President Jagdeo said top officials of the European Commission and governments in Europe had confided in him that some Caribbean Community (CARICOM) members had asked them to "lean hard" on Guyana to sign the Economic Partnership Agreement with the European Union in its current form.

Mr. Jagdeo told reporters at his office the unnamed CARICOM members argued that they would lose face if Guyana were to succeed in getting key changes to the agreement.

He said he was disappointed at this stand and doubted whether this country would be concluding an unchanged EPA with the EU on October 15.

"I firmly believe it's a bad agreement for the region and that's why I continue to fight and seek changes to the agreement...(but) some countries seem more interested in saving face than getting a better agreement", he said.

The President said Guyana has suggested two key clauses be included in the EPA or a declaration to the agreement:

** that in the implementation of the EPA, should any of its provisions conflict with the revised CARICOM founding Treaty of Chaguaramus, the treaty will take precedence to safeguard the regional integration process

** a mandatory review every five years to look at the socio-economic impact of the EPA on the people of the region and a commitment by Europe to address that impact should it be adverse.

Despite his disappointment at the turn of events, Mr. Jagdeo said Guyana remains a strong member of CARICOM. "I don't allow setbacks on one issue to daunt me...I can't hold the future of the people of this region hostage based on my current likes or dislikes."

He said this push by some in the region to sign the deal on October 15 was also a "slap in the face" of other members of the 79-nation African, Caribbean, Pacific (ACP) that took a stand at their summit which ended last week in the Ghana capital, Accra.

It could undermine ACP unity, he warned.

What a load of crap,where were the diplomatic efforts all along.But as one former leader used to say," out of nothing,cometh nothing".

It is my strongly held view that Guyana has little to gain from CARICOM as a collective grouping. The current EPA imbroglio highlights the individual nature of some members CARICOM.
These folks are failing to take cognizance of the disadvantages of the current EPA agreement to Guyana productively inclined economy.

quote:

The continued betrayal by some CARICOM heads

Are they afraid that little Guyana will eventually become a more prosperous nation before them?

CARICOM members are suppose to be looking out for each other needs not trying to impose an agreement that could be perilous to us.

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:
It is my strongly held view that Guyana has little to gain from CARICOM as a collective grouping. The current EPA imbroglio highlights the individual nature of some members CARICOM.
These folks are failing to take cognizance of the disadvantages of the current EPA agreement to Guyana productively inclined economy.

Do you mean commodity inclined economy? Well just do like Bustamante and bust it up.
The EU from the inception imposed Lome,Cotounu etc on the ACP as a means of control.You got your market access and price preference and they had you locked into their products. With your special pricing regime,leaders like Burnham,Kaunda etc failed to make the hard decisions to expand their productive capacity in the non-traditional spheres and now the gravey train is coming to a stop and you all are crying.
Come on, what do you expect from the EU? They are the greatest example of duplicity and self-interest,just look at what obtains as Common Agriculture Policies in their economies and that would prove instructive to Jagdeo and his lot.
No country can beg and borrow its way to development and prosperity,it is achieve or attempted due to serious restructing of your domestic productive capacity.The mantra of value added production should be central to any action.Primary production and slash and burn activities will no longer hold the day.

quote:

Originally posted by The Terminator:

quote:

The continued betrayal by some CARICOM heads

Are they afraid that little Guyana will eventually become a more prosperous nation before them?

CARICOM members are suppose to be looking out for each other needs not trying to impose an agreement that could be perilous to us.

Term,disagreements are par for the course.Caribbean leaders have had disagreements on Anguilla Secession,diplomatic relations with Cuba,use of airports by Cuban military refueling,the Maurice Bishop overthrow and subsequent invasion.
As a matter of fact you would find the statements by certain leaders today rather calm when compared to the remarks in those days by Tom Adams,Eddie Seaga ,Eugena Charles, Forbes Burnham etc.
However, at the end of the day there was constant and serious engagement at every level.Not this insults by press conference and remarks to trade associations.

