Mortgages for the Few: Why Guyanaโ€™s Rate Cuts Are a Mirage for the Masses

BY: Hem Kumar 

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ

Warm words. Swift press releases. Three percent rates that gleam like foolโ€™s gold. GBTI slashes mortgages this week, Republic Bank uncaps to $60 million at five percent, New Building Society trumpets โ€œbest rates in the industry.โ€ In a nation wired for homeownership dreamsโ€”$159.1 billion in Budget 2026, 15,000 house lots, 8,000 homesโ€”itโ€™s sold as the great democratization.


It is not.
The Unspoken Threshold
Here is the question no bank answers: What salary gets you through the door? GBTI offers 25-year terms for low-income loans up to $30 millionโ€”no minimum wage disclosed. Republic demands payslips, NIS statements, sale agreementsโ€”still silent on the payslipโ€™s number. NBS advertises rates, not reality. This opacity is no accident. Publish the thresholds, and the dream shatters.


Arithmetic unmasks it. Average gross monthly salary: GYD 100,000. Median: GYD 50,000. Private minimum: GYD 60,147โ€”40% of Georgetown basics. A $30 million loan at 3.5% over 25 years? GYD 150,000 monthly. Banks cap payments at 30-40% of income. Qualifying wage: GYD 375,000 to 500,000. Three to five times the average. Seven times minimum. For 90% of workers, $30 million is theory, not tenure.[paylab +1]
Savings dazzle the elite: From 5% to 3%, monthly drops GYD 33,200 on $30 millionโ€”over GYD 10 million lifetime interest spared. But if you earn GYD 60,000? Youโ€™re invisible.


Supply Without Subsidy
Ceilings riseโ€”supply expands. Repayments donโ€™t shrink. No income bridge for the poor. Contrast: 50,000+ house lots since 2020โ€”90% low-income, 47% single women, 54% youth under 35. Tiered, targeted. State-backed homes demand just GYD 100,000 contribution. Mortgages need that model: income-tested subsidies. Caribbean neighbors taper state-paid interest gapsโ€”borrower gets 3%, Treasury tops up. Guyana lags.


Liquidity or Laundering?
Why the rush? Economy swims in liquidityโ€”31% reserves-to-assets. Oil billions idle; banks funnel into โ€œsafeโ€ mortgages. Marketing teases masses, underwriting gates the few. Debt trap? Noโ€”rejections protect. Laundering? Unlikely; deposits cycle legitimately. But opacity breeds suspicion. Whereโ€™s the data on low-wage approvals?


Demand Transparency Now
Bank of Guyana, Ministry of Finance: Mandate disclosure. Minimum net income per tier. Debt-to-income ratios. Approval rates below median wage. Not trade secretsโ€”family rights.


Three percent for the top tenth isnโ€™t progress. Itโ€™s a headline. Homeownership demands arithmetic for all, not illusions for some. Guyanaโ€™s families deserve doors flung open, not thresholds in the shadows.

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”

โ€œCountry First, Not Clause First: Aliโ€™s โ€˜Sanctity of Contractโ€™ Excuse Falls Flat Next to Real Leadersโ€

BY: Hem Kumar 

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ

The real test of leadership is not how smoothly you manage powerful interests, but how visibly you wrestle them for the people. When President Irfaan Ali shrinks from any serious renegotiation of the Exxon contract and hides behind โ€œsanctity of contractโ€ and โ€œunimaginable legal hurdles,โ€ he is not just defending legal technicalitiesโ€”he is surrendering Guyanaโ€™s bargaining power while the fields pour billions offshore.


Contrast that with leaders who act as if the nationโ€™s interests are nonโ€‘negotiable. John F. Kennedyโ€™s famous lineโ€”โ€œAsk not what your country can do for you, ask what you can do for your countryโ€โ€”was not just a slogan; it framed a president prepared to confront the Pentagon, the CIA, and Wall Street when he believed they were putting their interests ahead of the people. Kennedyโ€™s Cuba missile crisis stand was not a โ€œsafeโ€ move; it was a risk taken in the name of national sovereignty and security.


