Receive FIU from fewer SARs
I refer to the heading: “FIU reports a decrease in suspicious transaction reports -29 new reporting agencies registered” (KN December 23). I recognize that things are moving again, except it is in a different direction from what is healthy for the interests of this country. There are pros and cons, with my challenge everywhere to start.
I am considering FIU Guyana Address, Mr Matthew Langevine. He may not be a former tax collector, but he keeps a close eye on his mind and focuses well on collecting Suspicious Transaction Reports from those responsible for transferring them. A few of the organizations responsible for their delivery balked in case of upsetting valuable relationships. Of course, the little people were harvested at every opportunity for the smallest cuts. On behalf of Mr. Langevine, I commend him for his positive attitude to the issues overseen; his diligence is notable, but he regrets that he is not well received in powerful circles. And yet, I think his understanding (at least, as expressed publicly) of what might be responsible for the decline in reporting suspicious transactions is a little off-center.
I agree that the volume has been much smaller, due to the advent of COVID-19 and its continued stay; and to that I add the hullaballoos of the elections. But I would venture that volume is more offset by what goes on – always happens – behind the scenes. For enlightenment, I note 11 tonnes of street produce that weaved its way to a cold Belgium, and note that the big ticket items are happening and with more consistency than a bag of porridge. Means that roads have been found to avoid scrutiny and reporting. I refer the skeptics to the GRA. Public volume and public dealings are certainly smaller, but that’s for small fish dealing in ‘fried and baked fish,’ and no one cares about that, given its lack of relevance.
More importantly, I believe the source of that collapse when reporting suspicious transactions has something to do with the presence of the new government. I remind everyone that the current main man, the president, has promised to do many things with regulations. It has definitely achieved, from day one, where those affected could tread beautifully: Regulations? What regulations? What about them? We are not liable to anyone on any stupid regulations. Political funders do not think that such applies to them; they are currently operating in the regulatory heaven, with very few rules and the like adhering to them. These are the same skeptical characters who enjoy the fruits of the PPP government’s friendship, having funded its rise to democratic power. In such contexts, regulatory compliance is neither relevant, nor traction. From my perspective, that is the source of the decline in reports to the FIU of questionable transactions. Naturally, it is of clean governance in action.
For whatever it’s worth, I’m reminded that during the Coalition’s reign, many of its supporters were loud in complaining when they had to comply with tough enforcement. Many PNCR followers (now PPP adherents) said: lawd! Do all ting deh gah fuh see? Rise up and see some bizness happening nah maan … It’s the holiday season, so I’m treating myself to the freedom of a word or two.
Should any additional exhibits be required, I tender the EPA, which is virtually headless, out of place, and chronically reckless with Guyanese well-being. His current bespoke remedy for Guyanese inquiry with troubled minds is that some protection measures are not needed for the benefit of communities at all. To reiterate: that abomination called Environmental Impact Assessment is not necessary in a situation that asks this question: how can that be? What about when hazardous materials associated with chemical facilities appear? No one in their right mind can tell me that an EIA is not necessary when the planned is what it is supposed to be. But this is the way things are going to be, as Director Langevine discovered, and with more to come in the FIU and in other cycles of national activity.