Dear Editor,
I would like to support the Wales gas to shore project, but whatever the leaders of the PPP government provide as enlightenment only adds more darkness and slyness to what is present. The latest example of underhanded premeditations came from a most unusual source: advertisement for Expressions of Interest (EOI), through what was labeled ‘gas related investments’ for the project. Several things trouble, because they tell so much of what is wrong about this project, especially as pushed from the inception. Even if this project is right for Guyana, something stinks.
First, there is unfinished business with the Wales location itself, which is before courts. How NICIL handled some of the land collided with a judicial roadblock. Second, there is this fanfare and hullabaloo about public consultations re the gas to shore project, but which more and more assumes the characteristics of an infant pretending at intellect and looking like an imbecile. When questions are asked, they are dodged. When basic insights are sought, fluff and bluff reigns; or, worse yet, dodging and cartwheeling. So, it has been from Exxon’s participants; and, so stands the tawdry litany of what is best described as the shadowy, and has been the substance of this project from the start.
Third, there comes this media advertisement for EOIs for gas related investments. I cut through the baseline narrative about pipeline, power plant, and industrial park, and reach the heart. This is where the rubber meets the road. Or, as Guyanese say: mouth open, story jump out. This is not jump out, but flush out. The related bolded and underlined and black-backgrounded language (for extra emphasis and sharpness) is worth re-presenting: “The GoG is not bound to accept any Expression of Interest and reserves the right to select any parties for any specific element of the EoI and to annul the process at any time prior to further direction, without thereby incurring any liability to affected interested parties.”
The lawyers certainly went to town and did earn every cent of their pay on that big mama of a disclosure. I dissect. “Not bound to” and “reserves the right” are standard, and though warning bells go off, no hackles are raised yet. But it is not for the usual liberty or right to reject the highest or best or most skilled, but things more perverse. It is the starkness of “any parties” for “any specific element” and “to annul” without “any liability.” Isn’t that going overboard with crossing Ts and dotting Is, or what? Definitely, overkill, but with a purpose. My reasoning leads to these conclusions: we (GoG) will partner with and reward who we want, and do what we will, and that is that, so stop the complaining and crying. Site was always done; the consultations were done before they began; and the EoI selections foregone. Now, don’t let the door hit on the behind on the way out. There goes my baby (billion-dollar one), and I am not the Drifters.
Sincerely,
GHK Lall