Then look at Delcy Rodrรญguez sitting in The Hague, facing down an international tribunal over Venezuelaโ€™s Essequibo claims. Whatever the outcome, that imageโ€”the image of a national leader in the dock, tethered to her peopleโ€™s causeโ€”sends a single, unmistakable message: โ€œI am here because of you, not because of investorsโ€. The symbolism alone is a weapon: it tells Venezuelans she is willing to bear the legal and political cost of defending territory they see as theirs.


Compare that to Volodymyr Zelenskyy appearing in battleโ€‘fatigues, refusing to flee Kyiv and insisting he will be last to leave the capital under attack. Zelenskyyโ€™s clothes are not theatrics; they are a visual declaration that the president shares the risk with his people, not the comfort of the boardroom or the embassy.


Ali, in contrast, appears in Houston positioning himself not as a tribune of Guyanese citizens, but as Exxon and Chevronโ€™s diplomatic facilitator. He talks about โ€œmanaging by resultsโ€ while preserving a contract that critics say handcuffs the state,cedes control of fiscal terms, and lets oil companies recover up to 75% of investments before Guyana gets a sliver of the remaining 25%. He is not going to The Hague for his people; he is going to OTC to tell the world that Exxonโ€™s comfort comes first.


Any government can drift along with a poor deal. What distinguishes a real leader from a caretaker is whether they are willing to pick the fight, to test the limits of the contract, to renegotiate, to litigate, or to at least publicly expose the inequity of the terms. Aliโ€™s refusal to seriously challenge Exxonโ€”even while acknowledging that future contracts will have better termsโ€”tells Guyanese that for him, โ€œcountry firstโ€ stops at the edge of the PSA.


So let the record be clear: Kennedy rode the risk, Rodrรญguez stands in the dock, Zelenskyy stands in the war zone. Ali? He stands in the shadow of Exxon, protecting their sanctuary while quietly asking Guyanese to accept a secondโ€‘class deal. That is not leadership; that is landlord politics with a presidential smile.

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”

PUBLIC ADVISORY

The Hydrometeorological Service has issued a Special Information Bulletin warning of unstable atmospheric conditions, widespread rainfall, and an increased flood risk across Guyana from tonight, May 10, 2026, to May 15, 2026. Residents, especially those in low-lying and poorly drained areas, are urged to remain alert and take all necessary precautions.[


Rainfall is expected to affect the country over the next several days, with a period of reduced rainfall anticipated from May 11 to 13, followed by a more significant increase on May 14 and 15. Forecast models indicate that all regions may be impacted, with rainfall totals potentially reaching 25 mm to 50 mm in 24 hours, and in some areas 25 mm to 75 mm in 24 hours.


Members of the public are advised to:
โ€ข Clear drains, culverts, and waterways near homes and businesses.
โ€ข Secure property and move valuables to higher ground where possible.
โ€ข Exercise caution while driving or walking through flooded areas.
โ€ข Monitor official weather updates and follow instructions from local authorities.
โ€ข Prepare for possible localized flooding and disruptions to travel and daily activities.


Fisherfolk, farmers, and residents in flood-prone communities are especially encouraged to take early protective measures. The public should remain vigilant and treat this weather system seriously, as conditions may worsen rapidly.


For official updates, continue to monitor announcements from the Hydrometeorological Service and emergency management authorities.

Venezuela Escalates Essequibo Campaign as Interim President Arrives for ICJ Hearing

Venezuelaโ€™s interim president, Delcy Rodrรญguez, has landed in the Netherlands to personally lead her countryโ€™s delegation at the International Court of Justice (ICJ), signaling a renewed and highly strategic push in Caracasโ€™ long-standing claim to Guyanaโ€™s Essequibo region.


According to an official statement from Venezuelaโ€™s presidential office, Rodrรญguez will appear before the UNโ€™s principal judicial body as hearings resume in the case brought by Guyana in 2018. The matter centers on the validity of the 1899 Arbitral Award, which legally settled the boundary in Guyanaโ€™s favorโ€”an outcome Venezuela has persistently sought to overturn.


