Entities being granted concessions regardless of performance is a national disgrace – Greenidge

By Kiana Wilburg
When it comes to the operations of foreign companies in Guyana, particularly those from China, A Partnership for

Carl Greenidge , APNU Financial Spokesman

National Unity’s (APNU) Shadow Minister of Finance, Carl Greenidge is adamant that Guyana’s policy makers should ensure that all of the country’s trading partners and collaborators respect its laws.
The politician’s position comes in light of several international reports on some Chinese firms whose behaviour in the forestry sector has been described as “barbaric and abusive.” The reports warned tropical countries to be wary of China but officials of the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) have firmly stated that it is highly unlikely that Guyana will end its relationship with the economic superpower of the west.
The Opposition has been highly critical of the operations of Chinese firm, Bai Shan Lin which they deemed to be abusive as well. Greenidge, in justifying this stance said that the aim of the Opposition’s criticism as it relates to the operations of the Chinese firms in Guyana, is not to end the relationship with China but to ensure that the affiliation takes place within a consistent policy framework that is transparent, legal and mutually beneficial.
With this in mind, he said that entities, whether Chinese or Indian, that are given certain concessions which are not hinged on performance, is a “national disgrace.”
Officials at the Guyana Forestry Commission had stated that it is very improbable that Guyana will sever ties with China based on international reports of its “seemingly abusive” behaviour in the forestry sectors of other countries. Commissioner of Forest James Singh had said, “We continue to ensure that all companies respect the laws. I am not worried because the Chinese companies have obeyed our laws.”
But Greenidge said that Singh and his staff are not Guyana’s policy makers and “I am not aware that he can give any assurances regarding what is a political decision. He cannot bind any future Government on political relationships with China or anywhere else.  In other words, whilst he is probably right, it is not within his competence to give such an undertaking.”
On Friday last, the Ministry of Natural Resources and the Environment in collaboration with the Forest Products Development and Marketing Council, held a seminar which focused on the incentives and investment opportunities for value added processing within the forestry sector.
Greenidge said that although the aim of the seminar is appreciated, having rules and  still being unable to explain or justify how some entities enjoy privileges that are not specified in those laws and regulations, is an unacceptable situation.
He said that only President Ramotar, Singh and his officials believe that they have provided satisfactory explanations of the application of the Forestry Laws of 2009 and 1959.  The APNU member emphasized that the current situation where entities are given conditional fiscal concessions and then enjoy benefits that are not time bound and are unrelated to performance is a disgrace.
The Parliamentarian said that concessions should not be based solely on the promise of processing or bringing value added activities. He said they should be monitored to ensure that the pledges are delivered.
Greenidge said that it does not make sense to permit a firm of whatever nationality, to bring in 1000 trucks, apparently to log as part of a harvesting and processing operation and then have such incompetent monitoring that 10 years after the trucks are brought in, the company has not processed anything as promised. Instead, “it has received duty-free concessions, sold services and even the trucks, paid no income taxes, cut down trees that will not be replanted and have left the country with fewer assets than when they started,” the politician asserted.
He made the point that while this is being allowed to go unchecked, local and regional operators have had to pay both import and corporation taxes on similar operations.
The former finance minister said that in the case of the Chinese firms, they seem to place a high priority on employing as many Chinese as they can in preference to locals.
He said that Guyana’s policy is supposed to be different but considering the case of the Cheddi Jagan International Airport and the Marriot Hotel, “the Government is so incompetent that agreements in direct conflict with national policy have been signed.”
Apart from the level of incompetence in contract preparation, negotiation and enforcement, Greenidge said that other issues that need to be addressed relates to our own Government’s  policy when interfacing with “friendly” Governments.
He said, “The Government should not be breaking its own laws to facilitate a Government because it wants favours from the foreign firm, or because the firm does favours for the PPP or because of personal links between the firm and persons in the Administration.’
“Unfortunately, all these factors seem to influence from time to time the granting of concessions and that is probably why our officials heading institutions responsible for managing the forestry and mining sectors are unable to give any coherent or credible explanations as to why Chinese and Indian firms in particular, seem to be the beneficiaries of concessions inconsistent with common sense, not to mention the regulations.”
Expressing those agreements, including Memorandums of Understanding are so secret, Greenidge said, that it is often not possible to quickly confirm claims made by either the officials or the foreign firms.
However, the politician summed up that the issue is not to ban enterprises of states, based on ethnicity for their favourite patterns of behavior, but to prepare rules and regulations and enforce them fairly, to study all the enterprises and to study the experience elsewhere so that Guyana can anticipate problems and handle them properly.
In the end, Greenidge said that the question is, “whether the PPP Government is willing to put the nation’s interests ahead of those of the Party and the political leaders and their associates.”