Former Human Services Minister Priya Manickchand says Police Commissioner Henry Greene should go because of his improper behaviour in a case that has put him on the brink of a rape charge and she also expressed disquiet at the ruling of Chief Justice Ian Chang in the matter.

When asked by Stabroek News how she felt about Greene remaining on the job, the now Education Minister said that while she was not sure if a decision had been taken the Commissioner of Police should not even wait for anyone to ask him to leave. “From his own admission he acted most improperly and in this instance he was discovered so he should leave willingly. I am not sure that he can do very much hereafter to enjoy the confidence of people generally and women in particular and his actions may have been a bad example for his juniors,” Manickchand, the first senior government official to call for Greene to go, said.

Manickchand, who had spent a lot of time in her former portfolio advocating for women’s rights and modern sexual offences legislation was referring to Greene’s admission in an affidavit that he had had sex with the woman who levelled the rape allegation against him. The woman had gone to him for assistance with a police matter.

Manickchand told Stabroek News yesterday that she is also worried about the implications the ruling by Justice Chang will have on other prosecutions or intended prosecutions for rape even though she agrees that the court had jurisdiction to review a decision by the Director of Public Prosecu-tions (DPP) to prosecute or not to prosecute.

“As far as it relates to the quashing of a decision to prosecute a rape charge, I am particularly worried about the implications of this decision on other prosecutions or intended prosecutions for rape,” Manickchand said in an invited comment.

Last Friday Justice Chang overturned the advice by the DPP to charge Greene with rape saying among other things that her advice was “irrational.” Since his judgment, the Chief Justice has come under unremitting criticism by members of the public and organisations.

The minister believes that it is only in the most “exceptional circumstances that the court should exercise its discretion when the decision by the DPP is actually to prosecute as matters that an accused takes exception to can be addressed in or during the trial…”

She pointed out that because rape is hardly ever done at “high noon in the market square” any allegation of rape is almost always going to be the complainant’s word against the accused’s word and that is a matter to be fully tested in court.

Manickchand said that she prefers a jury of 12 reasonable persons to decide whose word they actually believe rather than a judge of a review court.

A lawyer by profession, Manickchand, who had pushed the passage of the Sexual Offences Act, said that this Act specifically seeks to debunk many of the myths surrounding rape and the prosecution of rape charges.

“The new thinking on rape requires not only that women be more aware of their actions but that men too be cognizant of the law and its consequences,” the minister said.

Acknowledging that society’s debunking of long held rape myths is happening slowly, Manickchand said she expects that more and more persons would be enlightened as to the realities of rape and as to the provisions made in the law on the topic to cater for those realities so that all could be more equipped to address some of these issues accurately as jurors and potential juries.

“Given that research shows that 3% of women lie about rape but a GHRA [Guyana Human Rights Association] study showed only 1% of rapes reported to the police in Guyana result in a conviction, it means that here in Guyana we have a lot of work to do to debunk myths of rape, investigate rapes…” the Education Minister said.

According to her the figures mean too that had the decision to prosecute “those matters under that study been reviewed by the High Court, using the ‘realistic prospect of success’ test (propounded by Justice Chang) about 99% of prosecutions may not even have been instituted.”

“I worry about what that would mean for the building of confidence in the entire system and particularly in women to make complaints. In other words right now many people still believe women lie about rape.  So realistically the prospects of success on charges of rape matters are still slim. This will change with time,” the minister said.

Some of the reasons behind this change, the minister said, are “these matters will go to court and juries which are comprised of ordinary people will be instructed as to the matters they should and should not take into consideration and this, in addition to the intense sensitization that must be done by all stakeholders, including women’s groups, political parties etc etc will work so that eventually society will come to know that some things are just not acceptable but if we keep shutting down the prosecution then I fear we may be doing irreparable harm.”

She said the matter brings three things forcibly to her mind:

1. Any woman who lies about being raped or any person who conspires with a woman to falsely lay a complaint of rape is an enemy to all women and especially to those women who have been and will be raped. She and/or her conspirator is/are easily giving fodder to the very harmful myth that all complainants lie about rape.

2. Except in the most exceptional circumstances she would prefer that decisions to prosecute not be interfered with by the process of judicial review.

3. A lot of work has to be done to educate and sensitize the population about rape and intense work on this must begin with haste.

Source: https://www.stabroeknews.com/2012/news/guyana/04/04/greene-should-go-manickchand/

