Researcher, Dr. Janette Bulkan believes that it is time that the Sectoral Committee on Natural Resources ask serious questions of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Guyana Forestry Commission over the investments of Bai Shan Lin and insist on full disclosures as it is entitled to under the Legislative Bodies (Evidence) Act.
In a letter to Stabroek News on May 11, Bulkan said that following a previous letter seeking answers on Bai Shan Lin (BSL), Commis-sioner of Forests James Singh in his attempt to respond failed to address her concerns.
The company has publicised that it is making a US$100 million investment in forestry and other sectors, venturing out to gold mining and housing schemes.
“Commissioner Singh apparently knows, or has been authorised to disclose, little more than is available in BSL’s publicity video,” she said. “This dribble of information is incompatible with the assurances given by the Government of Guyana in items 10 and 23 of the REDD+ Governance Deve-lopment Plan agreed with Norway in June 2011,” Bulkan said. “If the government and its agency the GFC are serious about acquiring a Voluntary Partnership Agree-ment with the European Union under the Forest Law Enforcement, Governance and Trade action plan of 2003 then a freer flow of information will have to become a habit for government agencies,” Bulkan wrote.
“I asked in my letter ‘Questions about Bai Shan Lin interventions in the forest sector’ (SN, May 5) ‘When was such approval [for Joint Ventures between BSL and Guyanese holders of logging concessions] given, for what areas and under what conditionalities? Why were the existing logging concessions not rescinded and then publicly advertised to capture a bid premium at auction, for government revenue to the Consolidated Fund, in accordance with the National Forest Policy 1997/2011?,” she asked in her letter.
“Commissioner Singh does not reply to any of these questions. Instead he says that there was no legal forestry requirement prior to the early 2000 period… for approval/rejection of Joint Ventures. That is not correct,” she said.
“As I had pointed out, Condition 2 of the Timber Sales Agreement concession licence and Section 12 of the Forest Regulations 1954 have required presidential approval for transfers of any kind of interest in a concession, not just the whole ownership. However, the Forest Regulations 1954 did not spell out the criteria for presidential approval or rejection, and the process which Commissioner Singh states was followed from the early 2000 period has not been posted to the GFC website,” she said.
She noted that the Commissioner refers to the recent acquisition by BSL of the State Forest Exploratory Permit (SFEP 01/2007) acquired initially by Sherwood Forrest Inc. “The 1997 revision of the Forests Act did make provision for changes of SFEP ownership but the Commissioner does not say if that procedure was followed. In the absence of more specific information, it is reasonable to conclude that BSL has not acquired control of logging concessions by fully legal processes,” Bulkan said.
Pointing to the seven questions she posed in an earlier letter and to which she did not receive an answer, Bulkan said that the Commissioner is yet to state what are the Foreign Direct Investment arrangements for the various BSL enterprises.
“I did not ask how many machines have been imported. What citizens are entitled to know are the details of the tax and other concessions which the Cabinet has approved for BSL, and the conditionalities for such generosity,” Bulkan said.
When she wanted to know exactly what wood processing will take place, where and when, she noted that the Commissioner repeated what BSL has stated as its manufacturing intentions but does not give a time schedule.
“His Minister will recall the problems of failures to implement investment promises in 2006/7 by Bai Shan Lin’s earlier incarnation as Jai Lin, and Barama running its plywood mill at 11 per cent of designed capacity during January-June 2012 but receiving 100 per cent of tax concessions from Guyana.” Bulkan stated.
To Bulkan’s queries as to what raw materials will go to these wood processing facilities in terms of species, dimensions, volumes, qualities of timbers, she said that the Commissioner “utterly fails” to answer this question, other than saying that additional products from Lesser Used Species can also be produced.
When she asked what kinds of products will be produced which are not already milled in Guyana, she said that she did not receive an answer from the Commissioner, other than his saying that flooring will be produced and that finger jointing will be used.
When Bulkan asked what the agreed schedule for the phase out of exports of unprocessed logs was the Commissioner “says only that BSL intends to do in-country processing of over 80% of BSL’s leased concessions, without mentioning any time schedule. And why 80%, why not 100%?”
Bulkan asked what the training programme was for Guyanese at all operational and managerial levels of BSL to replace imported staff. To this, Commissioner Singh said that BSL is in discussion about comprehensive training of current and potential employees.
With regard to her question as to how many foreign workers have been brought into Guyana, and how many more visas are being processed, she said that the Commissioner evades answering this question.
Stabroek News has been making attempts to get an interview with officials from BSL on these matters but to no avail.
