Category: Letters to the editor

Posted on

Gov’t depriving Berbice Bridge Company and investors of rights under the law and concession agreement

A recent letter by Berbician Mr. Nowrang Persaud advocating for the Government to assume full ownership, control and management of the Berbice River Bridge appears to have aroused the disfavour of Minister of Public Security Mr. David Patterson and the Department of the Public Information. The Department quoted the Minister as assuring all Berbicians and users of the Bridge that the Government is not contemplating any increases to the Berbice Bridge Toll.

Minister Patterson seems to believe that it is that simple and simplistic. He must not only be familiar with the Provisions of the Berbice River Bridge Act but also the Concession Agreement dated June 26, 2006 under which the Bridge operates, and over which he exercises ministerial responsibility and has certain obligations to the Bridge Company and its investors.

The Concession Agreement was made under the laws of Guyana and obligates the Minister and the Government to grant periodic increases to tolls based on specific indications and circumstances as computed under Schedule 4 to the Concession Agreement. Continue reading “Gov’t depriving Berbice Bridge Company and investors of rights under the law and concession agreement”

Posted on

AFC has exhibited duplicitous leadership

I find the report by Mr. Raphael Trotman, leader of the key coalition party Alliance For Change (AFC) that his party will not support the Sedition Clause (clause 18) in the Cybercrime Bill of 2016 most astonishing. Mr. Trotman must be aware that Chairman and immediate past leader of the AFC and Vice-President of Guyana Khemraj Ramjattan and AFC MP Mr. Michael Carrington were members of the Committee and that both were present and voted to retain the dangerously offensive clause 18.

In fact, Mr. Ramjattan played a key role in the Committee, including referring the Bill to a lecturer at a meeting of the Commonwealth Parliamentary Association which he attended and also in offering guidance to the Select Committee that the “Commonwealth has a standard Legislation/Model Act and the Cybercrime Bill emanated from that Act.” At best, Mr. Ramjattan could only have been referring to the 2002 Commonwealth Computer and Computer Related Crimes Model Law. Incidentally, a 2014 Discussion Paper on Cybercrime Model Laws prepared for the Cybercrime Convention Committee (T – CY) reports that the Commonwealth Model Law could not be found on the Commonwealth Secretariat’s website and has “been of little relevance in terms of impact upon Commonwealth countries or even generally.”

The reason that I find Trotman’s statement so offensive is that it represents a pattern of conduct in which Trotman and the leadership of the AFC seek to distance the Party whenever questions arise in the public over odious matters supported by the Party in private. Under the Party’s duplicitous leadership, the policy is to support even the most reprehensible and outrageous acts of the Coalition and in the event there is public outrage, the reaction is distance, deny and disown. They did so in relation to VAT on education, the parking meter contract and the Esso/Hess and CNOOC/NEXEN petroleum contract.

Having played a leading role in the formation of the AFC, including hosting and chairing pre-formation meetings, the writing of the party’s constitution, the selection of the party’s logo, and participation in almost every single meeting of the parliamentary party to plan strategies and responses to the annual budgets under the PPP/C, I am shocked to see what the party has become – opportunistic, self-serving and dishonest – seeking only to promote the interests and comforts of a few leading members.

Having read the Report and the Minutes of the Select Committee and the Bill as recommended to the National Assembly, it is clear to me that the high-powered Select Committee did a rather superficial and poor job under the chairmanship of the Attorney General Basil Williams. The APNU and the AFC have used the ruse of a Cybercrime Bill to reintroduce Sedition Legislation nakedly seeking to protect not the State but the Government. That is not what cybercrime laws are about.

My recommendation is that the entire Bill be scrapped and replaced by a Bill based on the Budapest Convention.

Posted on

Minister made some outlandish comments on oil contract at PSC’s seminar

I attended the Private Sector Commission’s Seminar on March 6, 2018: Oil and Gas in Guyana: Perspectives for the Local Private Sector, at which ministerial remarks were made by Minister of Business, Mr Dominic Gaskin. Instead of informing the audience of the measures contemplated by the Government to deliver economic and social benefits to individuals, communities, businesses and employed persons from the exploitation of non-renewable petroleum resources, the Minister stunned at least some in the audience with his attack on sections of the media, his unbelievably misinformed and inappropriate comments on the Esso/Hess/CNOOC Petroleum contract, and his incomplete and flawed contrast between oil and gold. Continue reading “Minister made some outlandish comments on oil contract at PSC’s seminar”

Posted on

Gov’t needs a rational, coherent plan for oil sector

As reports of new oil discoveries are announced, it is becoming increasingly evident that Guyana is on the cusp of becoming a Petroleum Republic with all the attendant implications and consequences. How effectively the country and the government manage the petroleum sector will determine whether we become the petroleum El Dorado or another victim of the Dutch Disease. It is approaching three years since the Granger Administration took the reins of power and therefore assumed responsibility for the management of the country’s petroleum resources. While three years would not normally be considered a long time, in the context of the emerging petroleum sector, Guyana does not have the luxury of time.

Legislatively, the framework for the petroleum sector is outdated and hardly relevant, consisting of the Petroleum (Production) Act of 1939, which was effectively repealed in 1986 and which now has a mere two sections; the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Act of 1986; and the Petroleum (Exploration and Production) Regulations of 1986 which has never been reviewed or revisited in thirty-one years. Neither the Environmental Protection Agency Act nor the Occupational Health and Safety Act passed in 1996 and 1997 respectively, specifically addresses the petroleum exploration sector. Clearly, that is a grossly deficient platform from which to engage in negotiations that will shape the future of the country and the destiny of its people. Continue reading “Gov’t needs a rational, coherent plan for oil sector”

Posted on

Ad against investment crossed a line

On page 24 of yesterday’s edition of Stabroek News appears a paid ad that reads ` Investors beware, GOINVEST elsewhere’.

I salute Stabroek News, Kaieteur News, and the rest of the Guyana media for the work they have been doing in protecting Guyana’s natural resources. Their direct and indirect exposes and analyses of the 2016 Esso/Hess/CNOOC Nexen Petroleum Agreement are courageous, patriotic and worthy of any national media. They have exposed the weaknesses of persons like Ministers Greenidge and Jordan and the dishonesty and doublespeak of Minister Raphael Trotman. The collective errors of judgement, honesty and integrity will cost Guyana dearly for decades to come if the Contract is not renegotiated.

Guyanese therefore have a right to be outraged, but under no circumstances do I support an advertisement that discourages investors to our country. The country needs foreign investors bringing capital, technology and expertise, and providing jobs, revenue and models of good governance practices.

Yes, there will be carpetbaggers, as they are everywhere. Our duty is to establish a system for identifying and weeding those out. In fact, specific to the petroleum sector, if Janet Jagan and to a considerably greater extent, Raphael Trotman had ensured that the requirements of the Petroleum Exploration and Production Act and Regulations were applied, many of the concerns about the 2016 Agreement – important constituent parts of which are still being kept secret – would not even have arisen.

We therefore have legitimate reasons to believe that our Government has acted against the national interest. We must however respond in a measured and patriotic manner. The ad in my view has crossed a line.