Here are my observations.

1. Your opening paragraph in part says "But it (Guyana) has been holding its own and doing much better than some of the other economies of the Community."

However, nowhere in the rest of the editorial did you establish with facts which other economies in the Caribbean Guyana was outperforming. This is slipshod writing and unprofessional.

2. You also claimed that Guyana's performance had "...attracted the commendation of Guyana's regional partners and institutions." Including examples of this would have given more credibility to your claim.

3. So is Guyana no longer among the "20 poorest nations of the world"?

4. Referring to Guyana's debt servicing you said "When the enhanced HIPIC Initiative funding arrangement is completed shortly, with the availability of US$25 million annually over the next 20 years, it is expected to decline to 12 or 15 cents of every dollar earned."

Why not give a specific time when the HIPIC initiative would be completed rather than say "shortly." Also this entire sentence is confusing.

Are you saying that after the HIPIC initiative Guyana is going to get $25 million annually for the next 20 years which will help it to reduce its debt servicing to 12 to 15 cents of every dollar earned? Or is this $25 million part of the HIPIC initiative?

If so then the HIPIC initiative will not be completed shortly. If the $25 million is not part of the initiative then what is it and where is it coming from and why?

If this sentence was written in a different way all these questions would not surface automatically.

5. "Reduction of the debt burden has enabled increasing expenditures in the social sector with health and education for example rising to G$5.3 Billion and G$11.8 Billion respectively."

This was a good example of backing up a statement with facts.

6. You said "Poverty, once at a staggering 85 per cent...has dropped to approximately 35 per cent.

What does this mean? Is it that 85 per cent of the population was living under the poverty line and now only 35 per cent fall in that category?

If so what is the poverty line benchmark?

7. This editorial is basically saying that as a result of the Government's progress in foreign debt reduction it has been able to spend more in education and health.

The Government's success or failure at managing the economy would have been put in perspective if this editorial had included how many jobs were created and what new private sector investments (local and foreign) came on stream.

An editorial is a serious opinion and should be prepared with the greatest commitment to professionalism.

This was a hastily put together piece lacking professional treatment.

LINDSAY DAVIDSON