I SEE Mrs. Joan Ward-Mars has attempted a response to me in the KN and SN edition of 30/03/2011 in relation to funding to the Linden Legal Aid Centre (LLAC).
Except for one claim which I shall address later, the response does not surprise me one bit and confirms an impression that I had eventually and reluctantly formed and that is that Mrs. Ward – Mars was just not getting it.
In my letter I had made two main points. Firstly I had enquired whether Ms Dodson had authorization to speak on behalf of GAWL or if she went on a frolic of her own while wearing the hat of President of GAWL, secondly I had specifically said that government was funding LLAC though providing funds though UNICEF.
Mrs. Ward- Mars asserts that because Emily Dodson is a woman and because I believe in women’s rights and empowering women, I should not have refuted the erroneous things said by Ms Dodson and also claims that Ms. Dodson has a fundamental right to freedom of expression and so should be allowed to say whatever she wants.
For the record I have never held the view either that being a woman gives one a free pass to make false representations or that another woman cannot expose said falsities when they are made. Clearly from Emily Dodson’s initial claims which in essence would have been claims made against me ( a fellow woman) as the minister at the time, and given these present claims by Mrs. Ward- Mars against me now, some of which are just downright lies which I shall address later, I find Mrs. Ward-Mars uses this woman-for-woman-support argument conveniently.
It is true that Emily Dodson has a fundamental right to freely express herself but she does not have a fundamental right to mislead. And again Ward-Mars missed the point. I have no problems with Emily Dodson speaking but I, and other members of GAWL, have a huge problem with our President making wild, ill informed and political statements that we did not as members authorised. Or is Mrs. Ward-Mars suggesting that the members of this professional association who have said problem do not count. But all of this could be solved easily. There is an executive that as members we elect to run and manage the affairs of GAWL. If the executive authorised Ms. Dodson to “chide the Government”, “meet the leader of the opposition,” “call on members of parliament to act” and say “the government is treating Linden as stepchildren” then, as I asked, they should adopt those statements. If GAWL does not adopt those statements as their own, then at the very least, Ms Dodson must confess that she spoke in her private capacity and not leave the impression that GAWL made those reckless and untrue statements.
Mrs. Ward – Mars seems to think that good intentions alone suffice to receive and justify spending and unfortunately this just is not so, and she keeps failing to understand this.
Two examples that demonstrate to me that Mrs. Ward-Mars just does not get it are her expressed and repeated upset that even though the Honourable Prime Minister had called and asked me to allocate five million dollars to LLAC, I still did not and that in November last year LLAC did not have funds and she asked me for money and I still did not give. Editor, I do not have the power to take money from one place to which said money was appropriated in the National Assembly and give it to another place irrespective of how I personally feel or of how good the cause is. I cannot even use or instruct the use of money that was appropriated for ink to buy gasolene in the same ministry. If I do, it would amount to misappropriation. And I cannot force GLAC to collaborate with any other organisation if GLAC first requires certain record keeping. I do not know how to say this any clearer.
I note too that Mrs. Ward-Mars has not denied that LLAC receives money from UNICEF but continues to claim that Government does not support LLAC. Again, I do not know how to say this so that Mrs. Ward- Mars could get it. If UNICEF gives money to LLAC it is because government supported and approved same. Without said support and approval UNICEF cannot disburse Guyana’s country funds.
I see Mrs. Ward-Mars saying that LLAC has not received the sum of $9,060,070 from UNICEF. Well I have in writing that UNICEF has indeed disbursed that money. In fact the figures I used in my previous letter were provided directly from GLAC and the UNICEF office in Guyana. If in fact that money was not disbursed then I would myself advocate that the sum that the GOG approved for LLAC be disbursed as soon as possible.
Lastly, I wish to address Mrs. Ward-Mars claim that I, Priya Manickchand, said that “Linden does not need a Legal Aid Centre” and “you all can go to who you like, you have nothing to get…” This is most difficult for me to respond to as, save and except someone else who was at the meeting (who would all have been members of the board of LLAC) steps forward to dispute this, it really is my word against Mrs. Ward-Mars words. For the record, I specifically deny ever having conceived of any such thought let alone uttering any said words. I specifically call on Mr. Fitz Peters, Attorney-at-Law to be the gentleman I know him to be and tell the people of Guyana whether I uttered any such words. Incidentally, I have already spoken to Mr. Fitz Peters who says clearly that, while he did not take notes, he does not recall me saying any such thing.
In the meantime I offer the following facts that can be easily verified and leave it up to your readers to determine whether given said facts, there is likely to be any truth to this most wicked claim.

1. When the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic was about to close its doors because of lack of funding in or around 2003, while I was a lawyer in private practice, I volunteered my services and along with ONE other lawyer in the person of Sandra Kurtziuos and with some dedicated and hard working support staff and a persistent board of directors, who spent their own personal money, we managed to keep the doors of the Clinic opened.
I continued to volunteer at the Clinic until in or around 2005 when the Clinic received funding and started to pay me a stipend. Although I managed my own practice, I continued to work there until the day before I was sworn in as a Minister of the Government.

2. During 2006, before LLAC came onto the scene or before we knew that they had, we, Jolyon Hatmin, Gary Best and myself, then the lawyers at the Legal Aid Clinic, decided that even with our limited funding we would expand our services to Linden. We were kindly provided with transportation support, and started going to Linden to advise and represent clients. I believe most of this representation was done by (now Commodore) Best.

3. Upon my assumption to Political Office I made it very clear publicly that one of my priorities would be to expand Legal Aid Services and by 2008 in addition to the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic offering service in Georgetown and Linden alone, in collaboration with the two Clinics, through conscious and deliberate efforts, offices were opened in Regions 2, 5, 6 and 10. In fact the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic, because of the massive expansion had to be renamed The Guyana Legal Aid Clinic.

4. Mrs. Ward-Mars herself says that their board continuously met with me and I say that those meetings were first with a view to ensuring LLAC begin their operation and thereafter that they continue their operations.

5. The KN on Saturday 20th June 2009 reported that “Government and the Directors of the Linden Legal Aid Centre yesterday officially launched Linden Legal Aid Centre…” and the Chronicle reported on the 22nd June 2009 that “….speaking at the ceremony Minister of Human Services and Social Security, Ms Priya Manickchand said this centre has been in existence for a while now. However, she said it was officially launched because the weekly presence of lawyers from other parts of the country was not sufficient to deal with the issues of the people in Linden…..” and the Stabroek News June of 20th 2009 reported “….The centre was established with support and funding from UNICEF and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in collaboration with the Government of Guyana. Minister of Human Services and Social Security, Priya Manickchand officially declared the centre open and encouraged the full utilization of its services. She said that prior to the establishment of the centre; similar services were extended to residents but on a limited scale. She also stated that the government would not seek to compete with the centre but rather give maximum support in areas that are necessary…”

Editor, if long before I became Minister, I, along with my law colleagues, decided that Linden needed legal aid services and actually worked to provide those services, then how likely is it that I would have said “linden does not need a legal aid centre?” How likely is this to be my view when I have publicly advocated for legal aid in every region and actually worked consciously to bring legal aid to 6 of the 10 regions in Guyana? And why would I have kept meeting with LLAC over the years as per Mrs. Ward- Mars’ own admission if I held and expressed the view in that early meeting as she claims, that “you all can go to who you like, you have nothing to get…” And if I held this view that Linden did not need legal aid and that the LLAC had “nothing to get,” then I must have been schizophrenic to have been actively involved in the preparation for and the actual opening of the LLAC including causing to be provided, banners, programmes, tokens, decorations, refreshments, staff to prepare for the opening, publicly supporting the opening and declaring the Clinic open etc etc., and the LLAC must have been held at gun point to have “in collaboration with the Government of Guyana opened the Linden Legal Aid Clinic.” And of course the Kaieteur News, the Stabroek News and the Guyana Chronicle all conspired with me to publish my open and declared support for the establishment and continuation of legal aid generally and the LLAC specifically as is hereinbefore quoted thereby negating the likelihood of my uttering those words that Ward-Mars untruthfully attribute to me. I would like to think that Guyana knows me well enough to say whether that sounds like something I am likely to say. Indeed, I believe your readers can judge from my actions whether that is something I would have said.
I reiterate that I believe legal aid is a necessary service that MUST be offered. I doubt that my belief or my commitment to the provision of legal aid service is ever going to falter and I shall continue to do whatever I can to ensure this service never stops. It is unlikely that I could be clearer on any of these issues and any more energy or time I expend on the subject of legal aid will be to actually assist in the provision of service. Consequentially, this is my last correspondence on this matter.