Her presence at The Hague underscores the political weight Venezuela is now attaching to the proceedings, particularly in the wake of heightened geopolitical tensions following the dramatic removal of Nicolรกs Maduro earlier this year. This marks Rodrรญguezโ€™s first visit to Europe since assuming power under extraordinary circumstances.


The Essequibo region, which comprises over two-thirds of Guyanaโ€™s landmass and is rich in oil and natural resources, remains at the heart of the dispute. Guyana has maintained that the matter is settled under international law and has consistently rejected Venezuelaโ€™s claims as baseless and destabilizing.


While a final ruling from the ICJ is still months away, its judgment will be legally binding, though enforcement mechanisms remain limited, relying ultimately on the UN Security Council.


Rodrรญguezโ€™s direct involvement raises fresh concerns about Venezuelaโ€™s broader strategy, including whether this appearance is a genuine legal engagement or part of a wider political maneuver aimed at bolstering domestic legitimacy and international positioning.


For Guyana, the stakes could not be higher. The proceedings at The Hague are not merely legal formalitiesโ€”they represent a defining moment in the defense of its territorial sovereignty.


๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”

Trinidad Probes Reported Oil Spill as Venezuela Raises Alarm Over Environmental Damage

An investigation has been launched into reports of an oil spill in the Gulf of Paria, following claims by the Venezuelan Government that the incident has already caused significant environmental harm along its coastline.


In a formal communiquรฉ issued on Saturday, Venezuelaโ€”under Acting President Delcy Rodrรญguezโ€”alerted the international community to what it described as an oil spill โ€œoriginating from the Republic of Trinidad and Tobago,โ€ with documented impacts on the coastal states of Sucre and Delta Amacuro.
According to Venezuelan authorities, preliminary technical assessments indicate that the spill has affected marine ecosystems, shorelines, and fishing communities, while posing serious risks to mangroves, wetlands, and other ecologically sensitive zones critical to regional biodiversity and food security.


The communiquรฉ further warned of damage to vulnerable species and hydrobiological resources, underscoring the potential long-term ecological consequences if containment and remediation measures are not urgently implemented.


Venezuela has since instructed its Ministry of Foreign Affairs to formally request detailed information on the incident, including the scope of the spill and the response plan being undertaken by Trinidad and Tobago.


Additionally, the Venezuelan Government is calling for full compliance with international environmental obligations and has signaled its expectation for reparative action to address any confirmed damage.


โ€œThe Government of the Bolivarian Republic of Venezuela will continue to deploy all necessary actions to protect affected ecosystems and safeguard impacted communities,โ€ the statement concluded.
In response, Trinidad and Tobagoโ€™s Energy Minister, Dr. Roodal Moonilal, confirmed that state-owned Heritage Petroleum Company Limited is currently conducting inquiries into the matter.


He indicated that a formal investigation is underway and assured that further updates will be provided as more information becomes available.

The Rot at the National Stadium

BY: Hem Kumar 

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ

Allegations now surfacing about the distribution of contracts at the National Stadium strike at the very core of fairness, governance, and public trust in Guyana. The We Invest in Nationhood (WIN) party, led by Opposition Leader Azruddin Mohamed, has sounded the alarmโ€”but what is most troubling is that these claims do not exist in isolation. They fit into a long, uncomfortable pattern.

At the heart of the issue is a familiar accusation: that state contracts are being funnelled to loyalists of the ruling Peopleโ€™s Progressive Party (PPP), while ordinary contractorsโ€”many already battling economic hardshipโ€”are left on the outside looking in. If true, this is not merely political patronage. It is the systematic exclusion of citizens from opportunities funded by their own tax dollars.

This is not how a functioning democracy allocates resources.

The Procurement Act of 2003 was designed to prevent precisely this kind of abuse. It was meant to guarantee transparency, competition, and fairness. Yet, more than two decades later, confidence in the system is eroding, not strengthening. The persistent complaints from contractors and civil society suggest that the law exists more on paper than in practice.

