Numerous absences from meetings of the Board of Directors of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC) may have led to many matters remaining unresolved and calls into question the competence of the board, a recent review of the mining agency says.
“The competence and commitment of the Board, as reflected through the numerous absences of its members must come in for some scrutiny as potential causative reasons for the large number of matters which remain outstanding and the manner of treatment of some matters,” the inception report of a Management and Systems Review of various divisions in the GGMC says. The report, compiled earlier this year, was authored by Dr Grantley Walrond, L. Heesterman and J. Goolsarran. Following a report in the Stabroek Business on Friday, the GGMC Board said in a statement that as a result of numerous complaints against the Commission and recommendations of the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment, the Board of Directors undertook a review of the Management Systems and practices for critical departments/divisions of the Commission.
The exercise commenced in December 2014 and was aimed at reviewing the operations of the Mines Division, Land Management and Geological Services Divisions of the Commission to determine the coherence of the structures and functions, the adequacy of its staffing, the flow of its operations and to identify systemic problems and other conflicts and deficiencies. The team of consultants was also required to investigate whether the activities of the specific departments/divisions were aligned to the overall strategic plan for the sector.
Peripheral
The report which was obtained by Stabroek News said that the Board must have an appreciation at more than a peripheral level of what the aims and objectives of the Commission are and what are reasonable deliverables to expect from the executive in all the areas. “If this is not in place, then the substantive divisions will not perform optimally,” it asserted.
It also noted that the “palpable tension” which exists at the upper levels of management of the GGMC and the Ministry of Natural Resources is not healthy. “While some tension in any operational arena is good, as it keeps one alert, careful and potentially more productive, it can become counterproductive beyond certain points,” the report states.
It declared that the relationship which exists between GGMC management and the supervising Ministry of Natural Resources is “far from healthy” and some effort has to be made in treating with this tension. “At the barest minimum, a serious and perhaps assisted discussion needs to be had” with the GGMC and the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment to identify the areas causing this tension, the report says.
It noted that the Minister, who has wide powers, is the elected official who properly must answer to the people for the state of the sector and by extension the institutions, which manage the sector. “The Commission Board is a vehicle at the disposal of the Minister to ensure that appropriate policies are developed and implemented to ensure the good health and effective governance of the sector. It must be appreciated that policy development comes from recommendations of the Minister, the Board members themselves and the Executive of the Commission, via submissions, which can be studied and acted on,” the report said.
It noted that the Commissioner is the Chief Executive Officer of the GGMC and is the vehicle through whom the Commission gives effect to approved programmes and policies. “He has statutory responsibilities under the law, which would restrict his ability to perform any unlawful act, regardless of the source of the encouragement. He, however, is always under the supervision of the Board of Directors, which is not an executive Board, sensu stricto (in a narrow or strict sense) in terms of its ability to issue instructions for actions by the subordinates of the Commissioner and particularly without reference to him. It must, however, be always borne in mind that Chapter 31 of the GGMC Act empowers the Minister to issue such directives to the Commission as he deems appropriate in the performance of its functions,” the report said. “A perusal of the recent assessment of the Board reveals in a worrying sense that very few issues are being resolved, whether from the relevant information not being available, i.e. not submitted by the CEO or some action not being accomplished for month after month,” it asserted.
