STABROEK NEWS EDITORIAL:

The announcement on Saturday by Muri Brasil Ventures Inc (MBVI) that it would no longer pursue its controversial Permission for Geographical and Geophysical Survey (PGGS) in the New River Triangle in southeastern Guyana has to be seen as a positive result for society’s struggle for openness and accountability in governance.

In its parting statement it was therefore unfortunate that MBVI sought to pin its decision on “misinformation, prejudice and hostility…by persons and agencies which are fostering an adverse investment climate in Guyana”. The discerning observer would instantly detect the fallacy. No serious investor engaged in a process that was “legal and transparent” – the words of Muri – would be dissuaded by the actions of misinformed and prejudiced persons and agencies. Indeed, the tenor of the statement on Saturday was entirely different from the one MBVI had issued on December 17, 2013 wherein it stoutly defended its rights and argued that “unimaginable” benefits would flow from its survey work under the PGGS. MBVI had also made the point that the scale of investment in the PGGS required some assurance that there would be prospecting, hence the inclusion of the clause allowing it prospecting permits.

A year after it would have begun its investment here it is not plausible that MBVI would just simply forsake its fees paid and investment and pack up and go because of pesky persons – not unless it was recovering every single dollar of expenditure unbeknownst to the Guyanese public. What is more likely is that its deal, which had been kept under wraps and out of the view of many stakeholders until its unveiling in Stabroek News, risked further exposures and embarrassment to it, its principals and the government. That was apparently a risk too great for MBVI though the government remains under scrutiny over its handling of the deal and the role of some of its key figures. MBVI’s statement on Saturday was also completely silent on the fact that the Ministry of Public Works had just denied it permission to construct an airstrip in the New River Triangle. Without this airstrip it appeared that the MBVI venture was doomed.

Investment in all sectors of the economy is needed and welcome. Not only should the investors be fit and capable but the government must also in equal measure ensure that all aspects of the arrangement can withstand scrutiny. It must also ensure that the people on whose behalf it is affixing its imprimatur to deals such as the one with MBVI are kept fully informed and advised of important policy shifts. In this instance the government failed disastrously. Its Minister of Natural Resources, Mr Robert Persaud appended his signature to a deal which virtually assured that there would be prospecting and likely mining in the New River Triangle, something that had hitherto not been permitted. Amid the flailing attempts by his Ministry to defend the deal in the wake of the absence of any previous commercial prospecting in the area and the restated position of former army chiefs that such ventures had been advised against, President Ramotar was not heard from although Prime Minister Hinds defended the PGGS. Instead, the Head of the Presidential Secretariat, Dr Luncheon bumbled into the fray to suggest that former President Jagdeo had been in favour of prospecting in the area despite adverse views by Cabinet members. Dr Luncheon later attempted to refine that position. Even if unintended, Dr Luncheon might well have exposed a Jagdeo/Persaud axis in government and its undue and unacceptable influence in serious policy matters. It was left to Works Minister Benn to announce that MBVI’s application for an airstrip in the New River was denied as it wasn’t in keeping with government’s policy for the area. This denial of permission seemed to have offered both MBVI and the government an exit from this troubled deal. How a major investment deal could proceed for a year without prior clearing of what would have been a make or break decision further underscored how obtuse the government’s decision-making process is.

The withdrawal of MBVI leaves the government with two important tasks. The first is the formulation of a policy on rare earth metals. Given their growing importance in sensitive industries and the market upheaval caused by China’s position, the government here must have a clearly defined policy on their mining, use and sale. There must also be a clear position on the investors who would be permitted to prospect for these minerals given their importance and the ensuing deals should be drawn to the international standards for extractive industries. There should also not be any lumping of classes of minerals as disparate as bauxite and rare earths.

The second matter is a pellucid restating and honing of the government’s position on mining or other development activities in the southeast of Guyana. There are however two issues which should be tackled frontally. The first is that the area is biodiversity rich and virgin forest in many areas. In keeping with the longstanding low deforestation in the country, its growing conservation thrust and the recent forest protection agreement with Norway should there not be a clear determination to avoid opening up this area to activities which could lead to ribbon developments and perhaps uncontrollable trespassing? Second, any corridors cut towards the borders either to the east or to the south could make maintaining security on the Guyana side rife with hazards and dangers. Should this be permitted?