There are growing concerns that procurement procedures are being manipulatedโ€”whether through sole-sourcing, restricted tendering, or opaque evaluation processes that raise more questions than answers. When contracts repeatedly land in the hands of the politically connected, merit becomes irrelevant and public confidence collapses.

And where, one must ask, are the watchdogs?

The National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) and the Public Procurement Commission (PPC) were established to act as safeguards against precisely this kind of misconduct. Yet the perceptionโ€”fair or notโ€”is that oversight is either weak, selective, or entirely absent. Silence in the face of mounting allegations only deepens suspicion.

This is bigger than one stadium. It is about whether Guyanaโ€™s development is being built on competence or cronyism.

Small contractors across the country are watching. They are working, struggling, and competingโ€”only to feel that the game is rigged before it even begins. When access to opportunity depends on political allegiance rather than qualification, the message to citizens is clear: loyalty matters more than legitimacy.

That is a dangerous message for any nation.

The government must understand that transparency is not optionalโ€”it is a duty. If the procurement system is clean, then open it. Publish the contracts. Disclose the evaluation criteria. Let the public see who is winning, and why. If everything is above board, there should be nothing to hide.
But if it is not, then what is unfolding at the National Stadium is not just mismanagementโ€”it is a betrayal of public trust.

Guyana cannot afford a system where national resources are treated as political rewards. Development must belong to all, not a privileged few. Until that principle is upheldโ€”not in words, but in actionโ€”the questions will not go away.

They will only get louder.

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”

Luxury Lies, Missing Millions: How Guyanaโ€™s Tax System Was Gamed Again

BY: Hem Kumar 

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ

Another day, another gut-punch to the Guyanese taxpayerโ€”and this time, the stench of elite privilege and systemic failure is impossible to ignore.

Information now in the public domain reveals that the Guyana Revenue Authority (GRA) may have been fleeced of hundreds of millions of dollars in unpaid taxes tied to the importation of three high-end luxury vehicles by a prominent attorney, Devindra Kissoon, a founding member of the London House Chambers.

This is not a story about success or wealth. It is a story about manipulation, apparent deception, and a tax system that continues to bend for the powerful while squeezing the ordinary citizen.
Start with the most recent transaction.

In January 2025, a Lamborghini Urusโ€”one of the most recognisable luxury SUVs in the worldโ€”was imported and declared at a value of just GY$22.5 million, roughly US$107,000. Globally, that same vehicle commands between US$240,000 and US$280,000. That is not a minor discrepancy. That is a brazen undervaluation that effectively slashes the governmentโ€™s rightful tax intake by tens of millions of dollars.

And this was no isolated incident.
In April 2024, a Porsche sports car was declared at a laughable GY$4.7 millionโ€”just over US$22,000. That figure would barely secure a used economy vehicle, far less a high-performance German machine with a market value starting around US$135,000.

Then there is the 2021 importation of a Mercedes-Benz GLE 350, declared at GY$9.3 million (US$44,000). While less outrageous on paper, it fits a now unmistakable pattern: luxury vehicles, consistently undervalued, systematically eroding the countryโ€™s tax base.

This is not coincidence. This is a method.

And the most disturbing question remains unanswered: how did these declarations pass through the GRA without triggering red flags, audits, or enforcement action?
Because here lies the deeper crisisโ€”not just individual conduct, but institutional weakness.

When a school teacher, a vendor, or a small business owner falls short on taxes, the system moves swiftly and decisively. Penalties are imposed. Licenses are threatened. Compliance is enforced.
But when the elite manipulate invoices and shave millions off import values, the system appears to fall silent.

This is the very definition of a two-tiered society.

Even more troubling is the eerie resemblance to the Azruddin Mohamed scandal, where luxury vehicles were similarly undervalued, and where political proximity blurred the lines between governance and favouritism. In that case, the country was rocked by revelations of a staggering $1.2 billion in unpaid taxes, alongside claims of direct communication with the Head of State regarding reduced tax payments.

Different actors. Same playbook.
Guyana cannot continue down this road.

