Dear Editor,
It is with much consternation and chagrin that the Office of Climate Change (OCC) once again is compelled to respond to inexactitudes and misinformation carried in the Stabroek News. The newspaper’s latest adventurism in the realm of speculation and unprofessional journalism is noted in its Wednesday, June 30, edition in a page 11 article captioned ‘Jagdeo ups money plea.’
First of all, it must be noted that the Stabroek News totally missed the essence of the President’s message. Careful attention to detail and backgrounding are virtues every good reporter should espouse, but regrettably this best practice was not observed by the journalist covering the event at which the President spoke. In fact, the President’s call for additional and adequate finances to support countries’ efforts in REDD+ was not a national call for support but an international call for all the forested developing countries to receive support to assist in the implementation of programmes aimed at maintaining forest cover. This international context is one that is reflective of the vital need that all developing countries face when seeking to address REDD+ activities.
Therefore, the President’s advocacy in this regard is in consonance with his recognised leadership and continuing efforts to ensure that developing forested countries are adequately compensated for the services that their forests provide. This means that a more accurate reflection of the President’s call is that it was not a call for aid but rather a call for appropriate payment for the direct services that these countries, including Guyana, provide for the rest of the world by virtue of their standing forests.
Further, the OCC wishes to categorically refute the speculative and downright inaccurate reporting by Stabroek News when the newspaper claims that “… Jagdeo had told two [Amerindian] communities that they will not receive any money through the LCDS…” This statement that is attributed to the President is wholly inaccurate and is therefore construed by the OCC as one which is deliberately aimed at misleading the Guyanese nation as a whole, as well as international observers and stakeholders.
To buttress its concern over Stabroek News’ callousness in this instance, the OCC wishes to share with the public the decision of the Multi Stakeholder Steering Committee (MSSC) in response to a point raised by some members of two Amerindian villages regarding the LCDS process, during a recent Training of Trainers Workshop on Indigenous People’s Rights, Extractive Industries and National Development Policies in Guyana, organized by the Amerindian People’s Association (APA). It was brought to the MSSC’s attention that a few toshaos had attended that workshop without the mandate of their village councils and the residents of the concerned communities were dissatisfied with some of what their leaders, reportedly, had agreed to at the workshop.
It is in this context that the MSSC during its 25th meeting held on March 16, 2010 discussed the matter since the LCDS has always been promulgated as a national development strategy that would benefit all Guyanese. During the meeting, Independent Monitor for the International Institute for Environment and Development (IIED), Ms Vanda Radzik, in referring to the workshop, stated that “…the APA felt that the way in which the workshop statement is being interpreted is not what was intended, and that the statement from the workshop was not as demeaning as was reported in the Stabroek News.” The minutes of that meeting also record that “Mr. Joe Singh [a member of the MSSC in his individual capacity] said that it was unfair to penalise villages that do not know that their Toshaos came and made objections. Mr. Singh stated that these villages need to be given the benefit of the doubt for the recent objections from their Toshaos. His Excellency [the President] agreed, and said that a team from the OCC, MoAA, and IIED can go back to villages to explain what their Toshaos said. The team should explain that if the villages do not want the money to be distributed to them, then their wish will be respected. His Excellency stated that the media should also go to the villages and have enough people document the process properly.”
Editor, the above verbatim record of the 25th MSSC meeting is available on the OCC’s website www.lcds.gov.gy It is, therefore, against this background that the OCC takes umbrage that the Stabroek News report can be so simplistic as to imply that the Chairman of the MSSC and Head of State of the Republic of Guyana would exclude any group of Guyanese from the national development pie and in this instance, the LCDS.
In relation to the mention of the MRVS in the article, the OCC wishes to reiterate that the key natural resources agencies in Guyana, including the Guyana Forestry Commission, have had a history of strong institutional capacity to conduct forest management and monitoring activities. This, among other factors, is directly responsible for the low rate of deforestation and forest degradation in Guyana. Capacity to conduct MRVS activities which bring an additional aspect of monitoring to the overall monitoring programme done by the GFC is currently being built using existing resources and skills sets. Allowing for this process to continue and at the same time commencing implementation of the MRVS in tandem with enhancing skills level at every stage is the better approach to realizing the benefits of early action in creating a robust monitoring framework for assessing forest cover change and carbon fluxes.
The mechanism that has been put in place to allow for the MRVS to draw on local capacity across the relevant sectors is the MRVS Steering Committee. This committee has been instrumental in developing the necessary building blocks for a functional MRVS that is appropriate for Guyana, and internationally robust. Building capacity with local resources now, and working at the same time on building additional capacities with international (external) support, do not mean that there will be no need to build capacities in the future. It has been recognised that capacity building is continuous and thus the President’s proposal for the training of Guyanese in scientific areas including GIS is also vital. Guyana is well positioned to receive payments for the services that its forests provide and as such implementation of development plans to improve the livelihoods of the people of Guyana should not wait until that time when full capacity is built. These can happen in tandem with each other to achieve maximum benefits.
The above-mentioned article also raises the question of the efficacy of the LCDS consultative process. Again, the OCC wishes to cite easily verifiable information in support of its contention that the Stabroek News can be reasonably deemed mischievous, dishonest or both. In its final report which was submitted to the Government of Norway, IIED notes that “The Independent Monitoring Team finds that the process of Multi-stakeholder consultation surrounding Guyana’s LCDS has broadly followed principles derived from international best practice and has met these criteria. It is the opinion of this team that the consultative process, to the extent that its findings inform a revised LCDS, can be considered credible, transparent and inclusive. The Government’s commitment to transparency and accountability has been commendable during the preliminary consultation process of the LCDS and it is hoped that the openness and inclusivity with which this first phase is proceeding will be strengthened and continued in the ongoing phases of its development and implementation.”
Editor, the OCC wishes to reiterate the fact that it is mindful of the Government of Guyana’s commitment to full transparency and accountability in all aspects of the LCDS, including the right of Guyanese to be fully informed in a continuous and timely manner. However, it would be remiss of us if we, on occasions as the one extant now, fail to protect the public’s right to know by allowing inaccuracies and half truths on matters under our purview to be propagated unchallenged. For this reason we feel the Stabroek News should again hang its head in shame.
Yours faithfully,
Office of Climate Change
Editor’s note
President Jagdeo’s statements at Wednesday’s event were very clear and unmistakable in their entreaties for donors to make good on their financial commitments to Guyana.
Perhaps the Office of Climate Change had been expecting that the presentation would have been pitched more generally in favour of all of the countries in the partnership.
It is also of note that earlier in the day, the Minister of Agriculture, Mr Robert Persaud had also raised concerns about the level of scrutiny that Guyana was faced with prior to disbursal compared to others in the Forest Carbon Partnership Facility.
As it relates to what the two communities had been told and by whom, Stabroek News was informed that during a meeting with toshaos on April 3, 2010 at St Ignatius, President Jagdeo had said that the two communities – Karaudarnau and Maruranau – whose toshaos had signed the APA statement would not receive any money through the LCDS. This meeting came after the Multi Stakeholder Steering Committee meeting of March 16, 2010.
With reference to the OCC’s concern about the statement in the news item about the efficacy of the LCDS consultative process, it is sufficient to say that reservations continue to be expressed in various quarters about the quality of the consultations, the view of the International Institute for Environment and Development notwithstanding, and the newspaper will continue to report these.
Stabroek News therefore stands by the report.
This newspaper will not normally carry a letter from an organization which does not provide the name of a signatory, as the OCC refused to do in this instance. We have departed from our usual practice only because the letter contained criticism of Stabroek News.