These issues aside, the Minister of Natural Resources  and his Ministry still have to answer for their duplicity before a standing committee of parliament and the Guyana Human Rights Association. Such behaviour by a senior government official is thoroughly unacceptable and must be fully sanctioned. Together with the evasiveness displayed by his Ministry towards an attempt at an illegal road in the South Rupununi community of Parabara, which could possibly be connected to the MBVI venture, Minister Persaud should well consider whether he can credibly retain his position in the Ministry of Natural Resources.

ASS WIPE Editorial is raw sewage. The World knows why they pulled out. Only FOOLS and DUNCES would try to sell Snakeoil to the people of the World.

What an ignorant man you are.

I don't think you've read and understood the SN Editorial. In addition to a lack of policy on "rare earth minerals", and the military advice on landing strips in a disputed area, the a Editorial makes the point that Muri itself praised the transparency of the deal and indeed sunk money for fees and licenses. The Editorial questions if Muri's withdrawal statement about forces inimical to Guyana's development is not a cover for deals made that would bring embarrassment to it and the Government.

It would be helpful for you Pavi, with obvious knowledge of skulduggery on the part of those who do not want to see Guyana develop, to point out what they've done to cause Muri to pull out. Cite the misinformation, etc., and then you can use the proverbial ASS WIPE injunction you so reflexively employ.

Assni is the bagman for the PPP mafia. He mussi vex that he had to return the bribe from Muri. 

Nehruuuuu, Nehruuuuuuu

New River Triangle debacle…Exposure, not hostility, unraveled MURI deal – Harmon

“…our natural resources are finite and if in one generation all are given out what will happen to future generations” – Harmon  

Muri Brasil Ventures Incorporated has blamed its pullout of the Permission for Geographical and Geophysical Surveys (PGGS) on prejudice and hostility but A Partnership for National Unity’s (APNU) Executive Member, Joseph Harmon, believes that it was in fact the scrutiny and exposures that resulted in the decision.

Joseph Harmon

Commenting on the matter yesterday, Harmon said, “there was no hostility on our part or on the part of the media.”
He said that it was the exposure of the information that should have been in the public domain even before the permission was granted.
Harmon warned too that this level of scrutiny will be applied to all future transactions.
He said that this level of scrutiny must be applied to all allocations of such large scale areas of land.
According to Harmon, “our natural resources are finite and if in one generation all are given out what will happen to future generations.”
The APNU Executive Member believes that the nation is in fact indebted to the level of scrutiny that was focused on the Muri PGGS.
He said that in future the same level of scrutiny will be applied to ensure that there is probity and transparency.
Harmon believes that companies must be thoroughly scrutinized before any such deals are inked, to ensure that they have the capacity to undertake their proposed ventures.
As it relates to Muri’s claim of hostility, Harmon said that it was the same ‘blame game nonsense’ that was used when the Amaila Falls Hydroelectric project fell through and the government resorted to blaming the opposition.
Muri Brasil Ventures Incorporated on Saturday last made the announcement that it had pulled out of the PGGS it had been granted by the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC).
The company in its announcement said that although the process was legal and transparent, “this decision is due to the misinformation, prejudice and hostility to this proposed survey by persons and agencies which are fostering an adverse investment climate in Guyana.”
The news came just days after Minister of Public Works, Robeson Benn, had confirmed that the Ministry denied permission to the company for the construction of an airstrip.
Muri had previously announced that it was awaiting permission from the Ministry to build an airstrip to facilitate its aerial surveys.
Benn had told media operatives that an application was made for an airstrip in the New River Triangle area and approval had not been granted.
He was adamant that the refusal of the permission for the airstrip had nothing to do with the imbroglio in the press over the company and the terms of its agreement.
Ever since it was discovered that Minister Robert Persaud had authorized granting the PGGS, several commentators had come out in condemnation and called for it to be recalled.
Minister Benn was asked if refusing permission for the airstrip was not a backdoor approach to ending the PGGS to which he responded that this was not the case.
He said the application had been made long before the disputation in the press over the company and its PGGS.
Benn said that as it relates to his Ministry’s decision, it was a question of whether there is really need for an airstrip in the area and also whether it would present additional difficulties in terms of security and oversight.
Critics of the PGGS had called it a threat to national security.
The Muri debacle had sparked a livid public debate as to the Government’s policy on mining in the disputed area.
The military has traditionally warned against mining in the area but Government’s chief spokesperson, Dr. Roger Luncheon had said that the army has no say in making the decision.