Constructive criticism must be rooted in fact

Dear Editor,
I read with interest the letter published on October 3, 2025, captioned “Measures announced by the President will do nothing to ease the pressure on the Guyana dollar.” As a student of international finance currently serving my country abroad, I noted with particular attention the comments attributed to Dr. Terrence Campbell regarding foreign exchange interventions and broader economic management.
For any national debate on such critical matters to be meaningful, it must rest on evidence rather than conjecture. In that spirit, I wish to respectfully clarify a number of inaccuracies in Dr. Campbell’s assertions.
First, the claim that the Bank of Guyana’s foreign exchange interventions signal “malignant” economic mismanagement is both inaccurate and misplaced. Central bank interventions are standard policy tools used globally to smooth short-term volatility and ensure exchange rate stability—particularly in rapidly expanding economies such as Guyana’s. The scale of intervention today reflects not weakness, but the extraordinary expansion of trade, investment, and capital flows.
In 2020, Guyana’s economy was valued at approximately US$5 billion; by 2024, it had grown fivefold to US$25 billion, and is projected to reach US$28 billion by the end of 2025. With such unprecedented expansion, it is entirely logical that the volume of foreign currency entering the market would increase proportionately. That is why it is difficult to comprehend why these assumptions are being made by Dr. Campbell that attempt to make out the situation as some sort of mini apocalyptic occurrence. These interventions are possible precisely because of prudent fiscal management and strengthened reserves. These interventions are deliberate action following a tried and tested model.
Moreover, His Excellency President Irfaan Ali has not acted unilaterally, but has convened a team of experts and financial leaders to develop a structured response. The introduction of nine new policy measures aims to strengthen Guyana’s financial system, expand access, and enhance oversight to ensure fairness and transparency in the foreign exchange market. Notably, these measures were well received by the banking community, reflecting their alignment with sound financial practice.
Second, the characterization of government spending as “reckless” or focused on “poor quality infrastructure” overlooks the transformational development underway across the country. Investments in farm-to-market roads, bridges, housing, schools, hospitals, and other public infrastructure are central to the Government’s clearly articulated national development plan. One only had to listen to Dr. Bharrat Jagdeo outline the strategy a week ago in a clear manner. Institutions such as the Inter-American Development Bank and the Caribbean Development Bank have repeatedly endorsed Guyana’s development drive as essential for long-term competitiveness and sustainable development.
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) itself, in its most recent Executive Board report, commended the Guyanese authorities’ commitment to balancing development needs with prudent macroeconomic and fiscal policies. This evidence speaks for itself.
Third, the assertion that Government policy neglects the non-oil economy is contradicted by the data. Non-oil GDP continues to record double-digit growth—13% in 2024—driven by agriculture, construction, ICT, and services. Targeted investments in agro-processing, aquaculture, forestry, and tourism are expanding Guyana’s export base and diversifying the economy. The evidence points to deliberate and balanced diversification initiatives in the economy.
On the issue of gold smuggling, this is indeed a challenge faced by many gold-producing countries. However, here in Guyana, it is being addressed through stronger regulatory oversight, tightened licensing for traders, and centralized monitoring via the Guyana Gold Board. Inter-agency coordination and the introduction of technology-driven tracking systems are enhancing transparency and enforcement. While these reforms take time to yield full results, progress is visible and measurable. To allege government complicity without substantiation is both unfair and counterproductive to the collective national effort to curb illicit activities.
Finally, Guyana remains fully compliant with international financial standards, including the Financial Action Task Force’s (FATF) 40 Recommendations. Our continued removal from both FATF’s “grey” and “black” lists is a significant national achievement, made possible through strong institutional reforms led by the Attorney General, Hon. Anil Nandlall, S.C., and his dedicated team. To suggest a return to the failed policies of the 1970s and 1980s is baseless alarmism that does not reflect the current strength of Guyana’s macroeconomic fundamentals or its robust fiscal discipline.
Constructive criticism is essential in any democracy and should always be welcomed. However, it must be rooted in fact and driven by the shared goal of national progress. To dismiss evidence-based policy measures while offering no credible alternatives contributes little to informed public discourse. Guyana deserves a higher level of debate—one that lifts the national conversation above partisanship and towards collective problem-solving.

Yours sincerely,
Sasenarine Singh