Dear Editor,
If there is no FDI document for Bai Shan Lin, how could there be fiscal concessions for more than ten years?
Minister with some responsibility for the Natural Resources Sector, Raphael Trotman, and Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, allegedly said that they could not find the documents covering the foreign direct incentive (FDI) tax concessions awarded by the PPP/C regime a decade ago to the Chinese transnational logger Baishanlin (KN, January 18). The Ministry of Finance has been awarding tax concessions to BSL annually during this decade, and publishing the amounts from time to time in the Guyana Chronicle. So some person or unit in the Ministry of Finance must be aware of the legal authority for such dispensation. If the currently chaotic Special Organized Crime Unit (SOCU) and Financial Investigation Unit (FIU) are unable to deal with this simple case, no doubt our Attorney General, Basil Williams, has reminded the Cabinet that the National Assembly itself can take action?
“Where it appears to a legislative body that anyone within Guyana is able to give any information with respect to the subject matter of any question arising for its determination or has any books, plans, or documents in his possession or under his control in any way relating to the subject matter of that question, that body may cause a summons to be issued to the person . . . requiring the person to be and appear before the legislative body . . . for the purpose of being examined (and, if so required, then and there to produce the books, plans, or documents mentioned in the summons . . .” (section 3 (1) in the Legislative Bodies (Evidence) Act (Cap 1:08, 1880/1977)). This Act goes on to prescribe penalties for failing to appear when summoned and for failing to produce the documents.
Thus the National Assembly can compel evidence from the ministries, Baishanlin itself and from the innermost recesses of the PPP/C. We look forward to immediate action by the National Assembly, given that Baishanlin has been receiving more than US$40 million income from its sales of unprocessed timber logs, entirely contrary to approved national policies and the manifestos of the main political parties since 2006, plus those investment incentives, but has failed to construct even the foundations of its long promised US$70 million wood processing facility.
And don’t forget the sales of steel imported duty free by BSL and then allegedly sold on to the private sector instead of being used for construction of the BSL wood processing facility ‒ a blatant illegality (KN, Jan 17).
Yours faithfully,
Janette Bulkan
