The Alliance for Change (AFC), a key constituent in the previous APNU+AFC Coalition government, has described the recent criticism of its members Khemraj Ramjattan, David Patterson and Dr. Vincent Adams in a Department for Public Information (DPI) news item as duplicitous.
The AFC also described the PPP/C Government and Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo as “spineless” and “supine” on their dealings with ExxonMobil.
In a press release dated August 23, the AFC said the DPI’s statement gave the impression that former President David Granger granted an extension without conditions in July 2020 to ExxonMobil, which he did not, but rather “… a conditional process to recalibrate or deduct time after a review, where obviously Exxon had to show cause. This first show-cause was to be done in September 2020.” The Granger correspondence to Exxon, said the AFC, provides for a “quarterly” assessment to determine any adjustments. The release queried, “Where is the documentation of the quarterly assessments (under the PPP/C government) to arrive at this decision per the Granger letter?”
It must be noted, the AFC said, that neither Exxon nor the PPP/C, both of whom should be adhering to the Granger conditionality as provided for in his letter of July 2020, sought to hold that review in September 2020. Hence, no recalibration of time ought to take place. Even if the APNU+AFC did give Exxon a one-year extension for COVID-related activities, the AFC’s release said that the relevant question now is, “why is it now necessary for the PPP/C to… grant an additional extension for the same reasons, three years after the pandemic?” The release noted that the Granger letter never said “wait three years until the expiration date to determine whether an adjustment is ‘warranted.’”
The AFC maintains that under the Granger “amendment”, the PPP/C Government ought to be asking Exxon why it wants the extension it now seeks concerning the Prospecting Licence of 2015.
The AFC called the attack on its members a distraction by the PPP/C to hide its “unadulterated cowardice” and “wholesale sellout” on this matter of relinquishment of the 20% hold on the Stabroek block by Exxon. Describing the PPP/C’s relationship with Exxon as “incestuous” with no conditionality whatsoever provided for, the release queried why no questions were asked nor any review done by Exxon in this governance regime as agreed to by Jagdeo.
The AFC described the PPP’s approach as “a laying-down-and-tek-all- you-want attitude” in contrast to that of the Coalition.
The release argued that the APNU+AFC Coalition did all it possibly could to normalise processes for Exxon during the abnormal COVID period and reminded the PPP/C and Jagdeo of its Manifesto, in which it promised that upon taking Government, it will “Immediately engage the oil companies in better contract administration/renegotiation; and, build capability to hold oil companies accountable, and to verify production and other expenditures”. [PPP Manifesto, Page 22]. To just grant a one-year extension without a review or any questions from October 2023 is certainly not better contract administration, nor holding the oil company accountable, the release stated.
