Dear Editor,
Mr. Thomas Singh’s recent letter to the Press framed the election as a binary choice between “continuity and change.” I would suggest it is also a choice between more concrete and bitumen versus better systems—systems that expand freedoms and real opportunities for citizens rather than inflating balance sheets with more roads and more bridges and more mega-projects all of which have little direct impact on the bread and butter issues for the people.
In a recent interview with Neil Marks, Dr. Irfaan Ali appeared almost desperate to paint himself and the PPP as trustworthy. But as the saying goes, self-praise is no recommendation. Trust is earned by conduct, not repeated assurances. Unfortunately, the record of the past five years suggests otherwise.
Under Dr. Ali’s leadership, allegations of favouritism in the allocation of contracts, lands, and state resources have multiplied. Reports even suggest relatives of senior PPP officials have been implicated in facilitating bribes and kickbacks. Procurement practices under Dr Ali and the PPP Government have been riddled with selective disclosures, undermining transparency and fair competition. One only needs to examine the beneficiaries of major contracts—almost all of which are linked to PPP networks—to see how a small circle prospers while the majority of the people is left behind.
What does this mean for the ordinary Guyanese, especially first-time voters? The 18-year-old from East La Penitence or Black Bush Polder is left with scraps—a $2 million gutter or road contract—while PPP-linked firms walk away with multi-billion-dollar projects. This inequality erodes both trust and opportunity. So Dr Ali’s words are hollow and empty.
Meanwhile, the police force remains weakened by political interference, unable to provide security or justice. Poverty still afflicts roughly 40% of the population despite record oil wealth. Food prices continue to rise sharply, and families struggle with a total breakdown in the social infrastructure with the many social ills that the state is ill-equipped to address.
Dr. Ali points to infrastructure projects as proof of achievement. But competence matters: there are capable professionals outside the PPP who could have delivered bridges and roads with more transparency, accountability, and efficiency. What is missing is not concrete—it is systems, fairness, and imagination. What is missing is respect for time, respect for aesthetics, respect for the people and building these things using a people centred approach.
So the real question is not whether the government “delivered,” but for whom it delivered. The answer is plain: for a narrow elite, not for the ordinary citizens.
Ultimately, this election is about priorities. Do we want more roads, bridges, and monuments to state power—or do we want better systems that expand opportunity, build capacity, and secure genuine freedoms? The choice is clear: bricks and bitumen with the PPP, or systems and shared prosperity with alternative forces.
The people of Guyana will decide, this letter is not to tell people how to vote. However, I trust the people will look past self-praise and ask: who has truly delivered for the many? Is the performance of the Mohameds with their active delivery of timely service to the ordinary people a valid consideration? Is Mr. Norton with his strong policy statement but poor track record while in government between 2015-2020 a consideration, or do we want more of the same corruptions where several senior officials went into Government as ordinary folks and are leaving Government as billionaires? Or are people willing to take a risk with Nigel Hughes and his small team?
As I said before, I trust the Guyanese people and my only ask of them is – go out and vote and vote like a boss.