Every dollar lost through tax evasion is a dollar stolen from public developmentโ€”schools left unfinished, hospitals under-equipped, roads riddled with neglect. These are not abstract losses. They are real consequences borne by citizens who play by the rules.

The GRA must answer.
Were these valuations independently verified?

Were internal controls bypassed or compromised?

Who approved these declarations?
And most importantlyโ€”will there be consequences?

Because without accountability, this is not just a scandal. It is a signal.


A signal that in Guyana, wealth can purchase leniency, influence can silence scrutiny, and the law can be negotiated.

That is a dangerous precedent for any nationโ€”especially one standing on the brink of unprecedented economic transformation.
If the institutions tasked with protecting public revenue cannotโ€”or will notโ€”act decisively, then they risk becoming complicit in the very corruption they are meant to prevent.

The Guyanese people deserve better.
And they are watching.

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”

She Carries the Nation: Honouring the Strength and Sacrifice of Our Mothers

On this Motherโ€™s Day, we pause to honour the women who so often give more than they have, and ask for nothing in return. Across Guyana and throughout our diaspora, mothers continue to carry the quiet weight of families, communities, and, in many ways, the nation itself.
They rise before dawn and rest long after night falls, stretching limited resources, absorbing burdens, and shielding their children from hardshipโ€”even when they themselves are weary. Their labour is not always seen, their sacrifices rarely quantified, yet their impact is profound and enduring.
In homes where challenges persistโ€”economic strain, social pressures, and uncertaintyโ€”it is mothers who steady the ground beneath us. They are providers, protectors, teachers, and, too often, the last line of support when systems fall short. Their resilience is not accidental; it is forged daily in the face of responsibility that rarely relents.
Today, we do more than celebrate. We acknowledge. We recognize the overextension, the silent endurance, and the unbreakable commitment that define motherhood in its truest form.
To every mother who continues to give, to hold, to build, and to believeโ€”thank you. Your strength shapes generations. Your love sustains a nation.


Happy Motherโ€™s Day.

How taxpayers paid for relief โ€” and got burden instead

BY: Hem Kumar 

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ

Royal Chicken and its consortium benefitted from state-backed land and infrastructure meant to lower feed costs and reduce food prices. Instead, the public now faces imported concessions, local exports, and no meaningful relief at the checkout line.
The Royal Chicken arrangement is a textbook example of how public power can be used to manufacture private advantage while ordinary citizens are left to carry the cost.
What was presented to the Guyanese people as a bold agricultural solution was supposed to do several things at once: build local soya and corn production, reduce dependence on imports, lower feed costs, support farmers, and eventually bring down the price of chicken and eggs. To make that happen, taxpayers helped fund the land, the roads, the silos, the wharf, and the wider infrastructure needed to sustain the project.
That was the promise. Relief.
But the reality now emerging is deeply troubling.
Royal Chicken is still reportedly receiving duty-free concessions for feedstock imports, even as the consortium tied to that taxpayer-supported venture is exporting locally grown product that was supposed to help meet domestic needs. In plain terms, the public financed a system designed to reduce costs, but the same system appears to be allowing the same players to import tax-free and export for profit at the same time.
That means the people have been made to pay twice.
First, they paid through taxes that helped build the infrastructure and support the venture. Then they paid again in the market, where food prices remain high and the promised relief has not materialized. The burden never went away; it was simply shifted onto the backs of consumers.
This is not a small administrative mistake. It is a serious abuse of public trust.
A handful of dominant operators appear to benefit from every side of the arrangement: public land, public infrastructure, import concessions, and market control. Meanwhile, small farmers continue to struggle with high production costs, and ordinary households continue to face expensive chicken and eggs. The people who were supposed to benefit from the policy are the very people still paying the price for its failure.
If the goal was self-sufficiency, why are imports still being subsidized? If the goal was lower prices, why is the consumer still suffering? If the goal was to strengthen local production, why is local output being exported while domestic demand remains under pressure?
Those questions go to the heart of the matter. This is not simply about feedstock. It is about whether state policy is being used to serve the public interest or to protect a privileged few.
The greatest insult is that the public was sold a story of relief, development, and national benefit. Instead, it appears to have received a system where taxpayers underwrote the infrastructure, subsidized the imports, and still did not receive affordable food in return.
That is why this issue has cut so deeply. It is not just a policy failure. It is a warning about what happens when public resources are captured by private interests under the banner of development.
The result is brutally simple: the people paid for the relief, and then they were left subsidizing the very arrangement that denied it to them.

