Dear Editor,
It is indeed curious, why the GtE Task Force and EEPGL on behalf of the Stabroek Block Partners would with more or less 25km of onshore pipeline to be laid, choose to begin in Canal #1. This is one of the locations where there is a legal challenge in the right of way (RoW) of the Gas to Energy (GtE) pipeline route. This is the same location, same Canal #1, where the residents penned a letter to the Executive Director of EPA informing that they were not consulted as residents in the area of interest (AoI) pre-submission of the EIA in 2022. The letter also seeks the repudiation and/or nullification of the EIA. Residents were asked, some refused, to sign a letter seeking permission to enter unto private lands by the joint venture subcontractor. Why would this be necessary if the land is vested as state officials keep reiterating?
Does this speak to the governance, management and oversight of the GtE project? Or maybe prima facie attempted acts of state and/or contractor provocation and/or intimidation? Or maybe this is the process of selecting the scapegoat flash point; should the GtE project be further delayed? Or maybe indicative of the regard given to the judicial process? Or maybe other unforeseen and/or unforeseeable reasons? What logical sense does it make to begin at this contentious point?
This matter has been raised with the relevant parties, directly. As has the question of the GoG’s authorizing party/parties to the pre-FID ongoing pipeline laying works.
No acknowledgement nor response is expected.
Yours sincerely,
Elizabeth Deane-Hughes