EDITOR’S NOTE: This letter was sent by e-mail since March 30, but due to space constraints, occasioned by the presentation of the National Budget,   it could not have been published in yesterday’s edition of the paper.

Source: http://guyanachronicle.com/2012/04/01/legal-aid-is-a-necessary-service-and-must-be-offered

I SEE Mrs. Joan Ward-Mars has attempted a response to me in the KN and SN edition of 30/03/2011 in relation to funding to the Linden Legal Aid Centre (LLAC).

Except for one claim which I shall address later, the response does not surprise me one bit and confirms an impression that I had eventually and reluctantly formed and that is that Mrs. Ward – Mars was just not getting it. 
In my letter I had made two main points. Firstly I had enquired whether Ms Dodson had authorization to speak on behalf of GAWL or if she went on a frolic of her own while wearing the hat of President of GAWL, secondly I had specifically said that government was funding LLAC though providing funds though UNICEF.

Mrs. Ward- Mars asserts that because Emily Dodson is a woman and because I believe in women’s rights and empowering women, I should not have refuted the erroneous things said by Ms Dodson and also claims that Ms. Dodson has a fundamental right to freedom of expression and so should be allowed to say whatever she wants.
For the record I have never held the view either that being a woman gives one a free pass to make false representations or that another woman cannot expose said falsities when they are made. Clearly from Emily Dodson’s initial claims which in essence would have been claims made against me ( a fellow woman) as the minister at the time, and given these present claims by Mrs. Ward- Mars against me now, some of which are just downright lies which I shall address later, I find Mrs. Ward-Mars uses this woman-for-woman-support argument conveniently.
It is true that Emily Dodson has a fundamental right to freely express herself but she does not have a fundamental right to mislead. And again Ward-Mars missed the point. I have no problems with Emily Dodson speaking but I, and other members of GAWL, have a huge problem with our President making wild, ill informed and political statements that we did not as members authorised. Or is Mrs. Ward-Mars suggesting that the members of this professional association who have said problem do not count. But all of this could be solved easily. There is an executive that as members we elect to run and manage the affairs of GAWL. If the executive authorised Ms. Dodson to “chide the Government”, “meet the leader of the opposition,” “call on members of parliament to act” and say “the government is treating Linden as stepchildren” then, as I asked, they should adopt those statements. If GAWL does not adopt those statements as their own, then at the very least, Ms Dodson must confess that she spoke in her private capacity and not leave the impression that GAWL made those reckless and untrue statements.

Mrs. Ward – Mars seems to think that good intentions alone suffice to receive and justify spending and unfortunately this just is not so, and she keeps failing to understand this.
Two examples that demonstrate to me that Mrs. Ward-Mars just does not get it are her expressed and repeated upset that even though the Honourable Prime Minister had called and asked me to allocate five million dollars to LLAC, I still did not and that in November last year LLAC did not have funds and she asked me for money and I still did not give. Editor, I do not have the power to take money from one place to which said money was appropriated in the National Assembly and give it to another place irrespective of how I personally feel or of how good the cause is. I cannot even use or instruct the use of money that was appropriated for ink to buy gasolene in the same ministry. If I do, it would amount to misappropriation. And I cannot force GLAC to collaborate with any other organisation if GLAC first requires certain record keeping. I do not know how to say this any clearer.

I note too that Mrs. Ward-Mars has not denied that LLAC receives money from UNICEF but continues to claim that Government does not support LLAC. Again, I do not know how to say this so that Mrs. Ward- Mars could get it. If UNICEF gives money to LLAC it is because government supported and approved same. Without said support and approval UNICEF cannot disburse Guyana’s country funds.

I see Mrs. Ward-Mars saying that LLAC has not received the sum of $9,060,070 from UNICEF. Well I have in writing that UNICEF has indeed disbursed that money. In fact the figures I used in my previous letter were provided directly from GLAC and the UNICEF office in Guyana. If in fact that money was not disbursed then I would myself advocate that the sum that the GOG approved for LLAC be disbursed as soon as possible.

Lastly, I wish to address Mrs. Ward-Mars claim that I, Priya Manickchand, said that “Linden does not need a Legal Aid Centre” and “you all can go to who you like, you have nothing to get…” This is most difficult for me to respond to as, save and except someone else who was at the meeting (who would all have been members of the board of LLAC) steps forward to dispute this, it really is my word against Mrs. Ward-Mars words. For the record, I specifically deny ever having conceived of any such thought let alone uttering any said words. I specifically call on Mr. Fitz Peters, Attorney-at-Law to be the gentleman I know him to be and tell the people of Guyana whether I uttered any such words. Incidentally, I have already spoken to Mr. Fitz Peters who says clearly that, while he did not take notes, he does not recall me saying any such thing.

In the meantime I offer the following facts that can be easily verified and leave it up to your readers to determine whether given said facts, there is likely to be any truth to this most wicked claim.

1. When the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic was about to close its doors because of lack of funding in or around 2003, while I was a lawyer in private practice, I volunteered my services and along with ONE other lawyer in the person of Sandra Kurtziuos and with some dedicated and hard working support staff and a persistent board of directors, who spent their own personal money, we managed to keep the doors of the Clinic opened.
I continued to volunteer at the Clinic until in or around 2005 when the Clinic received funding and started to pay me a stipend. Although I managed my own practice, I continued to work there until the day before I was sworn in as a Minister of the Government.

2. During 2006, before LLAC came onto the scene or before we knew that they had, we, Jolyon Hatmin, Gary Best and myself, then the lawyers at the Legal Aid Clinic, decided that even with our limited funding we would expand our services to Linden. We were kindly provided with transportation support, and started going to Linden to advise and represent clients. I believe most of this representation was done by (now Commodore) Best.

3. Upon my assumption to Political Office I made it very clear publicly that one of my priorities would be to expand Legal Aid Services and by 2008 in addition to the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic offering service in Georgetown and Linden alone, in collaboration with the two Clinics, through conscious and deliberate efforts, offices were opened in Regions 2, 5, 6 and 10. In fact the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic, because of the massive expansion had to be renamed The Guyana Legal Aid Clinic.

