Two GFC Officers disciplined
Guyana Chronicle, 31 August 2007
The Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) has reported that it has taken
disciplinary action against two of its Officers who had been found
breaching established procedures governing the export of forest
products from Guyana.
A press release signed by Commissioner of Forests James Singh said that
the two Officers had been dismissed following detailed investigations
by the Commission.
Disciplinary action had also been taken against external stakeholders
who had been found to be involved in the identified breach of
procedures.
The GFC release stated that all staff and stakeholders are to be
reminded that there are established procedures governing the export of
forestry produce originating from Guyana and these must always be
complied with.
Any stakeholder who is unsure of these procedures can obtain a copy
from the nearest GFC Forest Station.
The release stated that the GFC will continue to closely monitor the
implementation of exports of forestry products and will take action
against defaulters whenever necessary.
Friday, August 31, 2007
Asian loggers depriving Guyanese of jobs
Asian loggers depriving Guyanese of jobs
Guyana Chronicle, 31 August 2007
I refer to the letter by Ms Preamnarine Karan published in your
newspaper
[ GC 29/8 ] captioned "No transfer from Demerara Timbers to Bai Shan
Lin".
The final sentence in her letter which stated "The reviewers of her
thesis at Yale should be requested to go through her documentation to
ensure that it is based on fact" confirmed for me the identity of the
real author of this letter, as I was present at a meeting at which a
high official announced that he had taken exactly that course of
action.
I would like to ask Ms Karan two questions in turn: -
1. If Demerara Timbers only has a ‘Technical Assistance Management
Agreement’ with Bai Shan Lin, then why did they erect a giant signboard
at the gate of their Mabura operations announcing"Bai Shan
Lin/Demerara Timbers? And why was the signboard taken down a few weeks
later?
2. If DTL's ‘Technical Assistance Management Agreement’ with Bai Shan
Lin only "cover[s] the movement of shares within a specific company" as
stated byMs Karan - in other words, a takeover, confirmed separately
by Bai Shan Lin's Administrative Manager and Site Manager (Demerara
Timbers to be taken over by Bai Shan Lin, Stabroek News, 21 August
2007), would this be similar to the recent buyout in which Danny Chan
of Jailin sold STATE FORESTS belonging to all Guyanese to the same Bai
Shan Lin for over US$19 million. YesUS$19 million. Ms Karan claims
that ‘she does not speak about her very close family members who have
been in the forest sector for decades and have reinvested practically
nothing into the sector’.
Permit me, through your newspaper, to inform Ms Karan of the
contributions to the national economy by Bulkan Timber Works, Precision
Woodworking Limited, and Superior Shingles & Wood Products Inc., three
companies in which the brothers of Janette Bulkan are employed.
In 2006 those three companies employed about 250 Guyanese, all on the
NIS roll; exported about $590 million and paid $79 million in taxes. No
logs exported. All value-added production in 2007 our companies are
aiming to surpass all those numbers.
Furthermore in 2006 those same Bulkans joined with another local
company to start another company - Sustainable Forest Inc. SFI's
concession of 32,000 ha is less than 1 percent of the 4,911,000 ha of
State Forests allocated for commercial use. SFI is now in its first
year of operation, and our company will inform Ms Karan and all other
Guyanese the sum total of royalties and area fees paid per hectare at
the end of our first year.We pledge to have only Guyanese workers, no
logs will be exported. We would like to issue a challenge to all other
concession holders to publish their comparable figures. In addition,
our hard-working GFC and Go-Invest can publish those figures in the
national interest.
Finally I would like Ms Karan to further advise on the following -
Will our policy makers continue to allow Asian loggers to mine our
forests & export logs rather than ensuring that they process the logs
in Guyana? Does it not make sense for our natural resources to be
processed here so all the spin off benefits accrue to Guyanese? When
you fell a tree that takes over 100 years to mature and export it in
log form, here is
what Guyana gets - US $6 in export tax. The calculation is as follows:
The average log measures 3 cubic metres. Declared value of US$300 at 2
% export levy equals US$6.00. Yes the princely sum of US$6.00 for a
prime timber species. And to boot one Asian company is not even paying
its fair share of this 2 % export tax.One does not have to be a rocket
scientist to question whether this is accepable in the 21st century.
Where is the patriotism, Ms. Karan? Will our policy makers continue to
allow these Asian loggers to continue willy nilly to import Asian
workers thus depriving Guyanese of these jobs. And have these Asian
loggers tell us that Asian workers are more productive than Guyanese.
When will Ms Karan or our policy makers join up the dots?
Howard Bulkan
Guyana Chronicle, 31 August 2007
I refer to the letter by Ms Preamnarine Karan published in your
newspaper
[ GC 29/8 ] captioned "No transfer from Demerara Timbers to Bai Shan
Lin".
The final sentence in her letter which stated "The reviewers of her
thesis at Yale should be requested to go through her documentation to
ensure that it is based on fact" confirmed for me the identity of the
real author of this letter, as I was present at a meeting at which a
high official announced that he had taken exactly that course of
action.
I would like to ask Ms Karan two questions in turn: -
1. If Demerara Timbers only has a ‘Technical Assistance Management
Agreement’ with Bai Shan Lin, then why did they erect a giant signboard
at the gate of their Mabura operations announcing"Bai Shan
Lin/Demerara Timbers? And why was the signboard taken down a few weeks
later?
