Dear Editor,
In a ‘eureka’ moment that must rank up there with the discovery of the new world by Columbus, GHK Lall has declared “ExxonMobil USA is going to come up with some innovative way to stick the cost of that unlimited parent company guarantee right back at Guyana” (SN 21.05.23) while I am happy the light bulb has come on for GHK, my optimism is somewhat tempered as to its brightness by the fact that any schoolchild could tell him that there is no need for ‘Exxon innovation’, the term ‘cost oil’ means the cost to produce oil; costs that are borne directly by Guyana, and insurance falls squarely into that category.
I believe that GHK pretends to not understand that the Billions in insurance he champions will take bread from Guyanese mouths to avoid blame; he has now put himself into the category of Guyanese civil society actors and writers that do not want to bear responsibility for the real-world consequences of their impractical theories and actions; let me expound.
Jerry Jailall Ph.D. posits “What’s so hard about signing an unlimited parent company guarantee if their intentions are good?” (SN 21.05.23) The short answer is that an unlimited parent guarantee is not a simple piece of paper outlining ‘intentions’, it must be backed by an asset register, all of which would then be under lien and would require Guyana’s assent for any decision involving them. It is similar to a bank loan against a property, once executed; the asset cannot be disposed of or altered without notification and permission by the bank. Does the PhD. think ExxonMobil is willing to place all of its assets worldwide under Guyanese control?
Alfred Bhulai, writing about the prospect of a BP Macondo-type spill says “Guyana and the Caribbean should be entitled to claim as much as, say, litigants in the USA would be able to get” (SN 21.05.23) highlighting where his interests lie; oil spill cleanup costs are more about satisfying litigated claims by various individuals than about removing the oil itself, of the US$69B spent to clean up the Deepwater Horizon event, I can only find records of US$2.1B for removal of the oil from the Gulf.
Bhulai also says “Most ordinary Guyanese would like the oil to be exploited by the best-qualified oil companies in the business, but fairly”. Does Bhulai fail to understand that all the inflated insurance costs for the claimants he wants to empower come from Guyana’s share of its oil?; that if we continue to make demands that drive the cost up it delays the day when Guyana gets to collect and sell 64% (or thereabouts) of the oil produced? That ‘day’ seems to me to be a better way for the poor to benefit from our oil than to hope to become a litigant in an oil spill that may never happen.
Editor, that was just Sunday’s paper, Justice Sandil Kissoon’s ruling will have consequences beyond the meaning of ‘unlimited’; I expect it to attract the environmental hustlers by the droves, much like sharks can smell blood, the hustlers can smell an opportunity to extract judgments not on offer anywhere else from a Judiciary willing to under-think and overreach all in one swoop; ironically, the hustlers will come not in rowboats but flying in fossil-fueled jets looking to extract costs and concessions from ExxonMobil at the expense of Guyana’s oil resource. The Stabroek block is Guyana’s asset worth untold billions, it is bigger than any parent company guarantee, and it is attracting flies to honey with the aid of feeble minds in our midst. It is time for the critics, opposition, and idle politicians to think about the consequences of their actions and put their efforts toward developing Guyana; if not, the People will put Guyana First.
Sincerely,
Robin Singh
