admin

GFF launches Division 2 of the Elite League to expand competitive opportunities for club players Sep 14, 2024 Sports Kaieteur Sports – The Guyana Football Federation (GFF) has officially introduced Division 2 of the Elite League, aimed at providing additional competitive opportunities for players from the ten participating clubs who were not selected for their respective Elite League rosters. This new initiative is designed to ensure that all registered players have the chance to develop their skills in a competitive environment and work toward future inclusion in the top-tier teams. The GFF’s Elite League Division 2, also known as the Reserve League, kicked off on September 1, 2024, and has already completed five matches. The tournament is held on Sundays at various venues and features a total of eight teams, including two U17 national teams. GFF President Wayne Forde highlighted the importance of this new division, stating; “Division 2 allows clubs to maximize the development of their players, ensuring that no talent is overlooked simply because they didn’t make the final Elite League roster. It’s about creating more opportunities for growth and competition.” The participating teams for the inaugural season include Ann’s Grove FC, Santos FC, Monedderlust FC, Fruta Conquerors FC, Den Amstel FC, Guyana Defence Force FC, Guyana Panther U17, and Guyana Jaguar U17. Division 2 operates as a single-table competition, where each team plays one round of matches. At the conclusion of the round-robin stage, the top four teams will advance to the playoffs. The first-place team will face the second-place team for a spot in the final, while the third and fourth-place teams will compete for a chance to enter the final. This format ensures a competitive and dynamic season. In terms of results, the first set of matches held on September 1 saw Santos FC and Monedderlust FC playing to a goalless draw, while Fruta Conquerors FC defeated Den Amstel FC 2-0. The second set of matches, held on September 8, had Guyana Panthers U17 dominating Den Amstel FC with a 4-0 victory. GDF FC delivered a stunning 8-0 win over Monedderlust FC, while Fruta Conquerors FC secured another 2-0 win, this time against Ann’s Grove United FC. With these five matches already completed, the tournament continues to draw interest as teams aim to secure their playoff spots. Matches are held on Sundays, with kick-off times starting at 10:00 hrs at various locations, including the National Training Centre (NTC). The tournament will run through to November 2024, with the top four teams moving to the playoff rounds. However, the U17 teams will not compete for points or playoff positions. The GFF’s Division 2 of the Elite League marks a significant step forward in the Federation’s ongoing efforts to strengthen the football pipeline and give more players a chance to excel. Related Similar Articles

Hamilton Steelers beat Heritage Boyz in CPSCL T20 Bronze final Sep 14, 2024 Sports The victorious Hamilton Steelers team strikes a pose after the game. Kaieteur Sports – Hamilton Steelers beat Heritage Boyz by a convincing, 72-run margin on Sunday at the Glenforest ground, Brampton where the final of the 2024 Canadian Premier Softball Cricket League (CPSCL) T20 Regular Season Bronze Conference took place. Recently, Hamilton Steelers also won the 100-ball, Rapid-100, the President’s trophy and T10 competitions. On this occasion, they won the toss and rattled up a respectable 182-9 from the allotted 20-overs while Heritage Boyz responded with only 110 all out in the 19th over. Their innings was tormented by Mike Shivcharran who grabbed 4-17 from his maximum four overs. Rishi Harricharan and Canada-based Guyanese Sunil Sawh also delivered with discipline to finish off things with 2-12 (3) and 2-15 (4) respectively. Akash Bickram hit an impressive 50 having clobbered six sixes for Heritage Boyz while Dave Indardeo offered a fight too with 20. Earlier, skipper Lake Dhori led the way for Hamilton Steelers with a responsible 47 which contained two sixes and four fours. The consistent and opener Sawh struck a typically attacking 40 while Anthony Shivcharran made 31 and 19 from Harricharan to support Dhori. Bickram claimed three wickets from two overs but conceded 20 runs and another Guyanese Navin Indardeo with 2-40 from four expensive overs. Sawh was adjudged the player-of-the-match for his outstanding batting performance. The winning and runners-up teams collected a trophy each while Sawh also took home one. Meanwhile, President of the CPSCL Patrick Singh congratulated both sides for reaching the final. The Essequibian-born Singh also acknowledged the participation from the other teams. Related Similar Articles

When patriotism powers past partisanship Sep 14, 2024 Features / Columnists, The GHK Lall Column Hard Truths by GHK Lall Kaieteur News – The world is coming to an end; the good news is that it is not an apocalyptic one.  Former Republican and Bush Vice President, Dick Cheney will be voting come November for Vice President Kamala Harris, the Democratic presidential candidate.  It has all the seismic force of a political earthquake, one that batters the Richter scale.  It is why I like America: 250 years of trial and error, as well as repeated stumbling and soaring, but a man can still stand and deliver something of this stature.  Guyana has another 200 years to go and maybe (just maybe), it may get men and women who can shake the shackles of blind partisanship and be honest with themselves, just once.  It would be for the good of the country.  