2. If DTL's ‘Technical Assistance Management Agreement’ with Bai Shan
Lin only "cover[s] the movement of shares within a specific company" as
stated byMs Karan - in other words, a takeover, confirmed separately
by Bai Shan Lin's Administrative Manager and Site Manager (Demerara
Timbers to be taken over by Bai Shan Lin, Stabroek News, 21 August
2007), would this be similar to the recent buyout in which Danny Chan
of Jailin sold STATE FORESTS belonging to all Guyanese to the same Bai
Shan Lin for over US$19 million. YesUS$19 million. Ms Karan claims
that ‘she does not speak about her very close family members who have
been in the forest sector for decades and have reinvested practically
nothing into the sector’.
Permit me, through your newspaper, to inform Ms Karan of the
contributions to the national economy by Bulkan Timber Works, Precision
Woodworking Limited, and Superior Shingles & Wood Products Inc., three
companies in which the brothers of Janette Bulkan are employed.
In 2006 those three companies employed about 250 Guyanese, all on the
NIS roll; exported about $590 million and paid $79 million in taxes. No
logs exported. All value-added production in 2007 our companies are
aiming to surpass all those numbers.
Furthermore in 2006 those same Bulkans joined with another local
company to start another company - Sustainable Forest Inc. SFI's
concession of 32,000 ha is less than 1 percent of the 4,911,000 ha of
State Forests allocated for commercial use. SFI is now in its first
year of operation, and our company will inform Ms Karan and all other
Guyanese the sum total of royalties and area fees paid per hectare at
the end of our first year.We pledge to have only Guyanese workers, no
logs will be exported. We would like to issue a challenge to all other
concession holders to publish their comparable figures. In addition,
our hard-working GFC and Go-Invest can publish those figures in the
national interest.
Finally I would like Ms Karan to further advise on the following -
Will our policy makers continue to allow Asian loggers to mine our
forests & export logs rather than ensuring that they process the logs
in Guyana? Does it not make sense for our natural resources to be
processed here so all the spin off benefits accrue to Guyanese? When
you fell a tree that takes over 100 years to mature and export it in
log form, here is
what Guyana gets - US $6 in export tax. The calculation is as follows:
The average log measures 3 cubic metres. Declared value of US$300 at 2
% export levy equals US$6.00. Yes the princely sum of US$6.00 for a
prime timber species. And to boot one Asian company is not even paying
its fair share of this 2 % export tax.One does not have to be a rocket
scientist to question whether this is accepable in the 21st century.
Where is the patriotism, Ms. Karan? Will our policy makers continue to
allow these Asian loggers to continue willy nilly to import Asian
workers thus depriving Guyanese of these jobs. And have these Asian
loggers tell us that Asian workers are more productive than Guyanese.
When will Ms Karan or our policy makers join up the dots?
Howard Bulkan
Why Guyana National Certification Standard not completed?
Why Guyana National Certification Standard not completed?
Guyana Chronicle, 31 August 2007
I constantly read articles in the letters column and in the past I paid
a lot of attention to the letters written by one Janet Bulkan who
seemed to be exposing a lot of bad practices in the forestry sector and
pointing out the shortcomings of the GFC and government.
I was therefore pleased again when I saw the article by Mrs. Bulkan,
indicating that Demerara Timbers Limited was clandestinely acquired by
Bai Shan Lin, because I felt good that such wrongdoings were no longer
being swept under the carpet, but were being actively exposed by
champions such as Janet Bulkan.
To my surprise and amazement, I read the very next day, the rebuttal by
The Chief Executive Officer of Demerara Timbers Limited that the story
reported by Mrs. Bulkan is fictional rather than factual.
How it is that someone who is pursuing a doctoral degree can try to
misinform and hoodwink the Guyanese public. In the past whenever the
GFC made a rebuttal of Balkan’s allegations, I was unimpressed because
I saw it just as a lame defense.I now, however, will have to give
credibility to the responses of the GFC since it is unacceptable that
Mrs. Bulkan can write such erroneous statements. The least she could
have done was to contact the GFC for some clarification, but bent on
mischief making, she chooses to make the news, rather than report it,
she chooses to sensationalize issues in her apparent goal of mud
slinging at the GFC.
I also understand that Mrs. Bulkan was once a very senior scientist of
the Iwokrama program. Could she elaborate on the success stories of
herself and the other high priced “scientists”? Could she tell us why
the Guyana National Certification Standard is still to be completed? I
seem to recall that she was once the chairperson of that initiative.
The responses to these questions may make for interesting reading,
which hopefully, will be factual for once.
Chris Simpson
Guyana Chronicle, 31 August 2007
I constantly read articles in the letters column and in the past I paid
a lot of attention to the letters written by one Janet Bulkan who
seemed to be exposing a lot of bad practices in the forestry sector and
pointing out the shortcomings of the GFC and government.
I was therefore pleased again when I saw the article by Mrs. Bulkan,
indicating that Demerara Timbers Limited was clandestinely acquired by
Bai Shan Lin, because I felt good that such wrongdoings were no longer
being swept under the carpet, but were being actively exposed by
champions such as Janet Bulkan.
To my surprise and amazement, I read the very next day, the rebuttal by
The Chief Executive Officer of Demerara Timbers Limited that the story
reported by Mrs. Bulkan is fictional rather than factual.
