Peter Persaud: I WISH to refer to Janette Bulkan’s article in the Stabroek News under the caption, ‘The rule of law - what the Forestry Industry could do in a levelled business environment in Guyana.’ Kindly permit me to state the following:
Bulkan is a confused twit now living in Guyana, and does not understand why specific laws are made. But to fulfill her wicked and misleading agenda against the Management of Guyana’s Forestry sector she is now accusing the GFC of selectively applying laws, policies and administrative procedures for timber traders to maximise personal incomes. What is Bulkan’s point here?
If the GFC has specific laws relating to the export of timber logs and enforces these laws, policies and administrative procedures where the export to timber logs are concerned, then the GFC is doing its work in the right way and ought to be congratulated for being consistent with the applicable laws for timber exports.
But Bulkan has a problem with timber traders who are exporting their products to Asia and making money while family-owned businesses like hers are unable to do so because they lack the necessary capital. This however, is not a concern for the GFC.
Bulkan used her article to point out that the financial fragility of family-owned businesses in the Forestry sector is as a result of the “obscurity of business accounts” which is a reflection of poor financial management and where the commercial banks expressed wariness in giving loans due to “the risk of timber business”. This is of no concern to the GFC.
Bulkan however wondered in her article that “suppose, however, that children of the family enterprises who have business degrees from the University of Guyana or US universities were allowed to use their qualifications to develop their family businesses and suppose that the commercial banks over came their suspicion of the riskiness of timber businesses.”
What Bulkan fails miserably to understand is that a business degree from any university is not a guarantee for successful business development but more so a natural inclination for the application of sound business principles and good financial management which will enable reinvestments. Even a school child knows this. Further, is expert Bulkan saying that she has no say in her family-owned business?
Therefore the reason for Bulkan’s article under my reference is to get the GFC to facilitate the entrance of family-owned businesses into the exportation of timber logs to Asia based on the word ‘suppose’, hence her submission of five factors which she claims “are positive for a modernised forest industry.”
Bulkan’s lobbying for family-owned businesses into the export trade of timber logs is poor. But the reality is that anyone or company can enter the export of timber trade.
The GFC is currently equipped with experts and therefore does not need Bulkan’s advice or proposals for a modernised forest industry, since it is already moving in that direction.
Bulkan is a confused twit now living in Guyana, and does not understand why specific laws are made. But to fulfill her wicked and misleading agenda against the Management of Guyana’s Forestry sector she is now accusing the GFC of selectively applying laws, policies and administrative procedures for timber traders to maximise personal incomes. What is Bulkan’s point here?
If the GFC has specific laws relating to the export of timber logs and enforces these laws, policies and administrative procedures where the export to timber logs are concerned, then the GFC is doing its work in the right way and ought to be congratulated for being consistent with the applicable laws for timber exports.
But Bulkan has a problem with timber traders who are exporting their products to Asia and making money while family-owned businesses like hers are unable to do so because they lack the necessary capital. This however, is not a concern for the GFC.
Bulkan used her article to point out that the financial fragility of family-owned businesses in the Forestry sector is as a result of the “obscurity of business accounts” which is a reflection of poor financial management and where the commercial banks expressed wariness in giving loans due to “the risk of timber business”. This is of no concern to the GFC.
Bulkan however wondered in her article that “suppose, however, that children of the family enterprises who have business degrees from the University of Guyana or US universities were allowed to use their qualifications to develop their family businesses and suppose that the commercial banks over came their suspicion of the riskiness of timber businesses.”
What Bulkan fails miserably to understand is that a business degree from any university is not a guarantee for successful business development but more so a natural inclination for the application of sound business principles and good financial management which will enable reinvestments. Even a school child knows this. Further, is expert Bulkan saying that she has no say in her family-owned business?
Therefore the reason for Bulkan’s article under my reference is to get the GFC to facilitate the entrance of family-owned businesses into the exportation of timber logs to Asia based on the word ‘suppose’, hence her submission of five factors which she claims “are positive for a modernised forest industry.”
Bulkan’s lobbying for family-owned businesses into the export trade of timber logs is poor. But the reality is that anyone or company can enter the export of timber trade.
The GFC is currently equipped with experts and therefore does not need Bulkan’s advice or proposals for a modernised forest industry, since it is already moving in that direction.
No comments:
Post a Comment