4. Mrs. Ward-Mars herself says that their board continuously met with me and I say that those meetings were first with a view to ensuring LLAC begin their operation and thereafter that they continue their operations.

5. The KN on Saturday 20th June 2009 reported that “Government and the Directors of the Linden Legal Aid Centre yesterday officially launched Linden Legal Aid Centre…” and the Chronicle reported on the 22nd June 2009 that “….speaking at the ceremony Minister of Human Services and Social Security, Ms Priya Manickchand said this centre has been in existence for a while now. However, she said it was officially launched because the weekly presence of lawyers from other parts of the country was not sufficient to deal with the issues of the people in Linden…..” and the Stabroek News June of 20th 2009 reported “….The centre was established with support and funding from UNICEF and the United States Agency for International Development (USAID) in collaboration with the Government of Guyana. Minister of Human Services and Social Security, Priya Manickchand officially declared the centre open and encouraged the full utilization of its services. She said that prior to the establishment of the centre; similar services were extended to residents but on a limited scale. She also stated that the government would not seek to compete with the centre but rather give maximum support in areas that are necessary…”

Editor, if long before I became Minister, I, along with my law colleagues, decided that Linden needed legal aid services and actually worked to provide those services, then how likely is it that I would have said “linden does not need a legal aid centre?” How likely is this to be my view when I have publicly advocated for legal aid in every region and actually worked consciously to bring legal aid to 6 of the 10 regions in Guyana? And why would I have kept meeting with LLAC over the years as per Mrs. Ward- Mars’ own admission if I held and expressed the view in that early meeting as she claims, that “you all can go to who you like, you have nothing to get…” And if I held this view that Linden did not need legal aid and that the LLAC had “nothing to get,” then I must have been schizophrenic to have been actively involved in the preparation for and the actual opening of the LLAC including causing to be provided, banners, programmes, tokens, decorations, refreshments, staff to prepare for the opening, publicly supporting the opening and declaring the Clinic open etc etc., and the LLAC must have been held at gun point to have “in collaboration with the Government of Guyana opened the Linden Legal Aid Clinic.” And of course the Kaieteur News, the Stabroek News and the Guyana Chronicle all conspired with me to publish my open and declared support for the establishment and continuation of legal aid generally and the LLAC specifically as is hereinbefore quoted thereby negating the likelihood of my uttering those words that Ward-Mars untruthfully attribute to me. I would like to think that Guyana knows me well enough to say whether that sounds like something I am likely to say. Indeed, I believe your readers can judge from my actions whether that is something I would have said.
I reiterate that I believe legal aid is a necessary service that MUST be offered. I doubt that my belief or my commitment to the provision of legal aid service is ever going to falter and I shall continue to do whatever I can to ensure this service never stops. It is unlikely that I could be clearer on any of these issues and any more energy or time I expend on the subject of legal aid will be to actually assist in the provision of service. Consequentially, this is my last correspondence on this matter.

Source: https://guyanachronicle.com/2012/04/01/legal-aid-is-a-necessary-service-and-must-be-offered

— old projects to continue, new initiatives to be implemented
THE $26.5B allocated to the education sector under the 2012 National Budget will see many new interventions being undertaken, and projects continued to foster and further build Guyana’s education sector. This is a significant improvement from the 2011 budgetary allocation for the education sector, and this enhancement has been seen as a timely one that will serve the needs of the Guyanese people.
Government was successful in achieving its education goals set out in the National Budget for 2011 as evidenced in the many success stories in education throughout the year.
Accordingly, a further effort has been made in the 2012 budget to vastly improve this success through monetary provision.
Government is cognizant of the importance of a strong and vibrant education sector, and will continue to make significant strides to realize and fulfil long-held dreams in this regard.
For the current fiscal year, over $1B has been allocated towards continued implementation of the National and Hinterland School Feeding Programmes, while the School Uniform Programme will continue.
Allocations have been made to continue implementing school programmes which seek to enhance performances in Mathematics and English Language at the Caribbean Secondary Education Certificate (CSEC) examinations.
Schools countrywide have already begun working on key components of education delivery, including working closely with teachers, and allocating adequate resources to improve performances.
In the current administration’s manifesto, one of the key initiatives relates to improving teacher quality by strengthening the institutions involved, and upgrading the training programmes offered.
Over the years, the number of trained teachers has consistently been increasing, and there has been a 12 percent increase at the primary levels (from 58 percent to 70 percent), and 9 percent increase in trained teachers at the secondary level (from 55 percent to 64 percent).
A sum of $1.2B has been allotted towards teacher training in 2012. The Cyril Potter College of Education (CPCE) is expected to produce 430 graduates from the Associate Degree in Education programme in November 2012, while 800 students will complete the Trained Teacher Certificate programme in July of this year.

Information, Communication Technology
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) remains on the front burner also, and by the end of 2012, 3,500 teachers would complete ICT training. Additionally, all secondary schools will be equipped with functioning ICT departments.
Moreover, the ICT-based Success Maker programme will be installed in another 60 primary schools, and teachers will be trained in the use of this software as a teaching and learning aid.
Some $900M has been allocated towards the progress and development of tertiary education.
The 2012 budgetary allocation also plays a significant role in ensuring that all educational facilities deliver quality education. As such, this will see money being injected into places like the University of Guyana (UG), among others.
US$10M has been committed to the UG Science and Technology Project. Gy$80M has been allocated under this project towards the commencement of curriculum reform, research support, and infrastructure rehabilitation. Moreover, another Gy$450M has been budgeted for the student loan programme.
Money has been set aside for construction works at various learning facilities around the country, including the Ptolemy Reid Rehabilitation Centre, which caters for 60 differently-able students.
When the various works have been completed, the institutions would be equipped with the essential sanitary facilities, furnishings, and a computer room. Additionally, the training facilities would be rehabilitated so as to provide technical and vocational training to the students at the centre.
Special emphasis will be placed on ensuring that those who are differently able are empowered to achieve personal fulfillment, thus making a contribution to productive effort.

Improved learning environment
$3.3B has been allocated for continued construction, extension, rehabilitation and maintenance of schools and other educational facilities countrywide, to ensure that students are privileged to dwell in conducive learning environments.
Some of the schools that will see expansion works include Turkeyen Nursery School, Parika Salem Secondary School, and Waramadong Dormitory and teaching block.  Works will also be done to the LBI, St. Pius and Diamond Primary schools, Leonora Secondary School and dormitories at Charity and Sand Creek Secondary schools. Also, science and information technology laboratories are expected to be completed.