How it is that someone who is pursuing a doctoral degree can try to
misinform and hoodwink the Guyanese public. In the past whenever the
GFC made a rebuttal of Balkan’s allegations, I was unimpressed because
I saw it just as a lame defense.I now, however, will have to give
credibility to the responses of the GFC since it is unacceptable that
Mrs. Bulkan can write such erroneous statements. The least she could
have done was to contact the GFC for some clarification, but bent on
mischief making, she chooses to make the news, rather than report it,
she chooses to sensationalize issues in her apparent goal of mud
slinging at the GFC.
I also understand that Mrs. Bulkan was once a very senior scientist of
the Iwokrama program. Could she elaborate on the success stories of
herself and the other high priced “scientists”? Could she tell us why
the Guyana National Certification Standard is still to be completed? I
seem to recall that she was once the chairperson of that initiative.
The responses to these questions may make for interesting reading,
which hopefully, will be factual for once.
Chris Simpson
Administrative discretion should be kept to a minimum in forest regulations
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527922
Administrative discretion should be kept to a minimum in forest
regulations
Stabroek News
Friday, August 31st 2007
Administrative discretion should be kept to a minimum in forest
regulations
Stabroek News
Friday, August 31st 2007
Dear Editor
With reference to the letter by Ms Amanda Joseph captioned 'The
government has consulted many stakeholders in drafting the forests
bill", (07.08.29), I wish to note the following:
1. Not all the changes requested by the World Bank to the 2004 draft
were made by the Government of Guyana.
2. Best practice internationally has moved on since 2004, especially in
response to the need for clearer definitions of 'legality' in the
context of Forest Law Enforce-ment, Governance and Trade, and to
counter widespread corruption and inequitable implementation of laws
and regulations in the forest sector.
3. The reduction in responsibility and oversight by a Minister and a
consequent increase in authority for the unelected GFC runs counter to
international best practice, especially in the absence of provision for
non-financial performance audit. I agree that the revised GFC Act 2007
provides more explicit direction for audit of GFC accounts, and I hope
that this will extend to all special funds.
4. The numerous instances of administrative discretion given to the
unelected GFC are deprecated in international practice because of the
absence of criteria for the use of that discretion. Best practice is to
diminish such discretion as one means of reducing corruption and
regulatory capture. 'Regulatory capture' being defined as: "a
phenomenon in which a government regulatory agency which is supposed to
be acting in the public interest becomes dominated by the vested
interests of the existing incumbents in the industry that it oversees"
(http://en.wikipe dia.org).
5. The tortuous language and the lack of editing in the Forest Bill
2007 makes it difficult to understand exactly what is being prescribed
or proscribed.
6. Specific points will be raised in the citizens' petition to the
National Assembly.
Ms Amanda Joseph's general point about giving credit to the GFC would
carry more weight if there was a sign that the GFC was implementing
thoroughly, consistently and equitably the procedures developed several
years ago. The procedures which she mentioned were developed or last
revised in 2002. The GFC Code of Practice for Timber Harvesting (second
edition, November 2002) is still not back on the GFC website, and the
1999 procedures for the timber tagging have never been on the website.
I was pleased to see the revised GFC Act 2007 and the Forest Bill 2007
belatedly made available on that site.
The global ranking of Guyana in relation to forest cover as a
proportion of national land area is a function of the extremely poor
and infertile soils in the hinterland, a consequence of the geology.
The low intensity, low technology agriculture and poor market access do
not put deforestation pressure on the forest as happens in most other
tropical countries which have better soils.
The Kyoto Protocol and its Clean Development Mech-anism were never
intended to cope with the unusual conditions of Guyana.
The current discussions on Reducing Emissions from Deforestation in
Developing Countries scarcely deal with Guyana's situation of there
being little threat of deforestation.
However, these international discussions do not preclude private deals
between carbon emitters and Guyana, and perhaps that is what Go-Invest
is referring to in the article captioned "Wood products sector saw 63
investments in 18 months - Go-Invest" (Stabroek News, 07.08.29).
The Status of Tropical Forest Management 2005 report by the
International Tropical Timber Organization is scarcely complimentary to
Guyana, perhaps for lack of official response to the ITTO
questionnaire.
The anomalous position of Guyana in the Yale Environ-mental
Sustainability Index is also a consequence of the lack of data for
Guyana: values had to be imputed for 28 out of 76 variables, in the
absence of usable data.
Yours faithfully,
Janette Bulkan
Unlike our Asian counterparts we don't export logs and only employ local labour
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527930
Unlike our Asian counterparts we don't export logs and only employ
local labour
Stabroek News, Friday, August 31st 2007
Unlike our Asian counterparts we don't export logs and only employ
local labour
Stabroek News, Friday, August 31st 2007
Dear Editor ,
I refer to the letter by Ms Preamnarine Karan captioned "Ms Bulkan
should have clarified the position with Demerara Timbers Ltd"
(07.08.30)
I would like to ask Ms Karan two questions in turn: -
1. If Demerara Timbers only has a 'Technical Assist-ance Management
Agree-ment' with Bai Shan Lin, why did they erect a giant signboard at
the gate of their Mabura operations announcing "Bai Shan Lin/Demerara
Timbers? And why was the signboard taken down a few weeks later?
