Exxon should release data on expenditures, too many unanswered questions

Sep 10, 2021 Letters

Dear Editor,

Reference is made to your front-page news reports on that huge amount of money Exxon claims to have spent over the last year on local content and on local Guyanese employment. The accuracy of the claims has not been verified, as there is no published story of an audit being done on expenses. Release of public record on hiring and purchases, or payment for service will give credence to claims by Exxon and counterclaims by the public or critics.
If an audit was carried out, who did it and when? It would also help if Exxon defines what is local content and if it fits in with the government’s definition of local content. It would also be useful for the public to know how much was expended on non-local content costs. How and what Exxon Guyana spent the money on? We don’t know as records have not been made available to the public. We do not know how many Guyanese have been hired, doing what, and their salary or pay grade. What we do know, and is confirmed empirically, is that there is more enforced local content under this government than its predecessor. No doubt, this government has negotiated for greater local content use and contract of resources and hiring of Guyanese and is commended by Guyanese who I engaged in a discussion on the subject. We need public records in order to determine the extent to which Exxon is complying with local content rules.
A claim was made by a labour union that Exxon Guyanese workers earn less than school cleaners. If factual, it needs to be exposed and government must take action to remedy the injustice. If it happens in the US, Exxon would face heavy fines. As an economist who studies development in several countries, it is safe to say that jobs need to be relatively high-paying for there to be sustained long-term rising standard of living and national economic growth. Are Guyanese being paid less than Americans for similar jobs and qualifications? Do workers have health-insurance and retirement benefits, a mandatory US requirement for American workers employed by Exxon Guyana that pays American workers in the US in greenback dollars? Is Exxon paying the NIS of Guyanese workers?
Other claims have also been made against Exxon. One complaint level by Guyanese businesses, in conversations I had with captains of industry, is that Exxon has occupied offices and paying rent that local businesses can’t afford. There is also a complaint that Exxon is paying for real estate rental that it does not use. Businessmen complain that some of its offices are surrounded by deteriorating buildings and crumbling housing. Exxon is putting up its foreign workers at the Marriott and other leading hotels that are beyond the financial reach of Guyanese. Exxon deducts the bills as part of its oil production costs, meaning Guyana pays the bill.
As someone who taught developmental economics for decades, I think it is fair when Guyanese ask to what extent has Guyana benefitted from Exxon thus far. Is there an overall increase in employment in Guyana since Exxon began production? Or has there been economic displacement (leaving one job for another) in Exxon’s hiring? How are other aspects of the economy affected by Exxon’s recruitment and hiring? To what extent has Exxon’s investment helped to counter pandemic-driven economic fallout in the country? To what extent has Exxon contributed to or become a strategic partner in the economic recovery and the fulfillment of objectives to improve the level of well-being of Guyanese? These questions can only be answered if Exxon releases data.

Yours truly,
Vishnu Bisram