Dear Editor,
It is essential that the current administration keep in mind that they work for the Guyanese people and not ExxonMobil. If the deal with Exxon is as ridiculous as the deal that City Hall made with the parking company then the Guyanese people have a right to fire the current administration in the next election. So this nonsense about moving on and taking what we get from Exxon even if it is a bad deal, is not the attitude we need in a government that is supposed to ensure that they protect the sovereignty and best interest of Guyana and all Guyanese.
We the Guyanese people are not beggars asking Exxon to take pity on us to get a dollar. If the arrangement is not in the best long-term interest of the nation then no deal should be made. It is a pity that those who have just been given the chance to lead after complaining that the Guyanese people have been getting a bad deal in a number of areas for so long, would also make the same mistakes. It is definitely a sad day for the nation when those in power lose their way and their moral compass due to a dollar.
In addition, if the depth of drilling is such that the technology adds a significant cost to the operation, then it is clear that the profitability after expenses are considered will be reduced substantially.
When BP had the spill in the Gulf of Mexico, which has been noted as a lower depth drilling operation, the time and expertise to fix the underwater leak that significantly damaged the fishing industry in the gulf was substantial. This begs the question if such a leak were to occur in the drilling operation off the coast of Guyana whether Exxon would have the expertise to fix the problem.
It is now clear that they do not, as this will be a first for them based on the administration’s comments. Guyana should not be willing to take such a risk with a company such as Exxon that has a clear track record of negligence and poor corporate dealings with other countries. The risk that this undertaking is exposing our national budget and financial sustainability to is far too high based on the outlined rewards as mentioned in previous articles (ie profit sharing after expenses and 2% of revenue).
We must also keep in mind the Venezuelan situation and how their large oil reserves have been unable to change the living standards of the masses primarily due to external forces.
Our goal should be financial independence and sustainability. The current path with Exxon and the associated risks do not clearly accomplish this goal; instead it appears to do the reverse, placing the future of Guyanese in jeopardy.
Yours faithfully,
Jamil Changlee
