Nothing ‘onerous’ about asking miners for identification, other documentation

Dear Editor, I refer to the article headlined, ‘Little detail on how PPP’s Ali would create 50,000 jobs -presidential candidate silent on the matter’ (SN: 11/10/19). The following thoughts are offered.

Sometimes as little detail as possible and being stonily silent are better; better when extravagant claims are floated, and which loose lips can sink. I sense a glimmer of restraint on the jobs subject from that esteemed quarter. Silence is golden; let them pelt mud. I, too, maintain distance and silence from that greatest of heavyweight exuberances. Because unlike the high-performance Louisville Lip, the molten Guyanese god (in waiting) would liquefy under the demands of 10,000 jobs much less 50,000.

Also, I bypass, other than for one comment that other rosy commitment - admittedly doable - of tax concessions to the mining sector through reducing royalties. I have heard of constructive reduction of taxes, through the numerous calls by political operatives in the glorious pre-2015 days to the GRA, which led to sponsored tax evasion by wellpositioned party supporters. Better to give the evaded tax money to the party than to the treasury. Greater returns, greater cash flow, greater economic drain. That was the only thing left to drain since all the brains were already drained to elsewhere. Perhaps that is the kind of tax reduction contemplated. It can be of immense financial assistance. Naysayers are encouraged to reconcile how the GRA tax collections today are much higher, and despite business decline, lower consumer confidence, and lesser spending.

Today, I prefer to probe a little behind the other haze of doing away with “onerous” documentation for small and medium-scale miners. I acknowledge readily that the aspiring presidential candidate is more a man of the world than me. Just to be clear, it is not the kind of world that the conscientious and industrious and abstemious (no reference to 2 am curfew intended) would consider inhabiting for a moment. Not one moment!

But I digress. I make no pretense of being able to interpret what “onerous” means in the strong language of the presidential candidate. I suggest that he leaves that portfolio to those who can carry it. My first nomination would be yours truly. As for me, my definition of “onerous” is burdening, or yoking, or demanding. Now, I am not a worldly man, but if it is “onerous” to ask a small or mediumscale miner (or anyone engaged in routine business activity) for some form of identification, then I am living on the wrong planet; or in the wrong time; definitely among the wrong people.

Perhaps, the candidate has in mind nationalising local banks, who ask for the same “onerous” documents that miners are asked to tender, as part of legitimising processes that were found dismissible under the PPP administration. By the same token, if it is “onerous” to ask for proof of address and a tax certificate as part of the initial screening process in any business, then it is goodbye to rules and regulations, as well as standards and enforcement. Of anything. In any place. At any time.

Editor, to attempt to transact business with most private sector entities, the legitimate ones, requires the same, if not more than that which is currently necessary for the small and mediumscale miners. Everybody speaks sweetly about accountability and transparency, there it is: a name, an approved activity, a tracking of source and legitimacy. Substance not imagination nor concealment; no moonlighting and ghost riding.

I suspect that familiarity with phantoms has made possible many matters here. After all, other spirit forms have found favour through legalisation. So, why not in the mining sector too? No paper. No proof. No interest. Now since that is the standard, why all the hullabaloo about Haitians and what they are doing here? Why ask them for identification and proof of address?

I pointed out that insurance companies, banks, and others demand “onerous” documentation. I would hope that I have not

exposed them and this country to a return of the 21st century brand of communism. That would be like the state capitalism practiced in the People’s Republic of China, where only the people neither know nor feel that they own a vast republican civilisation.

To sum up, I can overlook any promise of 50,000 jobs since I, too, sometimes get carried away. Guyanese should be thankful it was not 150,000 for then there would be rounding up for press gang purposes. Think curfew, roisterers and merrymakers. I can ignore tax evasions since Mr Statia would be long gone; and the lunatics may retake the asylum.

But I am sorry, because try as I may, I am unable to appreciate what is “onerous” about asking a miner for identification and the rest. Maybe, there will be introduction of “place thumbprint on the dotted line.” What would be one more insult to bona fide taxpayers?

Yours faithfully, GHK Lall