Achievements in Education 2011
Under the 2011 budgetary allocation, $24B was expended, representing an increase of 13 percent in expenditure from 2010.
There were a number of key achievements in the education sector during the third year of implementation of the National Education Strategic Plan 2008-2013.  More than $47M has been expended for the establishment of the Education Channel which broadcasts programmes that supplement the education curriculum for all students countrywide.

Over $1B was spent on operational costs at CPCE, which offers the Associate Degree in Education. Another $768M was spent on the operational costs of UG’s two campuses, and $450M on student loans.
Additionally, government spent over $1B on the National and Hinterland School Feeding Programmes, which benefited over 63,000 children countrywide, while another $266M was expended on ensuring each child has a school uniform.
Over $1.8B was spent on technical vocational training institutes, including the completion of the two new vocational centres in Regions 3 and 5; while $2.8B was spent on construction, extension, rehabilitation and maintenance of schools and other educational facilities countrywide.
Government believes that education is critical in developing a well trained and highly skilled workforce to meet the needs of the modern economy.
The 2012 Budget is evidence that no Guyanese, irrespective of situation, has been left out.
The $192.8B budget was presented by Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh under the theme “Remaining on Course: United in Purpose – Prosperity for all”.

Source: https://guyanachronicle.com/2012/04/01/education-sector-gets-265b-for-2012

EDUCATION Minister, Ms. Priya Manickchand Tuesday visited the North Georgetown Secondary School and held an interactive session with students, parents and teachers to assess the progress made in the areas of Mathematics and English through the most recent enhancement project in the education sector. 

The project is aimed at increasing percentage passes in Mathematics and English, by at least 20 percent and will ensure that children have all the resources needed to bring about a change in the two subject areas thus boost the national pass mark.
According to Ms. Manickchand this is her third visit to schools across the country to get a first hand glimpse of what has been going on with the initiative and to see how well schools are progressing as well as to identify areas where shortcoming have been detected.

Manickchand said it is not any secret that Guyana like the rest of the Caribbean region is aware that there is a need for improvement in the areas of Mathematics and English and as such steps are being take to regularise this.
“I have been visiting schools. I went to Essequibo yesterday. I have been to Berbice. I went to Region 3. This is the Maths and English programme that we are monitoring. Why we are doing that is because our results like the rest of the Caribbean have been dismal.”

She continued to explain that while English Language has seen far better results than Mathematics over the years, Guyana is making every effort to change this.
“Mathematics has remained a bleak area not only in Guyana but for countries across the world and the Caribbean region. Guyana is not going to throw up its hands and say Guyana is going to do bad anyway, we came up with a programme that we think could see results and we have introduced it to forty one schools across the country.”
According to Manickchand, the initiative is a five party project between, the Government, teachers, parents, students and resource personnel, all of who are expected ensure that the aim of improving performance levels in Mathematics and English at the Caribbean Entrance Examination Certificate (CSEC) is accomplished.

“It is really a five-people party and we have government, parents, teachers, resource personnel, and students. Government gives resources so we give text books study guides dvds, calculators draft papers, and all the resources that we had and was at our disposal we acquired, procured and paid for them and distributed them to almost all half of our CXC population,” Manickchand said.
As a part of the project the minster has mandated teachers to have extra sessions after school in Mathematics and English to assist in this regard also.

“We asked the teachers to do several things like extra classes and create more focused working environment and so on and I must say that all the teachers we spoke to were very cooperative and happy to do this and this shows the spirit of a teacher wanting to do what’s good for Guyana’s children,” Manickchand disclosed.
She reiterated that a parent’s input in this regard is very important. She said in December when the initiative was officially launched parents had promised to be fully committed and she urged them to continue along this path.
“In December we had spoken to parents and students asking them to commit fully and asking parents to be consciously committed to students …then we have resource people who are going into the schools who could tell us whether the materials have reached the hands of the students and whether the classes are actually happening or if a teachers goes off on leave and leave a class unsupervised and so those people have been very helpful,” Manickchand said.

She pointed out that already, students have sat two different mock exams to see whether they have been improvements. “We are visiting schools for the third time and so far we have had two mock exams one in January and one in March and we have seen tremendous improvements from January to March,” Manickchand indicated.
She said it is her hope that this upward trend can continue over the years and added that she is very much satisfied with the outcome of the initiative thus far.
The minister believes that there have been major improvements in these two areas in a short space of time  pointing out that Guyana’s education sector is on stream and will see major steps being taken to revitalise it.
“Actually, what I have seen in the short time as Minister of Education is a renewed interest across the board in addressing Mathematics and English problems that students encounter with and I have seen improvements generally. We intend to keep inspiring students from as far as we can to CXC to get them to give their best shot at this Exam,” the minister offered.

Government has been playing a major part in this new project and had awarded an $85.7M contract for the execution of the Mathematics and English Pilot Project, which was launched by the minister in selected secondary schools.

The Pilot project was first implemented in 32 selected schools in several administrative regions, and has allowed for intense interactions between students, parents and the teachers of the two critical subject areas, with the Education Ministry being the facilitating body.

The minister reiterated the Education Ministry’s support towards the success of the pilot project and expressed the confidence that, with the commitment required, it can become a model for the rest of the Caribbean.

Source: https://guyanachronicle.com/2012/03/29/maths-english-language-pilot-project-progressing-well

…Linden legal aid receives more funds than Regions 2 and 6
I saw an article in the Kaieteur News edition of 26th March 2012 titled “Govt. chided for not funding legal aid in Linden” The article reported that the President of the Guyana Association of Women Lawyers, [GAWL] Ms. Emily Dodson made her remarks at a symposium held by the women’s arm of the People National Congress/ Reform (PNC/R). The article went on to say that the “President of the Guyana Association of Women Lawyers, Emily Dodson, is appealing to Members of Parliament to ensure Region 10 residents are provided with adequate legal aid services so that the people of Linden would not be treated as stepchildren of this country” and that “for whatever reason Government has not funded legal aid in Linden” and further the President said “enlightened that she recently met with the Leader of the Opposition, David Granger and discussed this issue.”

I find these disclosures that were published extremely interesting. As a member of GAWL and as the Minister who was responsible for the expansion of legal aid services, I feel duty bound to address two issues arising out of these statements.
Firstly, has the role and mandate of my organization the GAWL changed and is the GAWL now engaged in openly supporting/aligning itself to a political party, to wit, the PNC/APNU, and, secondly, the reality of the provision of legal aid services in Region 10.

