I refer to an article in the Guyana Times of August 14, ‘AFC Councillor lauds Government D&I investment at Supenaam Creek‘ and one in the Guyana Chronicle of August 10, under the caption ‘AFC Councillor reports farmers benefiting from Government Supenaam Creek investment,’ written by Rajendra Prabulall, the reporter employed by the Region Two administration. Also, there was the item on the RCA Channel 8 news on August 17 about 7.30pm read by Shawn Marks.
What was reported is true. I as a member of the Regional Democratic Council from the Alliance for Change made those comments while the Agricultural Report was being discussed, and it was also as a member of the statutory Agricultural Committee I would have raised those issues which farmers had asked me to raise at that committee meeting. This is what I said: whenever there is severe flooding caused by heavy rainfall and an above normal high tide that severely damages farmers‘ crops, the President will sometimes announce a package for the affected farmers, be it drugs, planting materials and fertilizer. However, the farmers of south Essequibo, that is Good Hope, the Essequibo Main, Corabaro, Pataralo, and the other islands do not benefit.
I also said that when the sigatoka disease was observed, enough was not done to combat it in Region Two. In fact there was a strong denial by senior agricultural officials; they were saying that the disease was not in Region Two, but later they themselves admitted the presence of this disease. The result is that plantains are now retailing for between $140 to $180 per pound.
This is part of my statement that was never reported by the reporter although everything was said during the said time I was on my feet and in one breath.
My understanding is that both the Chronicle and Times reporters shared the same office; of course that is none of my concern, I also do not have a problem with being quoted. What I do have a problem with is when any reporter extracts a part of my statements that they may be comfortable with and reports that part, and conveniently fails to report the other part of my comments.
This seems to be the pattern of reporting by these persons, because they have not quoted me correctly on many occasions.