Dear Editor,
For a country with our history and ideology, it is deeply disturbing to see Exxon writing its name all over Guyanese sports teams as if it were owner, benefactor and saviour of the country and its peoples. This while the existing contract – which both government and opposition have thus far refused to renegotiate – allows it to walk away with the vast part of our nation´s riches, if not our nation´s hopes. The money Exxon is spending will most likely be cost recovered from Guyanese oil, so we are paying for all this sponsorship and marketing anyway. Would it not be better to have the riches come to us so that we can proudly sponsor our own young women and men?
It has been shocking that so many actors in government, in opposition and in civil society continue to argue that sanctity of contract is more important than a fair deal for Guyana with the oil giant. From this standpoint, the argument is firstly that if Guyana insisted on renegotiating, its international reputation as a trustworthy business party would be ruined and secondly international companies would not want to invest in the country. This is a myopic legal understanding of the current economic, legal and realpolitik situation. Lawyers, respectfully, you need to take a look around. Trinidad is re-negotiating, and most natural resource contracts worldwide are renegotiated as conditions change. Neither Exxon nor any other international business is going to walk away in a huff from the economic bonanza that Guyana represents for them if we insist on meeting minimum international good practice standards and dignity in the contract. Exit would be suicidal for them, not for us. They know that the deal they got is not only sweet, it is sickly, and they are probably flabbergasted that the country is not standing up to them yet. There are billions of US$ remaining on the table for Guyana. Not just for the minority who can access contracts but for the entire society and future generations if informed decisions are taken in the public interest.
In addition, even in the (impossible) case that Exxon and the others were to refuse to renegotiate, breach theory clearly outlines the reality that a party may breach a contract and pay damages so long as the result is more economically efficient than performing under the contract. For once, Guyana has the upper hand and the world knows it. But do we?
Guyana is rushing when it should be thinking. Talking when it should be listening. How many countries have gone through the oil discovery process previously and learnt important lessons the hard way because they did not look at other countries first? From Mozambique to East Timor to Equatorial Guinea and Trinidad, the society as a whole should be learning before deciding on things just because foreign companies want to go as fast as they can. Of course they do!
Let us hope that the Government and the country feels reassured and emboldened by Prime Minister Rowley’s messages recently, and accept the absolute need to renegotiate the contract before taking a single step further. The government – and opposition – should not be afraid to say that they did not know all they needed to when they negotiated previously and thus are obliged as representatives of the nation´s peoples, to return to the table. There is kudos – not shame – to be found in such action.
The approval of the next project, Liza Phase 2, must be used as leverage to get a fair deal on the Stabroek Block contract, and a fair deal which is comprehensive and supported by all Guyanese. Our youth deserve to wear our colours, our flag, our symbols, not those of oil companies that give this support as a public relations exercise, not as a commitment to Guyana. Helping us is not their business and we need to accept that and be clear on what ours should be.
Yours faithfully,
Sean Ramcharan