2. If DTL's 'Technical Assistance Management Agreement' with Bai Shan
Lin only "cover[s] the movement of shares within a specific company" as
stated by Ms Karan - in other words, a takeover, confirmed separately
by Bai Shan Lin's administrative manager and site manager (Demerara
Timbers to be taken over by Bai Shan Lin, Stabroek News, August 21,
2007), would this be similar to the recent buyout in which Danny Chan
of Jailin sold state forests belonging to all Guyanese to the same Bai
Shan Lin for over US$19 million. Yes US$19 million.
Ms Karan claims that 'she does not speak about her very close family
members who have been in the forest sector for decades and have
reinvested practically nothing into the sector'and also 'how serious
are the Bulkans'. Permit me, through your newspaper, to inform Ms Karan
of the contributions to the national economy by Bulkan Timber Works,
Preci-sion Woodworking Limited, and Superior Shingles & Wood Products
Inc, three companies in which thebrothers of Janette Bulkan are
employed.
In 2006 those three companies employed about 250 Guyanese, all on the
NIS roll; exported about $590 million and paid $79 million in taxes. No
logs exported. All value-added production. In 2007 our companies are
aiming to surpass all those numbers.
Furthermore in 2006 those same Bulkans joined with another local
company to start another company - Sus-tainable Forest Inc. SFI's
concession of 32,000 ha is less than 1 percent of the 4,911,000 ha of
state forests allocated for commercial use.
SFI is now in its first year of operation, and our company will inform
Ms Karan and all other Guyanese the sum total of royalties and area
fees paid per hectare at the end of our first year. We pledge to have
only Guy-anese workers, no logs will be exported. We would like to
issue a challenge to all other concession holders to publish their
comparable figures. In addition, our hard-working GFC and Go-Invest can
publish those figures in the national interest.
Finally I would like Ms Karan to further advise on the following -
Will our policy makers continue to allow Asian loggers to mine our
forests and export logs rather than ensuring that they process the logs
in Guyana? Does it not make sense for our natural resour-ces to be
processed here so all the spin off benefits accrue to Guyanese? When
you fell a tree that takes over 100 years to mature and export it in
log form, here is what Guyana gets - US $6 in export tax.
The calculation is as follows: The average log measures 3 cubic metres.
Declared value of US$300 at 2 % export levy equals US$6. Yes the
princely sum of US$6 for a prime timber species. And to boot one Asian
company is not even paying its fair share of this 2 % export tax. One
does not have to be a rocket scientist to question whether this is
acceptable in the 21st century. Where is the patriotism, Ms. Karan?
Will our policy makers continue to allow these Asian loggers to
continue willy nilly to import Asian workers thus depriving Guyanese of
these jobs.
And have these Asian loggers tell us that Asian workers are more
productive than Guyanese. When will Ms Karan or our policy makers join
up the dots?
Yours faithfully,
Howard Bulkan
Forestry probe…Two top officials, business disciplined
Forestry probe…Two top officials, business disciplined
Kaieteur News, 30 August 2007
An Assistant Commissioner and another high-ranking official of the
Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) have been disciplined following
revelations that they allegedly manipulated internal procedures.
And GFC has also taken actions against a local business which
collaborated with the two officials.
A top Government official yesterday disclosed that a keen eye is being
kept on the forestry sector and any deliberate deviation from the
procedures will be met with punishment.
The GFC has also taken action against the external stakeholders who
were involved in the identified breach of procedures.
The commission has affirmed that there are established procedures which
must be complied with regarding the export of forest products from
Guyana .
In an issued statement yesterday, the commission said that it will
continue to monitor closely, the implementation of its export and all
other procedures, adding that it will take the necessary actions
against every defaulter.
The action against the two officials comes in the wake of recent
announcements of management shake-ups with the army and prison system,
and is being viewed by many as Government's growing intolerance of
indiscipline and corruption within the public service and governmental
agencies.
A statement from GFC yesterday did not call any names or indicate
whether police have been called in. GFC said that “two officers of the
GFC have been disciplined in accordance with the GFC Human Resources
Policy Manual.”
Last week, a former manager of a top sawmill disclosed that wrongdoing
is widespread within the forestry sector. He leveled several charges
claiming that Guyana is losing a lion's share of the royalties due on
timber, and accused Customs officials and GFC rangers of colluding with
exporters to defraud the government.
The spotlight was again turned to the forestry sector with the recent
disclosure that Bai Shan Lin, a Chinese logging company, is under the
microscope for alleged labour abuses against Guyanese workers. Also
joining the fray is the Amerindian Affairs Ministry which accused a
number of loggers of abusing Amerindians.
Meanwhile, the GFC in the statement stressed that all staff and
stakeholders should be aware that there are established procedures
governing the export of forest produce from Guyana which must be
complied with. “These procedures have been publicized in the print
media, and by various other mechanisms.
Any stakeholder who is unsure of these procedures can obtain a copy
from the nearest GFC Forest Station.”
Kaieteur News, 30 August 2007
An Assistant Commissioner and another high-ranking official of the
Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) have been disciplined following
revelations that they allegedly manipulated internal procedures.
And GFC has also taken actions against a local business which
collaborated with the two officials.
A top Government official yesterday disclosed that a keen eye is being
kept on the forestry sector and any deliberate deviation from the
procedures will be met with punishment.
The GFC has also taken action against the external stakeholders who
were involved in the identified breach of procedures.
