Dishonesty is a form of contempt
Dec 10, 2017 , https://www.kaieteurnewsonline...-a-form-of-contempt/
The litmus test of political correctness is transparency. Any action or agreement which has to be hidden, palpably fails that test.
The concealment of the ‘signing bonus’ between the government and Exxon Mobil suggests improper conduct. It will raise other questions, also, about government’s plans for the money.
The government has been speaking with forked tongues. They denied that the bonus had anything to do with legal fees related to the Guyana-Venezuela border controversy. They are now contradicting themselves by saying the signing bonus is to pay legal fees related to that controversy.
The usage to which it will be put cannot be a basis for lying about the bonus. The government could have simply said that they had agreed to a ‘signing bonus’ and they will decide later how this bonus will be utilised. Or they could have simply come out and said that the funds would be directed to covering the legal fees for the future ICJ challenge.
There was no need to conceal anything or lie to the nation. No need at all.
If you signed a contract come forward and indicate that you did. Defend that contract. Defend the terms of the contract. Defend the yields to be obtained and the uses to which it will be put. This is how an accountable government operates. Do not be evasive. Worst of all, do not lie or deceive the people of this nation.
Dishonesty in government translates to contempt for the people. When people feel disrespected and deceived by government they lose confidence in it and vote it out of office. The government’s record of transparency has been inconsistent.
What has been consistent is the excuse that they have been giving for not making public the renegotiated contract that they signed with Exxon Mobil. The government has always said that they have been advised by their lawyers not to make the contract public.
They did not state why the lawyers took this position. The Guyanese people, in other words, were being asked by the government to trust them. But how can you trust someone who is not levelling with you?
The government first denied the fact that there was a ‘signing bonus.’
They denied that any money from Exxon was going to pay the legal fees for the Venezuela-Guyana controversy. It was only when it became clear that the Leader of the Opposition was going to expose the truth, and when the media actually punctured the government’s case, that the government belatedly admitted that there was a ‘signing bonus’ and that it was going to be for legal fees.
The government has been involved in wholesale deception. But why would they want to do this if their intentions were honourable? In other words, what was wrong with simply saying that there was an agreement for a ‘signing bonus’? The public would have understood if the government did not wish to indicate the uses to which the money would be put.
So for what purposes will the money be used?
We are told that it is for legal fees. Four billion dollars will go towards paying legal fees. It literally pays to be a legal expert these days! The government has found themselves in a muddle over this ‘signing bonus’, they can perhaps, at the least, be transparent about the agreement that they have with the lawyers who are advising them on the controversy with Venezuela. Is there a written contract with the lawyers? Who are the lawyers? How much are they receiving? How did the government determine what these lawyers are to be paid?
The government must state what has been paid to the lawyers so far and they must justify that they have received value for money for whatever advice would have been rendered. They must produce the agreement with its legal advisers and indicate just how they decided on a US$18M signing bonus.
By the way, can they also indicate whether in the process of this agreement with Exxon, any private bonuses or honoraria were paid to any government official or Minister? A straight “yes” or “no” answer is desired.