Yes, by some miracle, we still have that, with Guyana standing as proof, as flimsy as it is. GHK Lall Let this word be said: I have little to no use for the likes of Dick Cheney, former US vice President, a politician of hanging chads infamy, thanks to another Harris and her team in Florida during the US presidential election of 2000.If I incensed the US Ambassador, Her Excellency The riot should know that it is part of what makes America great (genuinely great), these rare freedoms that we have, so treasure.  It is to speak and do as Dick Cheney did, to stand up and go against the grain and still matter.  How can I, a colored man, a simple citizen, be endeared by a Vulcan backer, a 21st century warrior in the mold of Atilla the Hun and Genghis Khan the barbarian?  Yet, it is said that even in the most heinous, the worst of us, there is that spark that could set apart, if allowed the opening to take feeble first steps, then to flourish.  It is why I still hope, as much as it is against hope, that our own esteemed Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo would find that spark and push his way to such a moment of clean reckoning with himself.  All Guyana could be better.  Even though in President Dr. Irfaan Ali, I discern a still worse streak-a very broad one-of Vice President Jagdeo in the making, the identical hope and spark are wished for him. Again, it could be for the Guyana that has always eluded.  Never lose hope is the spirit; never give up is the word.  It is why I never retreat.  There are some developments that are so staggering that they are unfathomable.  Republican hit man Dick Cheney gave us one in the most tumultuous of times.  The Dick Cheney of Iraq and supporter of the Project for the New American Century, a man who treaded close to the demagogic in US political leadership, embodied some of that himself, yet does the unbelievable.  He has crossed the American political Rubicon, and that says it all.  I think that a better America could be the result.  His words tell we the people of Guyana of what is wrong with America, and the leadership that needs to be exercised to make a start in righting the wrongs.  We have our own unending range of leadership wrongs here, compliments of VP Jagdeo and Excellency Ali.  They should listen and learn.  We all should. “In our nation’s 248-year history, there has never been an individual who is a greater threat to our republic than Donald Trump. He tried to steal the last election using lies and violence to keep himself in power after the voters had rejected him.” How many more sober and serious Americans think similarly?  Whether Republican or Democrat or Independent, how many more have quietly resolved internally to do as he did on the first Tuesday in November?  It takes an American Firster to get there, say so, a man as Republican as Rock of Ages.  Politically speaking, of course.  “As citizens, we each have a duty to put country above partisanship to defend our Constitution. That is why I will be casting my vote for Vice President Kamala Harris.” What is left for a non-entity like me to say in the face of such noble patriotic instincts?  Those with honest convictions, those with the stirrings of conscience that troubles, can look at their own cult leaders and be bold: of that I will have no part.  Whatever Kamala Harris is, ever will be, she can never be half as dangerous, or a quarter as destructive as Donald Trump.  Instead of using Mr. Cheney’s remarkable reaction to American circumstances to point to Messrs. Ali and Jagdeo and the demagoguery present in Guyana.  I say, instead, let it be a wakeup call for these two rancorous and ramshackle Guyanese leaders, and urge that an about turn be made.  Guyana is too precariously poised.  It is too young and too seething to be stable enough to manage its affairs with aplomb, with the requisite strength that should have been from the inception.  Make a change, a real one.  Invaluable it would be to Guyana and Guyanese to have a few good men and women to say that we have gone too far in this country.  It is time I take the lead in being different, by breaking ranks.  By standing for country before the cultish.  By being for fellow citizens above cash and corruption.  By being for the Guyana that could be, probably just within the grasp. (The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.) Related Similar Articles

Breaking the back of criminal networks Sep 14, 2024 Editorial Kaieteur News – “The bust is not the end of the matter, we have every intention in working with our partners to destabilise and break the back of all criminal networks especially in drug trafficking operating within our territorial space and airspace. We have already asked and we are ready to work with our partners once we are given the assets, and once we can secure the assets to deal with all the over flights that are passing over our airspace, we are ready to work with you in dismantling the global empire that drug trade has created but we need that support.” President Ali could be depended upon to come up with the right words to suit the occasion.  He usually doesn’t disappoint, and in the matter of the giant Matthews Ridge Drug bust, the president was in good form.  The moment was right: the unveiling of the new National Defense Institute and his remarks at the Arthur Chung Conference Center.  The president, as quoted above must be commended for his stirring words, the seriousness of his apparent commitment to dismantle criminal networks in Guyana.  But there are some realities that the carefully avoided, and which house the troubling, what clashes with his highflying postures. In that major Matthews Ridge drug bust, the Guyana Police Force (GPF) was not largely uninvolved.  