Mr. Editor, while, from the article, it is easy to form the impression that Ms. Dodson spoke in her capacity as President of the Guyana Association of Women Lawyers, on a closer perusal, the article is not pellucid if the goodly Ms. Dodson was actually speaking in her capacity as President or if she was speaking as a member of the PNC/R or a sympathizer of the said party.
As a member of GAWL, I know I did not authorize Ms. Dodson to make those wild, ill informed and highly political statements. I have also spoken to several other members of the GAWL who confirm that they too did not authorize the President and/or the Association to make the pronouncements attributed to Ms. Dodson which have not  been retracted.
I am curious if, unbeknownst to me and in the absence of the relevant procedures and resolutions, the role and mandate of GAWL has changed and in pursuit of said curiosity and for some clarity, I call on the executive of the GAWL to either adopt the statements made by Ms Dodson or forthwith distance the Association from the said statements.

On the issue of the provision of legal aid to Region 10, Ms. Dodson’s statements raise two issues which reflect either deliberate wickedness or hopeless ignorance. Ms Dodson claims firstly that the Government of Guyana has not funded legal aid in linden “for whatever reason,” and that there is no adequate legal aid services in Linden and has concluded politically that the people of linden are being treated as stepchildren. I, as would any reasonable person, interpret Ms Dodson’s words as accusing the GOG of discrimination against the people of Region 10.

Following are the facts as they relate to the establishment of the Linden Legal Aid Clinic (LLAC).
1. From 1993 to about 2008, the sole legal aid provider in the country was the Georgetown Legal Aid Clinic (GLAC) which provided resident services in Georgetown and her immediate environs and from about 2006 to 2008, non – resident service in Region 10. These were the only two regions benefitting from legal aid services offered by the GLAC.

2. The PPP/C in its manifesto of 2006 promised to expand legal aid services. Notably the PNC/R did not even address this important service in their manifesto.

3. The GOG engaged the GLAC in an earnest effort to expand said legal aid services. An agreement was reached that GOG would provide the funding and GLAC would provide the services to Regions 2, 3, 4, 5, 6 and 10.

4. The said manifesto promise was fulfilled with resident legal aid services being launched in Region 2 on the 14th day of June 2008 and in Region 6 on the 10th day of October 2008. Only the 27th day of June 2008, Region 5 begun to receive the same type of service Region 10 was receiving since about 2006, that is non resident service. The intention was to graduate to provide resident services in all regions

5. In or around June 2008 after the budgetary allocation had been made to GLAC I was approached by Mrs. Joan Ward- Mars and Mr. Fitz Peters, both Attorneys-at Law representing LLAC. I did not know Joan Ward-Mars but I liked her immediately. Mr Fitz Peters I knew liked and respected. The lawyers made their interest in operating LLAC known to me and asked for funding from the amount allocated to GLAC. I explained that I could not reallocate funds appropriated in the National Budget as that would amount to misappropriation. At that time LLAC I was told, was being funded by USAID/GDCCR and I was further told that said funding would end by August 2008. I arranged and hosted a meeting in said June 2008 with said Joan Ward Mars and Fitz Peters of LLAC and Josephine Whitehead and Jolyon Hatmin both of GLAC, and asked that GLAC work with the said LLAC members to provide service to the people of Region 10. At this time GLAC was already providing service to Region 10 and all parties agreed that it made no sense to have two service providers in the same location. I am aware that GLAC, in keeping with their own established standards, asked for particular accounting and other procedures to be followed.

6. I am also aware that LLAC were actually adamant that they wanted to be independent of the GLAC and resisted every effort to come under the umbrella of GLAC who incidentally is the efficient legal aid provider for every other region that has legal aid. Because I generally do not care who provides the service, once the service is provided, and because I believed the members of LLAC to be good people and genuinely interested in providing service, and because there seemed to be great delay in LLAC working with GLAC and because it didn’t make sense to have two service providers in Region 10, I advocated at UNICEF and recommended that funding be provided from the country’s funds to LLAC. Said funding was provided from August 2008 and continues up till now.  Consequentially, on the 19th day of June 2009 LLAC was launched and said launch was fully funded by the GOG in the same manner as the launch of every other clinic hereinbefore mentioned.

7. Based on the 2002 census Region 2 has an approximate population of 49,254 Region 6 an approximate population of 123,694 and Region 10 an approximate population of 41,114.

8. In 2009, GLAC spent approximately $5,119,873 on managing and operating legal aid in Region 2 and $4,517,481 on managing and operating legal aid in Region 6. From August 2008 – August 2009 LLAC was granted the sum of $6,764,440 to manage and operate legal aid in Region 10.

9. In 2010, GLAC spent approximately $6,332,516 on managing and operating legal aid in Region 2 and $5,736,835 on managing and operating legal aid in Region 6. From December 2009 – December 2010 LLAC was granted the sum of $6,000,000 to manage and operate legal aid in Region 10.

10. In 2011, GLAC spent approximately $5,326,607 on managing and operating legal aid in Region 2 and $5,170,319 on managing and operating legal aid in Region 6. From April 2011 – December 2012 LLAC was granted the sum of $9,060,070 to manage and operate legal aid in Region 10. This sum was already handed over and is in the possession of LLAC.
The above is the indisputably factual account of the relations between the GOG, the GLAC and the LLAC.
I wish to point out that the claim both by the President of the Guyana Association of Women Lawyers, Ms Dodson and the LLAC’s website that “The LLAC has never received financial assistance from the Government of Guyana” has no basis in reality and in common parlance is just a downright lie. The fact is that the GOG provided funding for LLAC through the GOG/UNICEF country programme. Had the GOG not advocated for and approved the expenditure on LLAC by UNICEF, funds for the LLAC would never have been disbursed under the GOG/UNICEF country program. The GOG has repeatedly approved said expenditure. Without said approval the money could not have been granted to nor spent by LLAC. Given that I have explained this repeatedly to various members of the LLAC Board, and that I have even said same from the floor of the National Assembly, I find it extremely hard to believe these statements were simply made in ignorance.

