Latest update November 5th, 2024 1:00 AM
Apr 21, 2022 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom
Kaieteur News – The PPP/C government never fails to disappoint. Its appointments to the Board of Directors (Board) of the Natural Resources Fund are true to form.
This is not an indictment against any of the individuals appointed. Each has achieved prominence – some more than others – in their respective fields.
In Guyana’s fractured and antagonistic political culture, whichever persons were chosen to be part of the Board was bound to attract criticism and controversy. And even considering the fact that the PPP/C governments have tended to be cautious and careful and hardly trusts persons outside of their political orbit and friendship, the overall makeup of the Board is not one which will inspire much public confidence. But do not tell that to the government.
The parliamentary Opposition had expressed its disappointment that the PPP/C did not concede to an Opposition nominee for membership of the Board. But, as was previously explained, this nominee has to come from the National Assembly as a collective.
It is neither automatic nor desirable to reduce this choice to a nominee from the main Parliamentary Opposition. Perhaps, instead of ill-advised challenges to the legality of the Natural Resource Fund Act (NRFA), the APNU+AFC should have proposed a consensus nominee from the Opposition. The Coalition should be reminded also that there is another Opposition party in the National Assembly which may have had its own choice of a nominee.
It would have been very problematic of the President to select an Opposition nominee if that person was critical of the NRFA. How can someone sit on a Board which is a creature of legislation which that very person opposed? It would also have been difficult to select persons who would have been part of the leadership of political parties.
During the debate about the membership of the Board, the government was clear to point out that it did not wish politically aligned persons to sit on the Board. The President himself was quoted as saying that the governance and accountability structures would be constituted of “non-political [and] highly reputable persons.”
Section 4 of the NRFA requires that the Fund be managed in accordance with the Santiago Principles which are considered as part of the internationally acceptable principles for managing Sovereign Wealth Funds.
The commentary and explanation of Principle 8 of the Santiago Principles explains that the governing body should be so structured to allow it to exercise effective, independent, and objective judgment in respect of its responsibilities.
Critics of the government’s recent appointments to the NRF Board will most likely zero-in on whether any of the recent appointees can be considered as non-independent.
The Santiago Principles appear to suggest that ‘independent’ means free from influence of the government or the owners of the Fund. It can also be argued that “independent” also means free of any relation or likely bias towards any parties which may have a vested interest in Guyana’s petroleum sector. Principle 16 for example refers to the governance framework being independent from the owners of the Fund.
In this regard, the appointment of two of the persons selected for the Board raises red flags. Again this has nothing to do with their competence, qualifications, experience or integrity. It is known that one of the individuals was at one time listed as the Special Assistant to the President of Guyana. It is also known that this person is presently employed within the Office of the President.
It is also known that another of the nominees was a former Minister in a PPP/C government and presently holds the post of Permanent Representative of Guyana to the United Nations. In the context of Santiago Principles 6 and 16, can it be defended that the governance structure of the Board is independent of its owners?
Another related question is whether, given their appointments the two individuals concerned will be allowed to continue with their existing appointments or will have to resign from their present jobs in order to sit on the Board. It will be difficult for the government to establish that the NRF Board is operationally independent of the government if some of its members are still employed by the government.
The other contentious issue concerns the appointment of the UK parliament to the NRF. This is an unprecedented appointment. One of the companies with interests in the Orinduik Block, is Tullow, an Irish firm which is headquartered in London. But this fact in itself does not raise a conflict of interest. But persons are likely to be concerned that a member of the UK parliament is part of the Board of Guyana’s NRF.
All of the above concerned are going to be dismissed by the government. The government has already made its decision and like most of its other decisions, it is likely a done deal.
(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)
October 1st turn off your lights to bring about a change!
Nov 05, 2024
By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports- With less than two weeks before the Golden Jaguars meet Barbados in back-to-back encounters that could shape their Gold Cup destiny, the Guyana Football...…Peeping Tom Kaieteur News- No one, not even the staunchest supporters of Guyana’s electoral process, would claim... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – There is an alarming surge in gun-related violence, particularly among younger... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]