If it was involved at all, it was invisible and remotely.  This doesn’t help to “break the backs of all criminal networks” as welcome as that would be and as impressive as it sounds.  If the GPF had little to no role in something as big as the Matthews Ridge drug operation, then that does not say much about the trust placed in it, nor the efficiency that it brings to the table.  Were there fears from the Americans about a potential leak as to the development and timing of the interception, thus compromising months, if not years, of careful work?  This is not helpful at all to President Ali’s ringing words about his government’s intention to deal criminal networks serious body blows from which there is little hope to recover.  Guyanese harbor certain sentiments about the GPF and most of them do not accrue to its credit.  This is unhealthy for law enforcement, and it agitates the peace of mind of citizens.  To go further, it could be said that criminals and their networks are encouraged to greater efforts.  For when they are armed with the knowledge that the GPF’s operational environment is subject to such negative local and foreign attitudes, the criminals see a clearer path, are more incentivized.  Relative to negative foreign perceptions of the GPF, the proof is in who from Guyana was involved and who was left out in that Matthews Ridge drug mission. When the foregoing is attached to the news that a senior police officer is suspected of some involvement with the drug developments at Matthews Ridge, this all but confirms what Guyanese (and possibly Americans) think and conclude about the GPF.  Because if, indeed, a senior cop was that close to a likely long standing traffic, he could not have been operating alone.  It means that junior ranks may have also been ensnared in what was going on in the remote hinterlands.  If so, and that is the only such weakened GPF network of still to be proven rogue members, there may be some hope for Guyana, and the president’s commitment to “break the back of all criminal networks”.  If, however, there are more such rogue cells in the GPF, as many Guyanese believe, then dismantling criminal networks just became an almost undoable project, nothing but a big pipe dream, with words that dress up the situation. To break the back of all criminal networks is a noble undertaking.  Bigger and better governments have tried in more helpful environments, with limited success.  Locally, leadership speeches have their flashes of meaning, then they often diminish to nothing.  A depoliticized GPF would help, and a professional one could deliver on President Ali’s grand words.  Unfortunately, GPF and other local realities stand as major obstacles in his drive to “break the back of all criminal networks.”  The sound is good; the supporting substances are just too soft. Related Similar Articles

The PPP/C also drank the IMF/ World Bank Cool-Aid Sep 14, 2024 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom Kaieteur News – The curious thing about politicians is how easily they forget their own past while presenting a revisionist history that suits the moment. Case in point, Bharrat Jagdeo—Guyana’s Vice President and former President and Minister of Finance—recently attempted to draw a distinction between the structural adjustment programme implemented under the People’s National Congress (PNC) from 1989 to 1992, and the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C) government’s own programme post-1992. The former, he argued, was focused on stabilization and reform, while the latter, apparently, was of a different focus entirely. As the saying goes, he can tell that to the Marines. Let’s dispense with the illusions. There was no substantial difference between the PNC’s Economic Reform Programme (ERP) and the PPP/C’s subsequent policies under Jagdeo. Both were cut from the same neoliberal cloth, woven by the IMF, World Bank, and Inter-American Development Bank (IDB).  Neo-liberalism is still the dominant economic ideology in Guyana. The PPP/C, especially under Jagdeo’s stewardship, swallowed the bitter medicine of structural adjustment with a docility that bordered on the slavish. While the PNC’s reforms were blunt, harsh, unconscionable, and unapologetic, Jagdeo’s government dressed theirs up in rhetorical finery like “development with a human face.” But development is, in essence, about people—it doesn’t need a face. What the PPP/C likely meant was an adjustment with a human face. In this regard, it followed the IMF playbook almost to the letter, with little deviation from the course set before by the PNC. One need only look at the policies pursued by Jagdeo to confirm this alignment. Despite the PPP/C’s rhetoric, almost every major economic decision bore the imprint of international financial institutions. This slavish adherence to IMF prescriptions manifested itself in policies that struck at the heart of Guyana’s public service and economy. Privatization was continued vigorously under the PPP/C. They even tabled a  Privatization Policy Framework Paper.  