As it relates to Ms. Dodson’s assertion that the amount given to LLAC is inadequate, in my own view (which is extremely partial, and publicly so, to the provision of legal aid service), no amount will be enough or “adequate” for the various kinds of service legal aid centres could possibly provide. However, I wish to point out that as a matter of fact, by way of comparison, Region 10 has a smaller population than Region 2 and Region 10 has a smaller population than Region 6, yet LLAC was given more money than GLAC was given and spent in Region 2 and more money than GLAC was given and spent for Region 6 in the years 2009, 2010 and 2011.
It seems to me that it may therefore be necessary for the LLAC to review their service to the residents of Region 10 if after all of this expenditure which amounts to more than what Region 2 or Region 6 gets and spends that the President of GAWL still finds it necessary to call on “Members of Parliament to ensure Region 10 residents are provided with adequate legal aid services”. It may well be the providers of the service that have to be examined. I understand that Ms Dodson works at or for or with LLAC. 

Mr Editor, given the abovementioned facts, almost all of which can be found on the world wide web, I leave it up to your readers and the Guyanese people to determine whether the claims by the GAWL President are true or if said statements are ill informed, politically motivated and/or wicked.  Indeed, it is clear that if there is discrimination in relation to provision of legal aid services to the people of Region 10 then it is discrimination in favour of and to the benefit of our Region 10 people.

Source: https://guyanachronicle.com/2012/03/28/manickchand-debunks-gawl-claims 

Government has begun consultations to gather input into the possibilities of abolishing corporal punishment in the school system.

Over the weekend, on national televisions, Education Minister Priya Manickchand held a panel discussion which included the likes of Dominic Gaskin, Executive Member of the Alliance for Change (AFC); Karen De Souza, Head of Red Thread and Jennifer Cumberbatch, Headteacher of Winfer Gardens Secondary.
According to the Education Minister, while several countries have abolished corporal punishment in the school system, others including the United States are still at ‘loggerheads’, as to whether this should be eliminated or retained.

“Canada as recently as 2004, after a case went to the Supreme Court, banned it across the country and the US decided that it was not a breach of the Constitution,” she is quoted as saying in a government statement.
While Poland has been the first country to have abolished corporal punishment at school, Guyana is yet to take a stance on the issue, hence the need for countrywide consultations.
Thus far, all parties have agreed that no child below Grade Two, should be beaten in schools and this has since been a clause in the Bill, which is yet to be taken to Parliament to be made into Law.
“We are at a place where, because of consultations, we have come to a conclusion that our children younger than Grade Two should not be beaten in school and we have also laid down rules about how this is to happen,” Minister Manickchand said.

Dominic Gaskin, while making a clear point that it should not be abolished, however, stated that corporal punishment should be regulated, whereby, if the need so arises that children should be scolded in schools, it must be carefully done and monitored by the relevant authorities.
“I know there are a lot of people who are against it and I respect that view. Corporal punishment is a system; I think there is a place for it. However, abusive behaviour against students, I am totally against it,” he said.
Jennifer Cumberbatch, however, had different views and supported and maintained that corporal punishment should be retained in the school system, noting that children are becoming more insolent to teachers.
“I have no problem if someone were to give a child two lashes, that is not abuse…I am in agreement with those persons who feel that there should be no corporal punishment, if it is abusive, but we have to do something to stem that tide, because our children will become like those first world countries where children talk to their teachers anyhow,” she opined.

She added that corporal punishment at most schools is the last resort, as there is currently a  manual which governs how teachers are to maintain order and discipline in schools.
Ms. De Souza in her input to the discussion, stated that while the issue can be challenging, especially for teachers, corporal punishment should not be allowed, as it defeats teachers’ professional standards and ethics.
Meanwhile, the issue of corporal punishment being a defeat to teachers’ professionalism was defended by Cumberbatch, as she stated that teachers are concerned about children and as such, would not scold a child to an extent of being physically abusive.

In addition, she stressed that it is challenging for a teacher to function in a classroom where children are ill-mannered and disorderly.

Consultations on the abolition of corporal punishment in the school system, is a fulfillment of a commitment made during the submission of Guyana’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR) to the United Nations Rights Commission on several human rights conventions in 2010.

The consultations will be organised by Minister Manickchand and will take place in the broader context of consultations, which will continue on the draft Education Bill of 2012.

Source: https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2012/03/27/discussions-begin-on-corporal-punishment-ban-in-schools/

-wider consultations to begin shortly

As Government moves to begin a series of rigorous consultations, garnering the inputs of the grassroots with respect to abolishing corporal punishment in the school system, Education Minister, Priya Manickchand held a panel discussion on the latter on Saturday evening on the National Communications Network (NCN). The panel discussion, which also saw the inputs of Dominique Gaskin, Executive Member of the Alliance for Change (AFC); Karen De Souza, Head of Red Thread; and Jennifer Cumberbatch, Headteacher, Winfer Gardens Secondary, discussed whether corporal punishment should be eliminated.

According to the Education Minister, while several countries have abolished corporal punishment in the school system, others, including the United States, are still at ‘logger heads’ as to whether this should be eliminated or retained.
“Canada, as recently as 2004, after a case went to the Supreme Court, banned it across the country and the US decided that it was not a breach of the Constitution,” she said.
While Poland has been the first country to have abolished corporal punishment at school, Guyana is yet to take a stand on the issue, hence the need for countrywide consultations.

Thus far, all parties have agreed that no child below Grade Two should be beaten in schools, and this has since been a clause in the Bill, which is yet to be taken to Parliament to be made into law.
“We are at a place where, because of consultations, we have come to a conclusion that our children younger than Grade Two should not be beaten in school and we have also laid down rules about how this is to happen,” Minister Manickchand said.

Dominique Gaskin, while making a clear point that it should not be abolished, stated however that corporal punishment should be regulated, whereby, if the need arises, it must be carefully done and monitored by the relevant authorities.
“I know there are a lot of people who are against it and I respect that view. Corporal punishment is a system; I think there is a place for it. However, abusive behaviour against students I am totally against,” he said.
Jennifer Cumberbatch maintained that corporal punishment should be retained in the schools system, noting that children are becoming more insolent to teachers’ in schools.

“I have no problem if someone were to give a child two lashes, that is not abuse…I am in agreement with those persons who feel that there should be no corporal punishment, if it is abusive, but we have to do something to stem that tide, because our children will become like those first world countries where children talk to their teachers anyhow,” she said.
She added that corporal punishment at most schools is the last resort, as there is currently a teachers’ manual which governs how teachers are to maintain order and discipline in schools.