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”

GPLโ€™s battery deal has blown the lid off the governmentโ€™s energy mirage. 

A US$27.3 million battery storage contract is not a triumph of foresight; it is an indictment of a failed energy doctrine that spent years mocking the very solutions it is now rushing to embrace.

For too long, Guyanese were told to trust the grand promise of gas-to-energy, a project sold as the magic wand that would cut electricity bills in half and deliver cheap power on demand.

 Instead, the country is now watching GPL scramble to patch a fragile grid with battery storage, solar systems, control upgrades, and emergency fixes โ€” the very measures that should have formed the backbone of a serious energy strategy from the start.

That is the scandal at the heart of this story. The problem is not that Guyana is finally investing in modern grid support. The problem is that these investments are arriving only after years of political swagger, inflated promises, and a relentless refusal to admit that a single mega-project could not carry the weight of the countryโ€™s energy future.

The new battery systems at New Sophia and Goedverwagting may improve stability, reduce outages, and help integrate renewables. Fine. But what does it say about the original plan when the grid now needs a costly battery layer just to function properly? What does it say when the state must spend millions more to make the system resilient, while the public is still waiting to see the promised payoff from the gas-to-energy gamble?

This is where Pandoraโ€™s box opens. Once the lid is lifted, out spill the uncomfortable questions: Why was solar dismissed as too expensive when the government is now spending heavily on technologies built around solar integration and energy storage? Why was the nation railroaded into a US$2 billion bet on a single path when a diversified clean-energy strategy could have created local jobs, technical capacity, and industrial growth? Why are Guyanese being asked to accept ever more spending as normal, while accountability remains optional?

The arithmetic is unforgiving. Every new contract, every grid upgrade, every emergency fix adds weight to the argument that the original energy vision was not merely ambitious but dangerously narrow. If a project was supposed to solve the crisis, why is the crisis still demanding more public money, more imports, more foreign expertise, and more damage control?

Guyana could have used its oil-era resources to build a domestic energy industry, not just purchase pieces of one. It could have invested in solar manufacturing, battery assembly, training centers, and export-ready clean-energy capacity. It could have turned a national necessity into an economic engine. Instead, it appears to be buying expensive apologies for bad planning.

The public should not be comforted by the language of โ€œmodernizationโ€ when modernization is being used to disguise correction. A battery storage system is useful. A reliable grid is essential. But neither should be used as cover for a broader failure of judgment, transparency, and economic imagination.

If the government wants the country to believe in its energy plan, then it must do more than announce new contracts and repeat old slogans. It must publish the numbers, explain the delays, account for the rising costs, and admit what many Guyanese already suspect: that the great cheap-power promise has not aged well.

The lid is off now. What remains in Pandoraโ€™s box is not just technical failure, but political reckoning.

๐™๐™๐™š 592 ๐™‚๐™ช๐™–๐™ง๐™™๐™ž๐™–๐™ฃ-๐™๐™ง๐™ช๐™ฉ๐™ , ๐˜ผ๐™˜๐™˜๐™ค๐™ช๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™–๐™—๐™ž๐™ก๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ,๐™„๐™ฃ๐™ฉ๐™š๐™œ๐™ง๐™ž๐™ฉ๐™ฎ ๐™„๐™ฃ๐™‚๐™ช๐™ฎ๐™–๐™ฃ๐™– ๐˜ผ๐™ฃ๐™™ ๐˜พ๐™–๐™ง๐™ž๐™—๐™—๐™š๐™–๐™ฃ ๐™‹๐™š๐™ง๐™จ๐™ฅ๐™š๐™˜๐™ฉ๐™ž๐™ซ๐™š๐™จ.โ€” โœฆโ€”