Successive political administrations here in Guyana have, as part of a long ingrained governance culture, embraced a propensity to exaggerate and, not infrequently, to mislead their domestic audience. This practice has proven to be a handy political tool with which to mislead and/or to exaggerate. Not infrequently, the practice also comes in handy in the doling out of false promises. It usually matters little to those who rule that such governance ‘tools’ are ultimately counterproductive since, not infrequently, they are exposed for what they are. At that point they are reduced to no more than objects of public derision since, all too frequently, they are hastily contrived in order to serve some immediate political purpose. False promises are more prevalent in some areas than others. They usually ‘pop up’ most frequently in matters that have to do with social and economic development. These are the ‘citadels’ that are usually most closely ‘protected’ by propaganda. It is in this sphere that we, most frequently, have tidings of achievement.
A relatively recent case in point that merits mention here is February 23, 2022, the Ministry of Agriculture reported that “farmers and agro-processors” were to “benefit from lucrative markets this year,” 2022, that is. The news was proffered along with the customary state-designed decorative undertakings, the one in this instance being a declaration that government was “taking a more proactive approach to ensure farmers, agro-processors and exporters are linked to the most lucrative markets, locally, regionally and internationally.” It was an undertaking, the Ministry of Agriculture said, that was backed by $340 million ”to fast track the initiative” and “with the participation of trade fairs and exhibitions, and the use of e-marketing/e-commerce platforms.”
The missive went further, dragging a lacklustre Guyana Marketing Corporation (GMC) into the ‘affray’ by asserting that as part of the overall promised initiative, the state agency’s assignment would be to develop “strategies through extensive market research this year, (2022) to promote Guyana’s agricultural products here, across the region and internationally.” Were the research undertakings ever pursued? Are the findings available? Will they ever show up in the public domain? Mind you, if the GMC had ever been suitably ‘kitted out’ to execute an assignment of this magnitude that would have been one of the country’s better -kept secrets.
There are times when these attempts at image-burnishing are transparent enough to be seen for what they are a proverbial ‘mile away.’ Whether or not any of the undertakings would have ‘washed’ with its target audiences is, truth be told, beside the point. This newspaper’s checks with local Agro Processors, however, have revealed that most of them (particularly the medium and small scale operators in the sectors) are all busy ‘hunting down’ expanded markets mostly elsewhere in the region., many of them making it clear, that apart from the support provided by government to enable their participation in this year’s Agro Fest, where longer term marketing is concerned they are pretty much ‘hacking it’ on their own.
More than a year after the aforementioned disclosures were made, reportedly by the Minister/Ministry of Agriculture, there has been no known follow-up in terms of what has been accomplished and what still remains ‘in the pipeline.’ Nor are we, up to this time, any the wiser as to the promised initiative to fast-track the growth of the agro-processing sector “through participation of trade fairs and exhibition, and the use of e-marketing/e-commerce platforms,” exercises for which, the Minister/Ministry of Agriculture had declared, an amount of $340 million had been set aside.
Finally, there is the ‘small’ matter of twelve agro-processing facilities which, official reports have said, have been established in several administrative regions of the country. Try as this newspaper has, it has been unable to secure official confirmation that these facilities are now ‘up and running,’ backed by reliable maintenance support facilities and that they are all being fully utilized by the farmers and agro-processors in the respective communities. No state agency, it seems, is prepared, at this time to provide the requisite conformation. If the Ministry of Agriculture wishes to claim the prerogative of utilizing these agro-processing facilities for image-enhancing purposes, then it must place accurate information in the public domain with regard to their readiness to effectively perform the tasks for which they were created.