This was no accident; it was the direct result of the PPP/C’s willingness to bow to external diktat. Perhaps the most egregious example of this obedience was the controversial policy of “red-circling” certain public service positions. This measure, insisted upon by the IMF, was designed to limit salary increases and maintain fiscal discipline, but it came at a significant cost. Public servants, already underpaid, were told that certain positions were proscribed from enjoying salary increases. This was something that the IMF wanted just as how it insisted on a cap on salary increases. These developments helped fuel the public service strike of 1999, one of the most bitter labor disputes in the country’s history. Perhaps if the policy of red-circling and wage restraint had been relaxed, the country could have avoided the violent actions that accompanied that strike. The continuity between the PNC’s ERP and the PPP/C’s subsequent policies, especially under Jagdeo, is undeniable. One could argue that in the early years, Jagdeo’s lack of experience in running a country made him more reliant on the advice IMF, and World Bank, and other international financial institutions. But he would have gotten older and wiser on the job and by now should have dumped neo-liberal economics which widens rather than narrows the gap between the haves and the have-nots, and which subjects the people to the vagaries of markets and limits direct government intervention in the market. Under Jagdeo’s leadership, the PPP/C became the poster child for neo-liberal orthodoxy. The PPP/C government would be a strong contender for the podium in any competition for the title of foremost neo-liberal acolyte in the Caribbean. The PPP/C faithfully followed the IMF’s instructions. The PPP/C’s policies, for all their talk of human development, were in practice indistinguishable from those of the very international institutions they claimed to resist. What is most damning, however, is that the PPP/C continued this course without pause. The very adjustments that were supposed to stabilize and reform the economy have, in many ways, perpetuated the very inequalities they were meant to resolve… The legacy of these policies can be seen in the enduring struggles of the Guyanese working class, who have borne the brunt of these “reforms” without reaping the benefits. The macroeconomic structural adjustment policies advocated by the IMF and World Bank promoted a development model centered on export-led growth, driven by natural resource extraction and foreign direct investment. This is the very model that the PPP/C had castigated prior to 1992. In the end, Jagdeo’s attempt to distinguish his government’s policies from those of the PNC is deeply cynical. His administration, like its predecessor, drank deeply from the cup of structural adjustment, and the consequences of that choice are still being felt today. The rhetoric of “development with a human face” was little more than a façade, a thin veneer over the hard reality of neo-liberalism. It is time to confront that reality and acknowledge that the PPP/C, under Jagdeo, was no less beholden to the dictates of the IMF and World Bank than the PNC before it. The record speaks for itself. (The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.) Related Similar Articles

Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]

Why the UK Government must not abandon the Winter Fuel Payments Scheme Sep 14, 2024 Letters Dear Editor, In light of the UK Government’s recent proposal to eliminate the Winter Fuel Payments scheme, I feel compelled, as a journalist who has covered welfare issues extensively, to voice my strong opposition to this deeply misguided and dangerous policy change. The removal of Winter Fuel Payments is not just a minor budget adjustment; it is a direct threat to the health, dignity, and very survival of some of the most vulnerable members of our society. This policy, if enacted, will have devastating consequences that ripple far beyond the short-term financial savings it might provide. Winter Fuel Payments were first introduced in 1997 under a Labour government, a recognition that, for many, the cost of heating during the winter months was becoming unmanageable. The scheme provides a one-off tax-free payment of between £100 and £300 to help older people pay their heating bills, depending on their age, household situation, and whether they receive other state benefits. Since its inception, millions of pensioners have relied on this support, often as a critical line of defence against fuel poverty—a situation where a household is unable to afford adequate heating. Now, the current government is proposing to remove this safety net. The argument put forward is that Winter Fuel Payments are too costly and that cuts must be made to reduce the burden on public finances. However, this line of reasoning fails to take into account the human cost of such a policy. Removing Winter Fuel Payments will not balance the budget—it will push tens of thousands of households, already struggling to make ends meet, further into hardship. The proposed removal disproportionately affects those who are most vulnerable: low-income pensioners, the disabled, and individuals who are already living in or near fuel poverty. This policy doesn’t just strip away financial support; it strips away the safety net that many rely on to survive the harshest months of the year. In the UK, cold weather is not a trivial inconvenience for the elderly. It’s a life-threatening hazard. The British winter is characterized by long periods of damp, cold weather, which can exacerbate pre-existing health conditions. Pensioners, who are often less mobile and less able to generate body heat, are at particular risk. According to Age UK, a charity that advocates for older people, more than one million older households are living in fuel poverty, struggling to pay their heating bills. Cutting Winter Fuel Payments will push even more into this precarious situation. The statistics are already alarming. Every winter, the UK experiences what is known as “excess winter deaths”—the number of deaths that occur over the winter period compared to other times of the year. According to the Office for National Statistics (ONS), during the winter of 2022/2023, there were