The revised 'Investment Code' tabled in Parliament has been described by PNC REFORM (PNC/R) leader Desmond Hoyte as a bland, innocuous document with nothing in it to give confidence to a potential investor following the deletion of vital sections.

The private sector, Hoyte said, should express their dissatisfaction with this development.

Speaking on a number of issues at the PNC/R headquarters at Congress Place, Sophia on Friday, Hoyte said that at the sitting of the National Assembly on 9th August 2001, just before the annual recess, the Finance Minister "almost surreptitiously" tabled a document captioned 'Investment Code' "which bore no date, no letterhead, and there was nothing in it attributing it to any government minister, ministry or agency."

He noted that several agencies, including USAID, provided resources to help in the formulation of the code. After a much-publicised meeting in 1999 between President Bharrat Jagdeo and the Private Sector, the parties finally agreed on a text, he said.

Apart from truncating the document, he said, to make matters worse the minister never submitted the revised version to the private sector for comments.

There were about 15 sections deleted including the title 'Investment Act' and 'Part One: General Provisions' which contained Section 1: Definitions; The entire Part Three: Fiscal Incentives which included Section 39: Investment priority categories, Section 40: Tax Holidays, Section 41: Tariffs and Consumption Tax Incentives; Section 42: Master lists for import incentives; Section 43: Incentives for export-oriented enterprises and Section 44: publication of incentives granted.

All of Part Four was also deleted. This dealt with Administrative structures and procedures including Sections 45 to 48 which looked at the role of Go-Invest; the investment promotion committee; time limitations for deciding eligibility for incentives and the time-frame for approval of incentives for zero rated imports.

Also of concern to Hoyte was the compulsory acquisition aspect under Section 13 of Part Two of the investment code. The section reads "the Government shall not compulsorily acquire or take possession of any investment enterprise, or any asset of an investor except (d) there is prompt payment of adequate and effective compensation (deleted was the continuation) "together with interest from the date of acquisition or taking possession of the investment enterprise or asset to the date of payment at the commercial bank rate on loans to the corporate sector..."

Deleted, too, is Section 15: Non-intervention by government: "Notwithstanding the provisions of the Trade Act, the Government shall not intervene in the business management of investment enterprises or in the sale, pricing, or distribution of the products of those enterprises, except in the pricing of services provided by utilities for the supply of electricity, water and telecommunications".

Also deleted was the section that dealt with streamlining the existing procedures for investment and establishing the structure and authority of the agency responsible for investment.

Section 16: Free export and import; Section 18: National treatment; and Section 19: Most favoured nation treatment; Section 23: Tax obligations; Section 24: Bank accounts; and Section 28: Intellectual Property Rights have all been completely deleted.

According to Hoyte, the PPP/Civic government has unilaterally changed the agreed text by excising vitally important clauses from the agreed draft document, and is yet to put in place any document that could credibly be deemed to be an Investment Code. In the meantime, he said that grumbles and complaints by members of the business community are useless. He said "it is time for them to speak out in a loud and clear voice and let the government know of their dissatisfaction and their deep concern about its devious and untrustworthy behaviour."

If the private sector is serious about protecting its interests and promoting national development it should express "its deep dissatisfaction, tell the regime that its behaviour is unacceptable, and demand that an Investment Code along the agreed lines be promulgated", before a meeting which the President is calling with that body in early 2002.

?The Private Sector must stop giving the impression that it is a submissive, compliant civil society entity, scared to even pursue and secure its own vital interests. It must speak out."

Noting that the country's economy continues to decline, he said that the managers of every major sector have predicted serious shortfalls in production, productivity and earnings for the rest of the year.

The 1.3% growth rate in the country's economy for the first six months of this year "tests the limits of our credulity. Everybody knows that it was not possible; that the economy continues to slide, and the growth rate continues to be negative," he said. (Miranda La Rose)