Presidential consent to Oil Spill Bill would have dire economic consequences to Guyana - Dr. Adams

Presidential consent to Oil Spill Bill would have dire economic consequences to Guyana – Dr. Adams

May 24, 2025 News

Kaieteur News- The Alliance For Change (AFC) has joined with international award-winning environmental lawyer, Melinda Janki in urging President Irfaan Ali not to assent to the Oil Pollution Prevention, Preparedness, Response and Responsibility Bill.

The Bill was approved in the National Assembly on May 16 by virtue of the government’s one-seat majority in the House. Opposition Members of Parliament (MPs) argued against the proposed legislation and even proposed that the Bill be sent to the Select Committee for refining.

Presidential consent to Oil Spill Bill would have dire economic consequences to Guyana - Dr. Adams

Former EPA Head, Dr. Vincent Adams

On Friday, executive member of the AFC and former Head of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Dr. Vincent Adams warned that the consequences of assenting to the Bill would be dire to Guyana’s economy.

During the party’s weekly press conference, he said, “The President must not assent to signing this Bill. The consequences are dire. This can wipe out our entire economy. Just to put things into perspective the Macondo spill cost US$145B. Our entire national budget is US$5B so that’s where we’re heading, not to mention the other consequences for the islands.”

In an open letter to President Ali on May 19, Melinda Janki called on the Head of State to not assent to the Bill, citing violations to Guyana’s international legal obligations.

Duplicitous arguments

Meanwhile, Dr. Adams pointed to what he believes is clear evidence that the Bill was intended to reverse the ruling for unlimited liability coverage. The AFC member highlighted that the Attorney General (AG) and Legal Affairs Minister, Anil Nandlall during the Parliamentary debate on the Bill said “unlimited guarantee is not an animal known to the legal world.” To this end, Dr. Adams concluded that Nandlall was therefore implying that the Judiciary was ill-informed in handing down its decision.

He however argued that the “bigger scam” is the duplicity of the government which argues one day that the proposed legislation will provide full liability but still defends the non-existence of such a policy.

“Today or this minute you hear oh the Bill has unlimited liability coverage which is what was there before from the Coalition which is a blatant lie. It doesn’t say that but then a few minutes afterwards it says no, unlimited liability is unheard of,” the former EPA head noted.

He added, “In his (Nandlall’s) own diatribe that he has on a weekly basis, he says it (the Bill) doesn’t limit liabilities…then he goes to Parliament and he says no limit and no cap does not mean unlimited…he said this does not limit liabilities at all, none. We said no, no cap on liability, none. Wherever the damage flows, liability runs with the damage…then a few minutes afterwards he goes off, he says there is no such thing as unlimited liability so the guy is all over the place.”

The former EPA boss therefore challenged the government to remove Clause 14.3 of the Environmental Permits that were granted to Exxon and ditch its appeal of the High Court ruling if the law, when assented to, would provide full protection against oil spill costs to this country.

Further, he has since challenged the AG to a live public debate.

“He (Nandlall) said…these guys (Opposition) would not sit down with you and debate publicly. I, Nandlall, am prepared to do that. Let us go on TV,” Dr. Adams referenced the AG’s remarks.

In light of Nandlall’s posture, Dr. Adams made it clear that he is willing to make himself available as soon as possible.

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Adams, assent, consequences, debate, Economic, oil spill bill, President

Latest News