over 63,000 excess winter deaths. Many of these deaths are attributable to cold weather exacerbating conditions such as respiratory and cardiovascular diseases; illnesses that could be mitigated by ensuring homes are adequately heated. Removing the Winter Fuel Payments scheme would all but guarantee an increase in this tragic statistic. This brings us to a fundamental question: What is the ethical responsibility of the government toward its citizens, particularly those who have contributed to society through decades of work? The elderly are not simply a financial burden to be managed—they are individuals who have spent their lives contributing to the economy, paying taxes, raising families, and building communities. The Winter Fuel Payments are not charity; they are a part of the social contract that we, as a society, have made with our elderly citizens. Governments are tasked with protecting the welfare of all citizens, especially those who are most vulnerable. It is often said that the measure of a society is how it treats its weakest members. If the government proceeds with this policy, it is effectively telling the elderly and the disabled that they are expendable, and that their lives and well-being are secondary to the whims of fiscal austerity. Is this the legacy the government wishes to leave? To abandon the very people who built this nation during the hardest years of their lives? As a nation, we should be deeply concerned about what this says about our priorities. The removal of Winter Fuel Payments is not just about saving money; it is a reflection of how little we value our elderly population. We cannot—and must not—allow budgetary concerns to outweigh our moral obligation to ensure that no one has to choose between heating their home and eating a meal. Beyond the ethical implications, the economic argument for removing Winter Fuel Payments is woefully shortsighted. The government claims that eliminating the scheme will help reduce public spending, but this is a classic case of penny-wise, pound-foolish. Cutting Winter Fuel Payments will likely lead to higher public spending in other areas, particularly the NHS. Cold homes contribute to a significant increase in health problems, especially among the elderly. Exposure to cold temperatures can exacerbate conditions such as asthma, bronchitis, and cardiovascular disease, leading to more frequent hospital admissions, longer stays, and increased pressure on already overburdened healthcare services. The costs associated with treating cold-related illnesses far outweigh the relatively modest expense of maintaining the Winter Fuel Payments scheme. In fact, according to the charity National Energy Action, cold homes cost the NHS £1.36 billion every year in England alone. The ripple effect will extend to other public services as well. Social care, emergency services, and local authorities will all face increased demand as more individuals fall into fuel poverty and require additional support. The removal of Winter Fuel Payments will create a vicious cycle of need, with more people turning to state services for help, ultimately increasing the financial burden on the very system the government claims it is trying to relieve. Eliminating Winter Fuel Payments may offer a temporary reduction in public spending, but it creates long-term, structural problems that will cost far more in the future. The government’s responsibility is not just to manage the budget year by year but to ensure that its policies are sustainable in the long term. Cutting Winter Fuel Payments is a short-sighted fix that ignores the broader social and economic consequences. Moreover, in a global context, removing this scheme would make the UK an outlier. Countries with similar climates, such as Germany, France, and Sweden, provide substantial winter heating subsidies for their vulnerable populations. These nations understand that protecting their elderly and disabled from the dangers of cold weather is not just a moral imperative but an economic one. By removing Winter Fuel Payments, the UK would be taking a backward step, abandoning the most vulnerable while other nations move forward with comprehensive welfare policies. If cost savings must be made, there are more sensible ways to reform the Winter Fuel Payments scheme without removing it altogether. For instance, the payments could be means-tested, ensuring that the money goes to those who need it most. Alternatively, the government could explore ways to deliver the payments more efficiently, perhaps by integrating them into broader energy-saving initiatives such as insulation and home improvement schemes. These reforms would allow the government to reduce costs while still protecting the vulnerable. But an outright removal is a draconian measure that serves no one in the long term. It is not only an assault on the elderly but also on the basic principles of fairness and decency that should underpin any welfare system. In conclusion, the removal of Winter Fuel Payments is a dangerous and ethically indefensible policy. It will lead to more cold homes, more illnesses, more deaths, and ultimately, higher public spending. The UK Government must recognize the long-term damage this policy will cause and reconsider its position before it is too late. We, as citizens, cannot remain silent. I urge readers to express their opposition by writing to their local MPs, signing petitions, and participating in public discourse on this critical issue. We must stand together to ensure that no one in our society is left to freeze in the cold because of a reckless government decision. Sincerely, Wayne Lyttle Journalist Related Similar Articles