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:
It is my strongly held view that Guyana has little to gain from CARICOM as a collective grouping. The current EPA imbroglio highlights the individual nature of some members CARICOM.
These folks are failing to take cognizance of the disadvantages of the current EPA agreement to Guyana productively inclined economy.

Do you mean commodity inclined economy? Well just do like Bustamante and bust it up.
The EU from the inception imposed Lome,Cotounu etc on the ACP as a means of control.You got your market access and price preference and they had you locked into their products. With your special pricing regime,leaders like Burnham,Kaunda etc failed to make the hard decisions to expand their productive capacity in the non-traditional spheres and now the gravey train is coming to a stop and you all are crying.
Come on, what do you expect from the EU? They are the greatest example of duplicity and self-interest,just look at what obtains as Common Agriculture Policies in their economies and that would prove instructive to Jagdeo and his lot.
No country can beg and borrow its way to development and prosperity,it is achieve or attempted due to serious restructing of your domestic productive capacity.The mantra of value added production should be central to any action.Primary production and slash and burn activities will no longer hold the day.

The restructuring of our domestic productive capacity alone could not correct 2.1 Billion US$ of foreign debt, not to mention a Bankrupt treasury and non-existent or run down infrastructure.

Correcting such mismanagement by the PNC regime had to entail some amount of "begging or borrowing". This is what you folks fail to acknowledge during your penchants for being critical. Yet you never offer any alternatives to your alleged "Begging and borrowing" policies by the current administration.

What would you have done to reverse Guyana's financial and economic predicament prior to 1992?

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

quote:

Originally posted by The Terminator:

quote:

The continued betrayal by some CARICOM heads

Are they afraid that little Guyana will eventually become a more prosperous nation before them?

CARICOM members are suppose to be looking out for each other needs not trying to impose an agreement that could be perilous to us.

Term,disagreements are par for the course.Caribbean leaders have had disagreements on Anguilla Secession,diplomatic relations with Cuba,use of airports by Cuban military refueling,the Maurice Bishop overthrow and subsequent invasion.
As a matter of fact you would find the statements by certain leaders today rather calm when compared to the remarks in those days by Tom Adams,Eddie Seaga ,Eugena Charles, Forbes Burnham etc.
However, at the end of the day there was constant and serious engagement at every level.Not this insults by press conference and remarks to trade associations.

Yes but did any of those you listed above have to do with a direct impact on the country's ECONOMIC stability or detrimental factors to the country's agricultural sector, which is the leading income bearer for Guyana?

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:
It is my strongly held view that Guyana has little to gain from CARICOM as a collective grouping. The current EPA imbroglio highlights the individual nature of some members CARICOM.
These folks are failing to take cognizance of the disadvantages of the current EPA agreement to Guyana productively inclined economy.

Do you mean commodity inclined economy? Well just do like Bustamante and bust it up.
The EU from the inception imposed Lome,Cotounu etc on the ACP as a means of control.You got your market access and price preference and they had you locked into their products. With your special pricing regime,leaders like Burnham,Kaunda etc failed to make the hard decisions to expand their productive capacity in the non-traditional spheres and now the gravey train is coming to a stop and you all are crying.
Come on, what do you expect from the EU? They are the greatest example of duplicity and self-interest,just look at what obtains as Common Agriculture Policies in their economies and that would prove instructive to Jagdeo and his lot.
No country can beg and borrow its way to development and prosperity,it is achieve or attempted due to serious restructing of your domestic productive capacity.The mantra of value added production should be central to any action.Primary production and slash and burn activities will no longer hold the day.

The restructuring of our domestic productive capacity alone could not correct 2.1 Billion US$ of foreign debt, not to mention a Bankrupt treasury and non-existent or run down infrastructure.

Correcting such mismanagement by the PNC regime had to entail some amount of "begging or borrowing". This is what you folks fail to acknowledge during your penchants for being critical. Yet you never offer any alternatives to your alleged "Begging and borrowing" policies by the current administration.

