A few weeks ago, I had conceded that I, and quite a few thousands of other adult Guyanese, I suspect, paid little attention to issues related to one of our “most huge” natural resources – our vast forests.
My generation, especially the coastlander majority who hardly venture into the country’s “interior” did have a passing familiarity with certain names who would reap the rewards from their “grants” or concessions. The symbols of forestry benefits would be sawmillers and lumberyards with names such as Toolsie Persaud, Sawh, Willems, Mahazarally and the old DTL.
Way past my teens now, I can wonder how much regulation, monitoring and desirable management/governance of the nation’s forests were applied in those days. And the species of wood deemed suitable for commercial export purposes were not as varied as now. We knew greenheart, purpleheart, silverballi, crabwood and a few others, which our carpenters and cabinetmakers required.
Like gold and diamond mining and large-scale fishing and shrimping, the exploitation of and profit from Guyana’s forests were left to a select few with the wherewithal, the sense of wealth and the shrewd understanding of what is “sustainable” and what is not. Then came Barama!
So because of all the recent dramatic developments in the sector, I use today’s piece to provoke your thought(s) – and interest.
Barama
I have had cause to read the scores of letters to the press with respect to Barama’s presence and role in the forestry sector and the numerous related issues. I also had reason to delve into the analyses, exposes and conclusions, believe me. However, as is usual with my layman’s mind, I’ll eschew any attempt at profundity. Rather just contemplate the basics – as Guyanese patriot and concerned citizen and taxpayer.
Barama Company Limited (BCL) came here in 1991 when President Hoyte was at the helm. Barama was given a mighty large swath of the 4,911,000 hectares of our forests which are allocated for commercial use.
Added to that bonanza of a virgin natural resource, it was given various concessions at the start and during its 16 years here so far. Note right away that since 1992, of course, the range of generous concessions was granted by successive PPP/C governments.
Barama is now owned by Samling Global Limited, originally from Sarawak, Malaysia. Now you must know that Samling has developed into a giant of a company in the world’s forest resources, in Cambodia, Papua New Guinea, China and New Zealand.
Realise therefore, that Barama is part of a multi-national big-player in the international field of forestry and the exploitation of resources.
I have accessed Barama’s defence of all it does and has done. Barama could point to all it has done and is doing for the national economy and for hinterland communities even as it exports non-traditional species such as Baramali to manufacture its famous plywood. It points to its increasing employment – some 1,500 Guyanese including the subsidized use of 250 once-out-of-work Lindeners. Chairman Girwar Laleram and new CEO Mr Ho will readily reveal the millions and millions deposited in Guyana’s coffers but I’ll spare you the statistics.
Suffice it to say, in relative simplicity, that Barama has indeed contributed to our national upkeep most significantly. It has gone where others did not dare to tread. It has empowered certain Amerindian communities and groups – including two particular gentlemen – with funds never dreamt of before. But obviously, like others before and still around, apparently Barama has been no angel, with regard to its practices, procedures and financial statistics the country – through the Forestry Commission – needed to know about.
What’s new, cynics may ask. It’s for the Forestry Commission to pronounce on all aspects of Barama’s presence in our forests – as they have done recently. Sub-leasing, landlordism, third-party concessions – or exploitation are charges levelled against the Malaysian-owned company. But any Amerindian schoolgirl would tell you that Barama could not be guilty of all those sins – and the recent findings – without official collusion and complicity.
I therefore leave this portion with two observations: there needs to be a through examination of the capability, and culpability, of the Guyana Forestry Commission and, Frankly Speaking, it is doubtful whether another financially-able sector investor would rush in if Barama leaves.
Remember, it is now the largest single investor in our forestry sector. Not yet even utilising most of the 1.6 million hectares it acquired.
Bulkan
I agree that any company controlling such a vast reserve of our natural resources must always be under sharp, experienced and expert scrutiny. Laws, regulations or not they are making money from our birthright, entitled by agreement, as they are to do.
That’s why I recognize the worth of Ms Janette Bulkan, the feisty campaigner who is a doctoral candidate at the School of Forestry and Environment Studies at Yale University. Her curriculum vitae reveals her status and validity to do what she does best. According to one Stabroek News editorial: “In what has virtually been a one-woman campaign Ms Janette Bulkan has brought to public attention the fact that this country has not been earning the kind of revenue it could and should from the timber industry. In a series of articles in the Sunday Stabroek under the rubric of Dr Clive Thomas’s ‘Guyana and the wider world’ column and in a number of letters, some of them responding to criticisms from those who disagreed with her views, Ms Bulkan has argued mainly but not only that two many logs are being exported with no value added. In other words, we are remaining primary producers, as we have been of sugar for centuries.
“In the course of the debate it has become obvious that the local timber industry is under-capitalised and not competitive, a condition that is no doubt at least in part attributable to those long years from the seventies in which the private sector was marginalized and under continued threat of expropriation. So bad has the situation become that some companies have sub-contracted Barama, which enjoys special tax concessions to run some of their grants. And Barama has been exporting large quantities of logs from their own and other grants to lucrative markets overseas.”
Yes, to some, especially her disgruntled detractors, Bulkan has been a thorn in the sides of Barama, the Forestry Commission and the Minister of Forestry.
Actually, the lady has caused a paper to be circulated amongst the world’s leading authorities on forest management. Titled “Lazy days at international banks”, it “exposes” how Credit Suisse and HSBC support illegal logging and unsustainable timber harvesting by Samling/Barama in Guyana – and possible reforms”. (Credit Suisse and HSBC are two of the three international banks, which underwrote the IPO – Initial Public Offering – on the Hong Kong Stock Exchange of Samling Global Limited, the transnational forest products company. The banks are reputable and responsible. Bulkan infers that, in the case of Barama, they have been “lazy”.)
Bulkan’s paper is replete with the number and scope of Barama’s alleged sins and illegalities in the exploitation of Guyana’s forests. I suspect that she was also behind a group of Amerindian representatives journeying to a European capital to prosecute the case against Barama, which she prepared.
Ms Bulkan is from a family long in the downstream end of forest products manufacture in Guyana.
The names “Bulkan” and “Precision” have been Caribbean winners and achievers. That’s why I am going to avoid Chairman Laleram’s allegations that the Bulkans begged to be part of Barama, or that they have gone into the area which Barama was recently “vacated from”, to exploit the locust when purpleheart acquisitions became problematic. Acrimony should be avoided.
Say! Could Janette Bulkan ever sit down with Barama? Or with Minister of Fore
stry Bharrat J?
Bharrat
Since I’m merely provoking you to think more pointedly about the who, what, where and how regarding the use — or exploitation — of our vast forests, and since my allocated space is used up, I am going to direct your attention to the recent “doings” of our Minister of Forestry, President Bharrat Jagdeo.
Whatever encouragements, he might have offered Barama in bygone days; the President has obviously had a re-think. To me, President Jagdeo wants one of his post-presidency legacies to be that of a leader who, godfather-like, did his bit to battle global warming, climate-change and the stifling of the lungs of the earth. Like President Hoyte, he has offered up most of our virgin forests “in long-term service of the world’s battle against climate charge”. This offer is to be considered in Bali, Indonesia shortly.
Noble as it appears, on the face of it, I expect a heated debate on who authorized the President to offer up so much of our patrimony? Compensation from preservation of the rainforests in poor countries is now emerging as a hot international issue. You have to hand it to our Bharrat for, at least, keeping our international pot boiling.
I trust that some of you are now more seized with the need to become interested in such issues. Even from the layman/citizen perspective.
Until