The commission has affirmed that there are established procedures which
must be complied with regarding the export of forest products from
Guyana .
In an issued statement yesterday, the commission said that it will
continue to monitor closely, the implementation of its export and all
other procedures, adding that it will take the necessary actions
against every defaulter.
The action against the two officials comes in the wake of recent
announcements of management shake-ups with the army and prison system,
and is being viewed by many as Government's growing intolerance of
indiscipline and corruption within the public service and governmental
agencies.
A statement from GFC yesterday did not call any names or indicate
whether police have been called in. GFC said that “two officers of the
GFC have been disciplined in accordance with the GFC Human Resources
Policy Manual.”
Last week, a former manager of a top sawmill disclosed that wrongdoing
is widespread within the forestry sector. He leveled several charges
claiming that Guyana is losing a lion's share of the royalties due on
timber, and accused Customs officials and GFC rangers of colluding with
exporters to defraud the government.
The spotlight was again turned to the forestry sector with the recent
disclosure that Bai Shan Lin, a Chinese logging company, is under the
microscope for alleged labour abuses against Guyanese workers. Also
joining the fray is the Amerindian Affairs Ministry which accused a
number of loggers of abusing Amerindians.
Meanwhile, the GFC in the statement stressed that all staff and
stakeholders should be aware that there are established procedures
governing the export of forest produce from Guyana which must be
complied with. “These procedures have been publicized in the print
media, and by various other mechanisms.
Any stakeholder who is unsure of these procedures can obtain a copy
from the nearest GFC Forest Station.”
Guyana, one of the most corrupt countries in Latin America
Source: http://www.globaltimber.org.uk/guyana.htm
Guyana
Guyana, one of the most corrupt countries in Latin America, is noted
especially for links to the illegal drug trade. Guyana has a particular
reputation for money laundering and, given that trade in timber
accounts for much of Guyana's official export earnings, it is likely
that at least some of that trade is associated with money laundering.
The unit prices cited in the ITTO's fortnightly "Tropical Timber
Market Report" indicate that the difference between the unit prices for
Guyana's log exports are remarkably small relative to unit prices for
equivalent products exported from other producer countries. The
difference might well be attributable to transfer pricing fraud. Given
that, during 2005, logs account for almost all India's (and half of
China's) timber imports from Guyana, and that India and China
(primarily India) account for more than half of Guyana's log exports,
India and China may well be complicit in such fraud. The loss of export
revenue attributable to transfer pricing fraud might amount to US$ 10mi
during 2005. That amount represents some 2% of Guyana's export revenue
(of US$ 500 million, roughly half of which was then attributable to
gold, diamonds and sugar, and a further 10% to timber).
One might expect that such a large percentage in lost revenue would
prompt donors to at least claim to be applying effective pressure on
the government of Guyana to substantially reduce those losses.
Logs, sawn wood, and plywood accounted for approximately 40%, 30%, and
20% of the RWE volume of Guyana's timber exports during 2005.
During early 2006, Guyana's largest timber enterprise, Barama, received
an FSC certificate pertaining to the management of 570,000ha of its
forest concessions. This FSC certificate was withdrawn later in 2006
after it became apparent that Barama had failed to comply with
improvements required to maintain that certificate. Of Barama's
218,551m3 log production during FY2005/6, a little over 10% of that
company's log production derived from the area covered by the FSC
certificate and roughly two thirds derived from the 445,000ha of forest
over which Barama claims harvesting rights. Given that Barama's 1.6mi
hectare concessions expire in 2016, it is remarkable that such a small
proportion of Barama's log production derives from its concessions.
However, the window of opportunity for such exploitation is short (such
"rights" tend to be illegal and they expire prior to 2016), making it
unlikely that management of these forest areas is sustainable.
The lower of the two charts above, which covers only some of Guyana's
timber exports, indicates the extent to which China's imports of logs
have surged during 2006 - giving rise to much of the current concern
about transfer pricing and illegality. It also demonstrates that some
of Barama's efforts to gain FSC certification might have been motivated
by a desire to increase sales to the USA - Barama's exports to the USA
having halved during the first five years of this decade (reflecting
efforts by leading customers, e.g. The Home Depot and Lowes, to ensure
sustainable procurement.
Barama's illrepute includes allegations of economic crime (concerning
transfer pricing fraud and the granting of the very lage area of its
forest concessions and its remarkably generous tax treatment), failure
to respect the rights of workers and indigenous people, and procuring
wood from dubious sources. Barama - initially owned jointly by Samling
(a controversial subsidiary of Lingui Developments from Sarawak) and
Sunkyong (a major conglomerate from Korea) - is in effect the sole
producer of plywood in Guyana. Most of its key workers and labourers
are ethnic Chinese - some of whom are said be indentured to gangs from
China (to repay debts or to emigrate from China) - fuelling resentment
within Guyana. FSC certification would greatly help overcome these
negative perceptions - which depress the price of the plywood (and
other timber products) which importers procure via Barama.
Guyana's second largest timber company, Demerara Timbers, is said to be
owned the Prime Group of Singapore - which might be a shell company and
which is related to owners of the notorious Rimbunan Hiijau. Demerara
Timbers is said to have recently been acquired by BaiShanLin.