What would you have done to reverse Guyana's financial and economic predicament prior to 1992?

Oh boy!! I expect that to pop up any moment.The thing is there were other economies that were faced with more fundamential disequlibrium,war torn and with less that a quarter of economic potential and today they are doing better than Guyana. These countries also had a rather high debt stock and received similiar Paris Terms relief.Remember, this kind of relief was not unique to Guyana and Jagdeo,you had to be piss poor and under prohibitive balance of payment burden to qualify.Why are they doing better today?

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

Oh boy!! I expect that to pop up any moment.The thing is there were other economies that were faced with more fundamential disequlibrium,war torn and with less that a quarter of economic potential and today they are doing better than Guyana. These countries also had a rather high debt stock and received similiar Paris Terms relief.Remember, this kind of relief was not unique to Guyana and Jagdeo,you had to be piss poor and under prohibitive balance of payment burden to qualify.Why are they doing better today?

Why dont you tell me?

And while you're at it i'm still awaiting you answer to this question:
"What would you have done to reverse Guyana's financial and economic predicament prior to 1992?"

And by the way, im pretty sure that the countries you are alleging to have overcome all those obstacles had the full support of the entire populace in the implementation of such measures.
They did not have to contend with a section of the populace that were bent on making the country un-governable!

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

Oh boy!! I expect that to pop up any moment.The thing is there were other economies that were faced with more fundamential disequlibrium,war torn and with less that a quarter of economic potential and today they are doing better than Guyana. These countries also had a rather high debt stock and received similiar Paris Terms relief.Remember, this kind of relief was not unique to Guyana and Jagdeo,you had to be piss poor and under prohibitive balance of payment burden to qualify.Why are they doing better today?

Why dont you tell me?

And while you're at it i'm still awaiting you answer to this question:
"What would you have done to reverse Guyana's financial and economic predicament prior to 1992?"

And by the way, im pretty sure that the countries you are alleging to have overcome all those obstacles had the full support of the entire populace in the implementation of such measures.
They did not have to contend with a section of the populace that were bent on making the country un-governable!

SJ, I suppose countries like Uganda,Angola,Mozambique are homogeneous countries and were not war ravaged from civil and ethnic wars.Even the dictator Musceveni in Uganda scores better than your lot.

quote:

And while you're at it i'm still awaiting you answer to this question:
"What would you have done to reverse Guyana's financial and economic predicament prior to 1992?"

I certainly would not have followed the policy of controlling the comanding heights of the economy,The wrong headed import substitution industrial policy and certainly allowed for the private sector to play the dominant role in economy.
Greater focus on value added economic activities,especially in the arena of agri processing on a massive scale.The heavy reliance on being a primary commodity producer was to our detriment. But that is only little me,what do I know.

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:

quote:

Originally posted by Ireton:

Oh boy!! I expect that to pop up any moment.The thing is there were other economies that were faced with more fundamential disequlibrium,war torn and with less that a quarter of economic potential and today they are doing better than Guyana. These countries also had a rather high debt stock and received similiar Paris Terms relief.Remember, this kind of relief was not unique to Guyana and Jagdeo,you had to be piss poor and under prohibitive balance of payment burden to qualify.Why are they doing better today?

Why dont you tell me?

And while you're at it i'm still awaiting you answer to this question:
"What would you have done to reverse Guyana's financial and economic predicament prior to 1992?"

And by the way, im pretty sure that the countries you are alleging to have overcome all those obstacles had the full support of the entire populace in the implementation of such measures.
They did not have to contend with a section of the populace that were bent on making the country un-governable!

SJ, I suppose countries like Uganda,Angola,Mozambique are homogeneous countries and were not war ravaged from civil and ethnic wars.Even the dictator Musceveni in Uganda scores better than your lot.

The destruction of the physical and economic infrastructure led to many of the ills in our society. If Guyanese above the age of 35 years old were to be examined by psychologists, it may be instructive to know the percentage that still carry psychological scars.