Ms. De Souza, in her input to the discussion, stated that while the issue can be challenging, especially for teachers, corporal punishment should not be allowed, as it defeats teachers’ professionalism.
But Cumberbatch disagrees, as she stated that teachers are concerned about children, and as such, would not scold a child to the extent of being physically abusive.

In addition, she added that it is challenging for a teacher to function in a class room where children are ill-mannered and disorderly, as it would be difficult for a teacher to be respected and for the curriculum to move forward.
Consultations on the abolishment of corporal punishment in the school system is a fulfillment of a commitment made, during the submission of Guyana’s Universal Periodic Review (UPR), to the United Nations Rights Commission on several human rights conventions in 2010.

The consultations will be organised by Education Minister Priya Manickchand.

Source: (GINA) http://guyanachronicle.com/2012/03/26/panel-discussions-held-on-corporal-punishment-in-school-system

Minister of Education Priya Manickchand says ministry views the Auditor General’s report as a management tool and will do its best to ensure that the pronouncements made in the report are addressed and that there are no repeats.

The 2010 report commented on a number of issues concerning the ministry, including a $110 million contract for the procurement of textbooks, the process for which circumvented the controls of the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act 2003.

Former permanent secretary of the Ministry of Education Pulandar Kandhi, said he has prepared his comments to the Auditor General and the Public Accounts Committee of Parliament on the damning disclosures of the 2010 Auditor General’s report, made public on February 10.

Manickchand pointed out that much of what the Auditor General commented on was procedural and not substantial, even as she said the ministry will be addressing all of the concerns the Auditor General’s report has raised.

Speaking to Stabroek News last week, Kandhi, who served as permanent secretary at the ministry for a number of years, including in 2010, said that he cannot disclose his comments just yet, since doing so would prejudice the process to which he could be part.

Kandhi said too that while the present Permanent Secretary of the Ministry of Education, Delma Nedd, will be the one to face the grilling by the PAC after it begins to hear submissions from the various government agencies, departments and regions, it is possible that he is co-opted to help her in answering questions. Kandhi is now on the Teaching Service Commission.

Stabroek News also made attempts to speak to Nedd, but these attempts proved futile.

In very stern language, the Auditor General’s report for 2010 flayed the ministries of Education and Finance over a $110 million textbook procurement deal, which it said employed a strategy to defeat the controls of the Fiscal Management and Accountability (FMA) Act of 2003.

The report said the Education Ministry had, on the basis of sole sourcing, sought and obtained approval from the National Procurement and Tender Administration Board (NPTAB) to purchase $110 million worth of textbooks from a local supplier. A similar arrangement had been worked out the previous year with the same supplier who was not named in the report.

According to the 2010 report, the transaction exhibited features which constituted serious breaches and were dangerous.

The report said that the NPTAB granted approval on December 29, 2010 for the textbooks deal. Thereafter, two cheques were drawn on the Consolidated Fund in relation to three vouchers.

One cheque for $40 million was written on December 31, 2010 but not paid until May 4, 2011. The other cheque was written on December 31, 2010 for $70.2 million but not paid until September 20, 2011.

“As can be noted, payments took place four and eight months into the new year, which confirms the use of a strategy to defeat the controls enunciated in the FMA Act, by the withdrawal of sums appropriated in one year and holding them for extended periods for spending during the life of another Appropriation Act,” the report noted.

The report said it is was even more disturbing that such a serious breach is aided and abetted by the Ministry of Finance, through a process where stale dated cheques are extended for use at current dates. “This was the case of the second cheque, which was updated on 9 June 2011,” the report declared.

The report said that following the payment of $70.2 million on September 20, 2011, the supplier refunded the sum of $30.2 million on a Scotiabank manager’s cheque on the same day.

“Consequently it became apparent that the intention of the ministry was to pay over only $40 million, but was constrained by the sum written on the instrument on hand. Such dangerous accounting could only leave the ministry, and government as a whole, at risk.

The situation was compounded by the fact that to date the ministry has failed to repay the sum refunded by the supplier, to the Consolidated Fund,” the report said.

Further, the report pointed out that the contract executed with the supplier was dated May 4, 2011 even though approval had been granted by the NPTAB on December 29, 2010. “Given the date of the agreement for the supplies, the accounting methodology used to prepare cheques in the name of the supplier on 31 December 2010 was irregular,” the report said.

Source: https://www.stabroeknews.com/2012/news/guyana/03/25/manickchand-says-using-auditor-general%E2%80%99s-report-as-management-tool/

Minister of Education, Priya Manickchand, is confident that the US$10M World Bank University of Guyana (UG) Science and Technology Support Project is closer to becoming a reality.
During an interview with this publication yesterday, Manickchand indicated the Ministry and University’s readiness to approach the Minister of Finance next week to sign the loan document with the World Bank.
She related that recent steps taken by the Education Ministry, which is the executing body for the project and the University, show that the conditions for the loan would be satisfied shortly.

According to UG’s Vice Chancellor, Dr. Marlene Cox, the project was approved last June by the World Bank. However, Government was given an 18-month duration to satisfy certain conditions.
Dr Cox noted that the efforts to meet the conditions are in progress and emphasized that for the first time Friday last, advertisements were placed to fill three key positions.
They are an Assistant Accountant, Procurement Specialist, and Project Co-ordinator. The closing date for applications is April 12, 2012.
Another criterion to be satisfied is the establishment of a Project Steering Committee.

Dr. Cox said that the Ministry and the University are working together to finalize the Committee’s membership.
She revealed that the body should comprise eight members- seven from various organizations including the local University, an International University, Private Sector, and the Project Co-ordinator.
Dr. Cox emphasized that the Ministry and the University have to sign a subsidiary agreement outlining how both parties would collaborate on the project.
She said a draft is prepared and very soon that too would be finalized.

The Vice Chancellor pointed out that a draft for the operations manual is already prepared.
This project is linked to the Low Carbon Development Strategy (LCDS) and will be based in four Science faculties: Agriculture and Forestry, Natural Sciences, and the School of Earth and Environmental Sciences.
The project is expected to be implemented over a five-year period and would see the improvement of laboratory and building infrastructure at four faculties comprising 14 buildings; providing the laboratories with scientific equipment to enable the delivery of practical science education and research; and establishing of a campus wide internet network.

Source: https://www.kaieteurnewsonline.com/2012/03/22/university%E2%80%99s-us10m-project-closer-to-reality-manickchand/