒔𝒆𝒏𝒕 𝒀𝑶𝑼? 𝑶𝒓 𝒊𝒔 𝒊𝒕 𝒕𝒊𝒎𝒆 𝒕𝒐 𝒓𝒆𝒕𝒖𝒓𝒏 𝒕𝒐 𝒕𝒉𝒆 𝑨𝒓𝒓𝒐𝒘𝒉𝒆𝒂𝒅?

Transactional Diplomacy and the Courage to See Opportunity in Adversity

April 14, 2026/in Local News, Business & Economics, Featured/by Staff Writer

In an era when transactional diplomacy has become the global norm, Guyana must respond not with indignation or insularity, but with pragmatism, foresight, and the courage to see opportunity in adversity. President Irfaan Ali’s formal protest against Suriname’s decision to impose fees on vessels using the Corentyne River has ignited fierce debate, not just between Georgetown and Paramaribo, but among business chambers and trade advocates across the country. Yet amid the noise, one truth is clear — Guyana’s private sector has once again failed the test of vision.

Every major chamber and business commission has rushed to condemn Suriname’s move as protectionist, a knee-jerk reaction that reveals more about their own lack of imagination than any policy flaw across the border. True entrepreneurs understand that obstruction breeds innovation; real opportunity often hides where others see crisis. Adversity has always been the cradle of invention — but Guyana’s business elite appear more inclined toward complaint than creativity.

Let us not forget that “choke points” — those strategic intersections of trade, geography, and influence — have become the modern vocabulary of economic power. From Singapore to Panama, nations have turned location into leverage, converting geography into sustained prosperity. Ironically, while many Guyanese business leaders parrot Singapore’s success story, few seem to grasp the essence of that transformation. Singapore had no oil wells or forests to sell — only an unyielding supply of political will. Today, Suriname is demonstrating a similar temperament, employing its natural geography to create long-term fiscal gain. Why should Guyana begrudge such sovereign pragmatism?

Even more troubling is the hypocrisy underlying the local outrage. The same voices that decry Suriname’s assertion of sovereignty have remained curiously silent about Guyana’s own surrender of it — most glaringly in the oil sector. Our government, perched on a mountain of potential revenue, has timidly refused to implement a windfall tax, surrendering the nation’s fiscal destiny to ExxonMobil. The nation’s “captured state” has become an open secret, and yet the same business elites — who howl at Suriname’s tolls — have nothing to say about the most lopsided contract in modern times.

This duplicity must be called out, not just in political halls, but within the ethos and logos that define The 592 Guardian. Guyana’s future depends on leaders — both public and private — who can see beyond their limitations, who understand that sovereignty, economic innovation, and transactional diplomacy are not adversaries but allies. When protectionism meets pragmatism, we must choose courage over comfort. That is the real lesson in this moment — and the test of our national maturity.

𝐖𝐡𝐨𝐬𝐞 𝐕𝐢𝐬𝐢𝐨𝐧? 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐓𝐫𝐮𝐭𝐡 𝐁𝐞𝐡𝐢𝐧𝐝 𝐭𝐡𝐞 $𝟏𝟐𝐌 “𝐅𝐫𝐢𝐞𝐧𝐝𝐬𝐡𝐢𝐩” 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐤 𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐏𝐫𝐨𝐩𝐚𝐠𝐚𝐧𝐝𝐚 𝐋𝐨𝐨𝐩

April 13, 2026/in Featured, Editorial/by Staff Writer

Last evening, the nation was treated to the familiar spectacle of state-aligned media cameras capturing “progress.” The headlines spoke of a “government commitment to recreation” and a “presidential vision for regional development.” But as is often the case with the current administration, the narrative is built on the erasure of two critical truths: who actually gave the land and who actually paid for the work.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐄𝐫𝐚𝐬𝐮𝐫𝐞 𝐨𝐟 𝐉𝐨𝐞 𝐕𝐢𝐞𝐢𝐫𝐚

The public is being subtly conditioned to view this as a government-built project. However, the foundation of this park was not a government initiative; it was a personal sacrifice.

• The Reality: The land—formerly part of Plantation Meer Zorgen—was a gift to the people of Guyana by Mr. Joseph Rudolph Vieira, AA (1920–2005).

• The Distortion: By rebranding the space as the “Guyana-China Friendship Park” and emphasizing “Government oversight,” the state media is effectively burying the legacy of a private citizen who donated his property for the public good long before the current political era.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 $𝟏𝟐 𝐌𝐢𝐥𝐥𝐢𝐨𝐧 𝐒𝐢𝐥𝐞𝐧𝐭 𝐏𝐚𝐫𝐭𝐧𝐞𝐫

While the mainstream media carries on about the “Government’s investment in Region 3,” they conveniently omit a staggering financial fact: The Guyanese taxpayer did not fund this $2.5 Billion (GYD) transformation.

• The Fact: This was an unconditional grant (a gift) from the People’s Republic of China.