While I would not attempt to say that all was bad during that era the bad did overshadow the good. The rise and fall of Jonestown is one of the things that still baffle many. This was a group of nearly 1,000 American citizens living in Guyana and most Guyanese were unaware of their presence here – that was the level of freedom of information.

The Rabbi Washington cult was active and strong – he was wanted in the United States and was influencing many youths yet no one dared to call for his extradition – freedom of expression?

The banning of certain basic food items led to persons being criminalised for having things that people today expect to find in any shop. Sardines, potatoes, flour, split peas, are just a few items that were illegal and treated just as if they were illegal drugs.

This is part of our history, the absence of these basic items led to some of the disrespect that Guyanese still face in the region

If Europe, contrary to all that it has publicly stated, were to impose, and has committed to at various levels, especially at the level of the Council, were to impose tariffs under the GSP on Guyana, then we would have no choice but to sign the EPA agreement.

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:
If Europe, contrary to all that it has publicly stated, were to impose, and has committed to at various levels, especially at the level of the Council, were to impose tariffs under the GSP on Guyana, then we would have no choice but to sign the EPA agreement.

Europe has been telling us to transform our economy for more than a decade.

The PPP on on the other hand wants to retain its semi-illiterate constituency hence the massive investment in sugar. The PPP wants to keep GY backward.

quote:

Originally posted by BLACKBEARD:

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:
If Europe, contrary to all that it has publicly stated, were to impose, and has committed to at various levels, especially at the level of the Council, were to impose tariffs under the GSP on Guyana, then we would have no choice but to sign the EPA agreement.

Europe has been telling us to transform our economy for more than a decade.

The PPP on on the other hand wants to retain its semi-illiterate constituency hence the massive investment in sugar. The PPP wants to keep GY backward.

There were other factors that influenced the GOG's continued investment in Sugar, with particular reference to the Skeldon Modernization Project.
One such, is the huge Caribbean market for refined Sugar, as Trinidad has been unable to meet refined sugar demands and Guyana will now be positioned to tap into the refined sugar market.

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:

quote:

Originally posted by BLACKBEARD:

quote:

Originally posted by SJ4321:
If Europe, contrary to all that it has publicly stated, were to impose, and has committed to at various levels, especially at the level of the Council, were to impose tariffs under the GSP on Guyana, then we would have no choice but to sign the EPA agreement.

Europe has been telling us to transform our economy for more than a decade.

The PPP on on the other hand wants to retain its semi-illiterate constituency hence the massive investment in sugar. The PPP wants to keep GY backward.

There were other factors that influenced the GOG's continued investment in Sugar, with particular reference to the Skeldon Modernization Project.
One such, is the huge Caribbean market for refined Sugar, as Trinidad has been unable to meet refined sugar demands and Guyana will now be positioned to tap into the refined sugar market.

Anil, Am not an uneducated coolie from South Annanddale So cut the crap.

If Skeldon will produce sugar for the Caricom Market tell us who will be the customers for the sugar produced by the Demerara estates.

Caricom imports white sugar for the beverage and confectionery industry. But, white sugar can be acquired cheaply on the world market and the Trinidadians have already already started lobbing to buy sugar outside of Caricom. So go ahead and invest in a sugar refinery for ONE client who does not want to buy from you.

quote:

Anil, Am not an uneducated coolie from South Annanddale So cut the crap.

Like you ready to fight?

quote:

Originally posted by BONUS:

quote:

Anil, Am not an uneducated coolie from South Annanddale So cut the crap.

Like you ready to fight?

Charles Ramson is my trainer.

quote:

Charles Ramson is my trainer.

That is Anil's opponent

quote:

Originally posted by BONUS:

quote:

Charles Ramson is my trainer.

That is Anil's opponent

Ramson has been busy lately and the Oscar (at Everest) requested that the floor to be cleaned again. Apparently wiping it with Anil's face does the trick.

So Anil got his arse kicked??Wow