Jaling Forest Industries and Garner Forest Industries have forest
concessions of 164,800ha and 92,737ha respectively. An almost bankrupt
investment company with no experience of forestry, China Timber
Resources (listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange but incorporated in
the Cayman Islands and, until May 2007, known as Seapower Resources
International) owns 95% of Jaling and 100% of Garner through subsidiary
shell companies - Wide Resources (also referred to as Wild Resources)
and Vastrich respectively. Ownership of Jaling and Garner had
previously been dominated by the (ethnic chinese) Chan family which has
interests in the Karlam saw mill at Linden. Mr Danny Chan is chief
executive of Jaling. China Timer Resources increased its ownership of
Jaling from 51% to 95% by acquiring shares from a Mr Liu Feng Lei who
had acquired those shares from the Chan family subsequent to loosing
ownership control of Jaling in September 2006.
A state-owned timber enterprise from Wuchang (Northern China) was to
log Jaling's concessions despite having no experience of tropical
forests. It is likely - see the next paragraph - that another ethnic
chinese entity, Guyana BaiShanLin International Forestry Development
Co. might have logged Jaling's concessions. These arrangements are akin
to "landlording" which is illegal in Guyana (unless personally
authorised by the President). The resulting timber was to be exported
through a joint venture partly owned by a Mr Chu Wenze - a hardwood
floor dealer - who is chief executive of BaiShanLin. Ironicaly, Guyana
might prohibit the export of its most valuable (flooring) species
during 2008.
BaiShanLin (part owned by a residential housing company from Beijing
"BUCC" whose indentured work force in Dubai went on strike during 2007)
has also taken over Jaling's operations in Linden (the location of the
Karlam mill). BaiShanLin was registered during the month in which 51%
of Jaling's shares were acquired from the Chan family. Its subsidiary,
BUCC Wood, asserts that BaiShanLin has been granted wood cutting
licences for 1.2 million hectares of Guyana's forest. During April
2007, Bai Shan Lin was prohibited from exporting logs, partly as a
consequence of its failure to comply with its obligations. Two weeks
later, Jaling's Timber Sales Agreement was suspended due to
non-compliance by whoever was then logging on behalf of Jaling. BUCC
Wood is a jointly-owned subsidiary of BaiShanLin and BUCC established
at the end of 2006. It claims to sell 200,000m3 of imported logs
annually and, in Beijing, to process (some of this into) veneer and
flooring. BUCC Wood gives the impression that Guyana is its sole
supplier, that its logs enter China through ports near Zhangjiagang,
Shanghai and perhaps Tianjin, and that at least some of the products
made from those imports is subsequently exported. However, China is
unlikely to declare the import of more than 70,000m3 of logs and
5,000m3 of sawn wood from Guyana during the whole of 2007.
BUCC Wood appears particularly to promote logs of locust wood (Hymenaea
courbaril) from Guyana in its marketing material. The export from
Guyana of logs of this species - and crabwood/andiroba (Carapa
guianensis) which BUCC also markets - is prohibited. Authorities in
China have been obliged to "correct" the statistics of imports from
Guyana which they declare to the ITTO so as to exclude reference to
this species. BUCC Wood also markets logs of bulletwood (Manilkara
bidentata) from Guyana - a protected species.
The depth of BaiShanLin's apparent engagement in Jaling begs the
question "what is the linkage between BaiShanLin and China Timber
Resources"?
In April 2007, Guyana's Minister of Agriculture, Guyana's Commissioner
for Forests, and China's Ambassador to Guyana ventured into the
interior to attend a community meeting about certification of logging
in the Iwokrama Reserve - begging the question whether the purpose of
the latter's (uninvited) visit was to bully or bribe on behalf of
ethnic Chinese interests.
Guyana
Guyana, one of the most corrupt countries in Latin America, is noted
especially for links to the illegal drug trade. Guyana has a particular
reputation for money laundering and, given that trade in timber
accounts for much of Guyana's official export earnings, it is likely
that at least some of that trade is associated with money laundering.
The unit prices cited in the ITTO's fortnightly "Tropical Timber
Market Report" indicate that the difference between the unit prices for
Guyana's log exports are remarkably small relative to unit prices for
equivalent products exported from other producer countries. The
difference might well be attributable to transfer pricing fraud. Given
that, during 2005, logs account for almost all India's (and half of
China's) timber imports from Guyana, and that India and China
(primarily India) account for more than half of Guyana's log exports,
India and China may well be complicit in such fraud. The loss of export
revenue attributable to transfer pricing fraud might amount to US$ 10mi
during 2005. That amount represents some 2% of Guyana's export revenue
(of US$ 500 million, roughly half of which was then attributable to
gold, diamonds and sugar, and a further 10% to timber).
One might expect that such a large percentage in lost revenue would
prompt donors to at least claim to be applying effective pressure on
the government of Guyana to substantially reduce those losses.
Logs, sawn wood, and plywood accounted for approximately 40%, 30%, and
20% of the RWE volume of Guyana's timber exports during 2005.
During early 2006, Guyana's largest timber enterprise, Barama, received
an FSC certificate pertaining to the management of 570,000ha of its
forest concessions. This FSC certificate was withdrawn later in 2006
after it became apparent that Barama had failed to comply with
improvements required to maintain that certificate. Of Barama's
218,551m3 log production during FY2005/6, a little over 10% of that
company's log production derived from the area covered by the FSC
certificate and roughly two thirds derived from the 445,000ha of forest
over which Barama claims harvesting rights. Given that Barama's 1.6mi
hectare concessions expire in 2016, it is remarkable that such a small
proportion of Barama's log production derives from its concessions.
