Business and Economic Commentary
This column also brings to mind an earlier series, Business Page, which began in the early years of Sunday Stabroek under the editorship of David de Caires and Anna Benjamin. That column was interrupted after a disagreement over a piece on Caribbean Containers Inc. which prompted a defamation threat by its CEO, Ron Webster. Sunday Stabroek published an apology over my objections, which I felt might weaken my position should the matter reach the courts. I stood my ground and defended the action. No case ultimately succeeded, and the column eventually resumed.
The decision to bring Sunday Stabroek – a sibling of Stabroek News – to its final edition marks more than the end of a newspaper. It closes a chapter that began in 1986, when Guyana’s economic circumstances were vastly different from today. The economy was small and constrained, public finances were tight, shortages were common, and the state’s capacity to finance development was limited. Few would have imagined that four decades later the country’s economic output would be measured in the trillions of dollars.
Today the economy is estimated at roughly $1.5 trillion, a transformation – driven largely by offshore petroleum discoveries just over a decade ago – that reshaped both expectations and fiscal capacity. In a remarkably short period, the country has moved from harsh scarcity to the paradox of abundance.
Yet economic expansion does not automatically resolve the deeper questions of governance and accountability. Indeed, it often magnifies them. A striking illustration of this transformation lies in the public accounts themselves. The fiscal deficit projected for 2026 is larger than the entire national budget of 1986. That single comparison captures both the extraordinary growth of the economy and the expanding scale of the state’s financial commitments.
An unusual institutional development deserves notice. For the first time in Guyana’s post-independence history, responsibility for the nation’s finances has not been assigned to a separate Minister of Finance. However long-titled Dr. Ashni Singh’s designation might be, the portfolio remains with President Irfaan Ali, departing from long-standing administrative practice. The reasons were never clearly explained. At a time when public finances have expanded dramatically, concentrating fiscal authority in the executive inevitably raises questions about motive, institutional balance and oversight.
There is also a paradox that deserves reflection. The current administration came to office with what many regarded as one of the most academically accomplished economic leadership teams in the country’s history. Yet outcomes in several areas raise uncomfortable questions. Years after the completion of field work, the report on the 2022 national census is still outstanding. Long-standing structural challenges at the National Insurance Scheme appear to have deepened rather than eased. And in an economy experiencing unprecedented inflows of foreign earnings, complaints about the scarcity of foreign exchange continue to surface within the business community.
The contrast between the promise of technical expertise of Dr. Singh and the persistence of these difficulties, illustrates how economic management ultimately depends not only on credentials, but on the effectiveness of individuals, institutions and policy execution. Indeed, growth has also been accompanied by persistent concerns about the management of public resources. Over the years, observers have increasingly remarked on the pervasiveness with which corruption is alleged to have entered public life. What once appeared episodic now seems, to many citizens, more open and institutionalised.
Large and ambitious undertakings – among them the proposed development of Silica City and the gas-to-shore project – have been promoted as symbols of national ambition. Yet, their costs, their financing arrangements, their priorities, and their long-term economic justification are mired in obfuscation and opacity.
Fiscal policy itself has also evolved in notable ways over the past four decades. Personal income rates were dizzyingly high, reaching a combined marginal rate of 75%. Estate duty, sometimes referred to as Death Duties, formed part of the fiscal regime that had existed since income tax was first introduced in 1929. Except in the CIA inspired action against the 1962 tax measures introduced by the Cheddi Jagan premiership, most Guyanese grudgingly met their obligations.
Over the life of Sunday Stabroek, tax rates have tumbled, while some taxes have disappeared altogether. Capital taxes on death have vanished from the system, and more recently the wealth-related levy known as property tax for individuals, has effectively faded from relevance. At the same time, businesses and their leaders routinely advocate additional relief and concessions as “measures to stimulate investment and growth”.
Such developments raise legitimate questions about balance within the fiscal framework. A state with expanding expenditure obligations must also maintain a revenue system that is transparent, equitable, and sustainable. Otherwise, the burden of financing development shifts in ways that may prove difficult to sustain over time.
One area that has received remarkably little attention is the steady decline of the labour movement. Institutions such as the Trades Union Congress and the Guyana Public Service Union appear weaker and less effective than at any time since the colonial era. Leadership has too often placed politics ahead of membership, and the purchasing power of the minimum wage seems to bear a striking relationship to the quality of labour leadership.
These are precisely the types of issues that newspapers have traditionally examined. One of the enduring contributions of Stabroek News was its willingness to provide space for economic commentary that explored not only the promise of growth but also the institutional challenges that accompany it.
No reflection on this moment would be complete without acknowledging the role that Stabroek News played in holding the nation to account. That task was not always welcomed. At various moments, the newspaper faced pressures – political, commercial and financial – that might well have weakened a less determined institution. Yet it persisted in asking questions, examining public decisions and providing a forum where issues of national importance could be debated openly.
Particular recognition must go to the newspaper’s Editor-in-Chief, Anand Persaud, whose stewardship in recent years has required an extraordinary range of responsibilities. In many respects he has carried forward the demanding editorial tradition established by the newspaper’s founder, David de Caires, while simultaneously assuming functions that were once shared among several senior figures in the newsroom. That continuity of purpose has been essential in preserving the paper’s distinctive voice.
Equally deserving of recognition are the many individuals whose work rarely appeared in print, but whose dedication ensured that the newspaper reached its readers day after day. The production staff who kept the presses running through long nights, particularly after the paper moved to a seven-day schedule, demonstrated a level of commitment and resourcefulness that is seldom fully appreciated outside the walls of a newsroom.
Since the announcement of the newspaper’s closure, tributes from readers, writers and columnists have poured in – many eloquent, some deeply emotional, others personal, and a few that brought tears to the eyes. Together they testify to the quiet but profound place the newspaper has occupied in the intellectual and civic life of the country. Those tributes speak for themselves, and one can only join in endorsing the appreciation they express for the many people who sustained this institution over the years.
As the final issue rolls off the expertly maintained press, the national ledger which Stabroek News helped to maintain remains far from settled. The economic story of Guyana continues to unfold, shaped by decisions about governance, fiscal discipline and public accountability. One ledger may close with this edition.
The larger ledger, the one that records how Guyana manages its wealth, builds its institutions and governs itself, remains very much open.