APNU/AFC’s NRF Act had no place in Guyana’s governance

Dear Editor,
I am aghast that the Alliance For Change (AFC) and A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) are so adamantly opposed and antagonistic towards the new Natural Resource Fund (NRF) Bill that was recently passed and later signed into law by President Irfaan Ali. I find it most galling on two grounds: first, the APNU/AFC’s original Bill was wholly illegal; and second, its content was woefully lacking in fundamentals suited to such an all-important Bill.
As regards the illegality of the old APNU/AFC NRF Act, we must remember how and when it was delivered. As can be corroborated by memory, or actual recorded history, the initial NRF Act was passed in the National Assembly in 2019, but let us remember that by that time, the then APNU/AFC Administration was already toppled by the historical No-Confidence Motion that was tabled by the then People’s Progressive Party/Civic Opposition in December 2018.
This successful motion legally rendered the APNU/AFC Government a ‘care-taking’ one and held them responsible for calling fresh elections within a three-month time frame. In terms of necessary functions, APNU/AFC was not supposed to do anything save operate on a mere perfunctory basis, and conduct basic duties. In fact, the passage of the NCM meant that they were supposed to prioritise elections by March 2019. As we know, they did not and continued to function in unconstitutional ways.
In his presentation of the new NRF, Dr Ashni Singh succinctly reminded all that “Given that that sitting took place after the passage of the (said) No-Confidence Motion, that (APNU/AFC) Bill suffered the fatal defect of what I would describe as constitutional illegitimacy by the fact that it was considered by a National Assembly that should have been dissolved by that time.” In this regard alone, APNU/AFC has been silenced.
The other factor is that the unconstitutional APNU/AFC’s NRF Act was riddled with a plethora of deficiencies, infused to facilitate the suspicious ‘whims and fancies’ of their members, namely, the excessive powers invested in the Finance Minister; absence of a governing body for the fund; and a complicated formula, governing transfers from the fund and the provisions which allow withdrawals from the fund without parliamentary approval. In direct opposition to and destruction of these features, the PPP/C’s Bill exudes transparency and offers great confidence to the nation regarding its monetary management.
For example, the new Bill has greatly reduced the powers of the Minister of Finance. Plus, it has added an all-important Board of Directors, making it impossible for a one-man domination. The Bill is also characterised by a ‘compulsory parliamentary approval’ before any spending, with a provision that every receipt be published in the Official Gazette and be reported to the National Assembly.
As for the much talked-about Santiago Principles, APNU/AFC did not adhere in full, leaving out the ‘governing body’ as stipulated by the said Santiago Principles, established back in 2008 to deal with Sovereign Wealth Funds.
Overall, one is left to wonder what is really wrong with the APNU/AFC. They seem intent on ‘opposing just for the sake of opposing.’ They also seem hell-bent on using tactics that are unconventional, unruly and unconstitutional.

Yours truly,
Thomas Cole