• The Duplicity: State media frames the project as an achievement of the local administration’s “infrastructure trajectory.” In reality, the government acted as little more than a landlord for a project designed, funded, and largely executed by foreign partners.

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐌𝐞𝐝𝐢𝐚’𝐬 𝐂𝐨𝐦𝐩𝐥𝐢𝐜𝐢𝐭𝐲 𝐢𝐧 “𝐀𝐜𝐜𝐨𝐥𝐚𝐝𝐞 𝐓𝐡𝐞𝐟𝐭”

Why isn’t the $12,000,000 USD figure front and center? Because it weakens the “Great Leader” narrative. If the public realizes that the state is simply cutting ribbons on gifts from foreign powers and private citizens, the illusion of “unprecedented government spending” begins to crack

𝐓𝐡𝐞 𝐆𝐮𝐚𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐚𝐧 𝐕𝐞𝐫𝐝𝐢𝐜𝐭:

True leadership involves gratitude, not just photo ops. To credit the state for the “vision” of a park that Joe Vieira provided and China built is not just “bias”—it is a forensic distortion of history.

Wales Buses Expose Local Content Lie – Time to Burn It Down

March 26, 2026/in Investigative Report/by Staff Writer

A video hit FB this week: buses packed with Venezuelan migrants rolling up to Guyana’s Wales gas-to-energy site. Lindsayca ships them in while Guyanese watch from the fence. Local content? What a joke.

We’ve seen the Act enforced like scripture elsewhere. That $300M fuel farm? Dead over a shady consultant technicality. Multinationals rent 51% “Guyanese” certificates from insiders at premium rates. Elites cash in as landlords to foreign expats. Rules hit hard when big contracts are at stake.

But buses of migrants at a flagship project? Crickets. No tenders. No waivers shown. No “no local available” proof. Deadlines shift, excuses flow, and nationals compete with desperation labor. Double standard? It’s the whole damn game.

This isn’t oversight—it’s economic sabotage. Small man waits for skills training; migrants get bused in cheap. Insiders profit from ownership scams and rentals. When does enforcement touch the powerful, not just kill small deals?

Hard hits:

• Fuel farm axed for paperwork; Wales ignores buses. Why?

• Who waived Lindsayca? Names. Dates. Or admit the exemption scam.

• Locals sidelined in their country?

That’s not development—it’s colonization 2.0.

Government, Lindsayca: Answer or own the hypocrisy. Video’s viral. Truth’s out. Enforce equally or scrap the lie. Guyana First means ALL Guyanese, not rented certificates and migrant buses.

The 592 Guardian calls it: Local content’s a fraud for labor, a racket for the elite. Time to fix it—or watch trust burn.

161 Billion for Health, but None for Marlon

March 23, 2026/in Opinions/by Staff Writer

When the government boasted of a record $161.1 billion allocation to the health sector this year, it was sold to the nation as an affirmation of progress — gleaming hospitals, high-tech diagnostics, and a promise that “all Guyanese” would benefit from improved healthcare delivery. Yet, as a nation, we stand today in collective mourning.

Twelve-year-old Marlon Jupiter is dead — gone before his time — because the state that swore to protect him could not find $7 million to save his life.

Marlon suffered from T-lymphoblastic lymphoma, a rare but treatable cancer. The care he needed did not exist in Guyana. His family, like so many others before them, turned to the public with desperation — social media pleas, bake sales, and appeals for help. While they struggled to raise US$35,000, the government was signing off on hundreds of millions in discretionary allocations: $900 million for “Men on a Mission,” $300 million for the Office of the President, and untold sums for lavish conferences, diplomatic missions, and “consultations.”

In a budget where individual kickbacks can exceed $7 million, it is a national disgrace that a child was forced to die for want of that same amount.

What value do mounds of concrete and air-conditioned wards carry when life-saving treatment remains beyond reach? Of what use are billion-dollar budgets when their impact cannot be measured in the preservation of a single innocent life? This country continues to exhibit a pathology of misaligned priorities — where optics eclipse substance, where monuments matter more than lives, and where political showpieces are dressed up as “investments in health.”

When “healthcare” is invoked to justify building promenades for private hospitals and expanding vanity projects under the First Lady’s fund, we see what truly drives the expenditure: image management, not human welfare. The Constitution guarantees free healthcare, but “free” means nothing when it is hollow — when fundamental care is missing, and when bureaucracy and neglect replace compassion and responsiveness.

Marlon’s death is not just a tragedy. It is an indictment. It represents criminal negligence by a state that failed to deploy its resources toward their constitutional purpose — the preservation of life.

Every public dollar misused or hoarded for politics is a moral crime, costing lives like Marlon’s. A government’s greatness is not measured by how many hospitals it builds but by how many lives its health system can save — in real time, when help is needed most.

Rest easy, young Marlon. You deserved better.

And to those in power: your legacy will be judged not by the floodlights on new infrastructure, but by the number of children who lived to see adulthood because you chose compassion over vanity.