However, the window of opportunity for such exploitation is short (such
"rights" tend to be illegal and they expire prior to 2016), making it
unlikely that management of these forest areas is sustainable.
The lower of the two charts above, which covers only some of Guyana's
timber exports, indicates the extent to which China's imports of logs
have surged during 2006 - giving rise to much of the current concern
about transfer pricing and illegality. It also demonstrates that some
of Barama's efforts to gain FSC certification might have been motivated
by a desire to increase sales to the USA - Barama's exports to the USA
having halved during the first five years of this decade (reflecting
efforts by leading customers, e.g. The Home Depot and Lowes, to ensure
sustainable procurement.
Barama's illrepute includes allegations of economic crime (concerning
transfer pricing fraud and the granting of the very lage area of its
forest concessions and its remarkably generous tax treatment), failure
to respect the rights of workers and indigenous people, and procuring
wood from dubious sources. Barama - initially owned jointly by Samling
(a controversial subsidiary of Lingui Developments from Sarawak) and
Sunkyong (a major conglomerate from Korea) - is in effect the sole
producer of plywood in Guyana. Most of its key workers and labourers
are ethnic Chinese - some of whom are said be indentured to gangs from
China (to repay debts or to emigrate from China) - fuelling resentment
within Guyana. FSC certification would greatly help overcome these
negative perceptions - which depress the price of the plywood (and
other timber products) which importers procure via Barama.
Guyana's second largest timber company, Demerara Timbers, is said to be
owned the Prime Group of Singapore - which might be a shell company and
which is related to owners of the notorious Rimbunan Hiijau. Demerara
Timbers is said to have recently been acquired by BaiShanLin.
Jaling Forest Industries and Garner Forest Industries have forest
concessions of 164,800ha and 92,737ha respectively. An almost bankrupt
investment company with no experience of forestry, China Timber
Resources (listed on the Hong Kong stock exchange but incorporated in
the Cayman Islands and, until May 2007, known as Seapower Resources
International) owns 95% of Jaling and 100% of Garner through subsidiary
shell companies - Wide Resources (also referred to as Wild Resources)
and Vastrich respectively. Ownership of Jaling and Garner had
previously been dominated by the (ethnic chinese) Chan family which has
interests in the Karlam saw mill at Linden. Mr Danny Chan is chief
executive of Jaling. China Timer Resources increased its ownership of
Jaling from 51% to 95% by acquiring shares from a Mr Liu Feng Lei who
had acquired those shares from the Chan family subsequent to loosing
ownership control of Jaling in September 2006.
A state-owned timber enterprise from Wuchang (Northern China) was to
log Jaling's concessions despite having no experience of tropical
forests. It is likely - see the next paragraph - that another ethnic
chinese entity, Guyana BaiShanLin International Forestry Development
Co. might have logged Jaling's concessions. These arrangements are akin
to "landlording" which is illegal in Guyana (unless personally
authorised by the President). The resulting timber was to be exported
through a joint venture partly owned by a Mr Chu Wenze - a hardwood
floor dealer - who is chief executive of BaiShanLin. Ironicaly, Guyana
might prohibit the export of its most valuable (flooring) species
during 2008.
BaiShanLin (part owned by a residential housing company from Beijing
"BUCC" whose indentured work force in Dubai went on strike during 2007)
has also taken over Jaling's operations in Linden (the location of the
Karlam mill). BaiShanLin was registered during the month in which 51%
of Jaling's shares were acquired from the Chan family. Its subsidiary,
BUCC Wood, asserts that BaiShanLin has been granted wood cutting
licences for 1.2 million hectares of Guyana's forest. During April
2007, Bai Shan Lin was prohibited from exporting logs, partly as a
consequence of its failure to comply with its obligations. Two weeks
later, Jaling's Timber Sales Agreement was suspended due to
non-compliance by whoever was then logging on behalf of Jaling. BUCC
Wood is a jointly-owned subsidiary of BaiShanLin and BUCC established
at the end of 2006. It claims to sell 200,000m3 of imported logs
annually and, in Beijing, to process (some of this into) veneer and
flooring. BUCC Wood gives the impression that Guyana is its sole
supplier, that its logs enter China through ports near Zhangjiagang,
Shanghai and perhaps Tianjin, and that at least some of the products
made from those imports is subsequently exported. However, China is
unlikely to declare the import of more than 70,000m3 of logs and
5,000m3 of sawn wood from Guyana during the whole of 2007.
BUCC Wood appears particularly to promote logs of locust wood (Hymenaea
courbaril) from Guyana in its marketing material. The export from
Guyana of logs of this species - and crabwood/andiroba (Carapa
guianensis) which BUCC also markets - is prohibited. Authorities in
China have been obliged to "correct" the statistics of imports from
Guyana which they declare to the ITTO so as to exclude reference to
this species. BUCC Wood also markets logs of bulletwood (Manilkara
bidentata) from Guyana - a protected species.
The depth of BaiShanLin's apparent engagement in Jaling begs the
question "what is the linkage between BaiShanLin and China Timber
Resources"?
