Guyana’s partnership with Norway on forests, climate change and the Amaila hydropower project is shrouded in secrecy, the Opposition People’s Progressive Party (PPP/C) says.
Pointing to the pending final review on the controversial Amaila Falls Hydropower Project (AFHP), the Office of the Leader of the Opposition yesterday released a letter it sent on August 24 to the Norwegian government, outlining among other issues, the lack of inclusion of the Opposition and citizens in the process.
“Since the Minister of Natural Resource’s announcement in April that such a review (of AFHP) would be conducted and expected to be concluded in September, 2016, there has been no further information until today’s media report which stated that Norwegian company, Norconsult, hired to carry out the fact-based review had requested more time to conclude its report,” a press release from the Office of the Leader of the Opposition, Bharrat Jagdeo stated.
The media report referred to was an article in yesterday’s edition of the Stabroek News where Minister of Natural Resources Raphael Trotman informed that the deadline for the report on a review of the financial model of the AFHP has been extended. The reason being that Norconsult, the Norwegian company contracted to undertake the task, has asked government for more time.
“We have been advised by Norway last week that the report’s submission is a bit delayed and the review team is working to have it completed as a matter of urgency and within the next few weeks,” he said in response to queries from this newspaper.
“No reason was given for the delay but the Ministry of Climate and Environment of Norway has requested an extension for the completion of the process by Norconsult and we have given our no objection,” he added.
Stabroek News reached out yesterday to Trotman for a comment on the PPP/C’s letter but up to press time there was no response.
‘Shroud of secrecy’
The PPP/C says that while it was Jagdeo who called for the independent fact-based review of the AFHP, his party has not heard anything about the review, except for the announcement of its undertaking and expected deadline, and that government did not have the contract for the AFHP. It is for the latter reason, coupled with the PPP/C’s concern over “the shroud of secrecy that has permeated this issue, and, in fact, all issues of national importance under this government” that the party decided to write the Government of Norway’s International Climate and Forest Initiative, last month.
The PPP/C yesterday released the text of the letter sent to Norway saying that the decision to do so was because of the “continued exclusive and non-transparent character of this government.”
“The Parliamentary Opposition continues to be very concerned about the lack of transparency and accountability from the Government of Guyana, concerning the operation of the Guyana-Norway partnership on forests and climate change. As we have stated before, the only information about the partnership that is made available to the Guyanese public is through occasional press statements by Ministers who often contradict each other,” the Party’s Chief Whip Gail Teixeira said in the letter to Director of the Government of Norway’s Inter-national Climate and Forest Initiative, Per Fredrik Ilsaas Pharo.
“We have previously expressed to you our grave concerns about statements by the Minister of Natural Resources, when he stated in public that all of Guyana’s forests had been given away through concessions, when this is verifiably not the case. There are many other areas – for example lack of progress on the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI) and EU-FLEGT – where we are very concerned, but of most concern is the fact that Guyana’s citizens are being side-lined in the implementation of the Guyana-Norway partnership,” the correspondence added.
‘Not like us’
Teixeira told Pharo that unlike during her government’s tenure, decisions about Guyana are now entirely made without any civil society and other stakeholder engagement.
“Basic standards of transparency are no longer being followed. The Multi- Stakeholder Steering Committee- which previously met once a month and published its minutes online- has not met once since the Granger administration assumed office. At the same time President (David) Granger and other Ministers have made public commitments about agriculture, forestry, and conservation areas without any consultation with the people of Guyana,” the Opposition Chief Whip asserted.
“We fear that this decay in the quality of governance of the Guyana-Norway partnership could damage Guyana’s prospects for a genuinely transformative shift to a low carbon, green economy.
Of particular urgency is the long-overdue shift to clean energy. You will be aware that the position of the Parliamentary Opposition has always been to support any legitimate project that will bring cleaner, more reliable, more affordable electricity to the Guyanese people,” she added.
The missive also pointed out that it was Jagdeo who called for a technical review of the AFHP and had spoken publicly of how he was pleased that government agreed to it and that he was volunteering his party’s services to ensure that it would be done to the highest standards, given their knowledge of the project.
“Our over-riding priority here is the national interest and we have stood ready to help since the day the Leader of the Opposition first suggested the technical review. We remain ready to help, and are pleased to hear that consultants have been engaged by the Government of Norway to review the project. We hope that they will consult with technical officials and former officials who understand the project. We also believe it is essential that they consult with the political leadership from both the Government, and, the present Opposition who originated the project and understand its development and potential the best. We believe that engagement with the political leadership from both Government and Opposition is essential to ensure that the fact-based review is precisely that, and does not get coloured by political assertions that have no basis in truth,” the letter asserted.
In addition to complaints of exclusion, the opposition also told the Norwegians of Granger’s residential source of power. “We believe that the people of Guyana are entitled to be informed about what is happening in the long-overdue work to bring them clean, affordable, reliable electricity. Instead, the Government is paying for the President’s house to be fitted with solar panels (originally purchased for the Hinter-land Household Electrification Programme under the PPP/C administration), while denying the vast majority of the population access to similar low carbon electricity,” the Opposition stated.
Guyana and Norway had agreed in Paris, France, in December 2015 to conduct a review of the Amaila Hydropower project’s current financial model, which the government believes could shackle many generations of Guyanese to debt. Both sides also agreed on Norconsult for the undertaking of the analysis.
The two countries are awaiting the study to make a definitive decision on how to proceed. The AFHP was the flagship project of the five-year forests protection partnership between Guyana and Norway in which Guyana could earn up to US$250 million in performance-based payments based on an independent verification of Guyana’s deforestation and forest degradation rates and progress on REDD+ enabling activities. The deal was signed between the Jagdeo administration and the Norwegian government in 2009. The partnership has been extended so that Guyana can fulfill some of the remaining deliverables.
REDD+ is a global initiative that aims to reduce greenhouse gas emissions from deforestation and forest degradation.
Norway had transferred US$80 million to the Inter-American Development Bank for the AFHP but the Granger administration has said that as currently configured, “it would not only be irresponsible, but a downright criminal act of deception,” if government proceeded with Amaila.
Norway had previously urged the APNU+AFC administration to consider the merits of the AFHP and indicated that Guyana stands to lose the US$80 million earmarked for the project if it fails to come up with a plan for “transformational” renewable energy sources that can be realised in the next few years. It had supported the AFHP under the previous PPP/C administration.