In April 2007, Guyana's Minister of Agriculture, Guyana's Commissioner
for Forests, and China's Ambassador to Guyana ventured into the
interior to attend a community meeting about certification of logging
in the Iwokrama Reserve - begging the question whether the purpose of
the latter's (uninvited) visit was to bully or bribe on behalf of
ethnic Chinese interests.
No transfer from Demerara Timbers to Bai Shan Lin
No transfer from Demerara Timbers to Bai Shan Lin
Guyana Chronicle, 29 August 2007
Janette Bulkan is once again exposed as a promoter of rumour rather
than factual information. This “doctoral” candidate from Yale
University should really take time off to get the facts rather than
jump to conclusions on the basis of rumour.
Bulkan in her eagerness to attack the government and the Guyana
Forestry Commission at every angle, does not do the accepted thing and
seek clarification on an issue, instead she lambastes the Government
and Guyana Forestry Commission for not following some procedures in the
“transfer” of Demerara Timbers Limited to Bai Shan Lin Limited.
If Bulkan had simply called Demerara Timbers Limited, the Guyana
Forestry Commission or Bai Shan Lin Limited, then she would have gotten
the real facts of the matter, and would not have embarrassed herself
and lose further credibility by continuing her mis-information and
fact manipulation.
I myself was concerned when I read her article about the transfer of
Demerara Timbers Limited to Bai Shan Lin. However, I sought
clarification from the Commission and was informed that no such thing
had happened. I was also told that the procedure that Bulkan was
referring to was really in respect to the transfer of a concession from
one company to another (involving also a name change), and did not
cover the movement of shares within a specific company.
I was however pleased to note that the revised forest law which is to
be debated soon in Parliament, and which is being ironically, opposed
by Bulkan, actually addresses the transfer of shares within a company.
The revised law makes it compulsory for the GFC to be prior informed,
and also to give approval after completing the necessary due diligence.
The existing law of 1953 does not allow for this, and companies are
therefore free to have a change of shares until the revised law is
passed. How serious are the Bulkans and petitioners of the proposal to
block the new forest law about transparency, and accountability when
the revised law provides for all of these safeguards and the existing
law has all of these glaring loopholes?
The subsequent letter by the CEO of Demerara Timbers Limited refuting
the claims of Bulkanhas clarified the matter beyond doubt. It has
also embarrassed Bulkan, because here it is that Demerara Timbers
Limited is actually moving into the welcome area of added value, yet
Bulkan in her eagerness to misinform seizes the opportunity to spread
rumour. If I were the CEO of Demerara Timbers Limited, I would actually
consider taking legal action against this individual who it seems has a
vicious agenda against the Asians.
It is apparent to me that Bulkan has a definite aversion to Asians
coming and working in Guyana, making investments that very few locals
are prepared to make. She loses no opportunity to criticize them and in
this instance slanders the names of the companies.
However, she does not speak about her very close family members who
have been in the Forest sector for decades and have re-invested
practically nothing into the sector. In fact, Rich Resources, an Asian
controlled company is harvesting on a concession that was granted to
Bulkan’s family decades ago. This is the “land lordism” that Bulkan
should also speak out against.
It would be also good for Bulkan to recognize the tremendous assistance
that the Asian countries are providing to Guyana at the bilateral
level.
Guyana needs foreign investors. They must comply with our rulesand if
they are guilty of breaches, then they must be penalized. However, any
criticism must be justified, it must not be criticism that is seen to
be part of someones agenda to bring down Asian companies. This can be
construed as an attack to discredit the Asian companies and so reduce
competition with family members who are also in the forestry sector.
The general public now has more evidence to see that Bulkan’s campaign
in the forestry sector is mis guided, and lacks credibility.
The reviewers of her thesis at Yale should be requested to go through
her documentation to ensure that it is based on fact.
PreamnarineKaran
Guyana Chronicle, 29 August 2007
Janette Bulkan is once again exposed as a promoter of rumour rather
than factual information. This “doctoral” candidate from Yale
University should really take time off to get the facts rather than
jump to conclusions on the basis of rumour.
Bulkan in her eagerness to attack the government and the Guyana
Forestry Commission at every angle, does not do the accepted thing and
seek clarification on an issue, instead she lambastes the Government
and Guyana Forestry Commission for not following some procedures in the
“transfer” of Demerara Timbers Limited to Bai Shan Lin Limited.
If Bulkan had simply called Demerara Timbers Limited, the Guyana
Forestry Commission or Bai Shan Lin Limited, then she would have gotten
the real facts of the matter, and would not have embarrassed herself
and lose further credibility by continuing her mis-information and
fact manipulation.
I myself was concerned when I read her article about the transfer of
Demerara Timbers Limited to Bai Shan Lin. However, I sought
clarification from the Commission and was informed that no such thing
had happened. I was also told that the procedure that Bulkan was
referring to was really in respect to the transfer of a concession from
one company to another (involving also a name change), and did not
cover the movement of shares within a specific company.
I was however pleased to note that the revised forest law which is to
be debated soon in Parliament, and which is being ironically, opposed
by Bulkan, actually addresses the transfer of shares within a company.
The revised law makes it compulsory for the GFC to be prior informed,
and also to give approval after completing the necessary due diligence.
The existing law of 1953 does not allow for this, and companies are
therefore free to have a change of shares until the revised law is
passed. How serious are the Bulkans and petitioners of the proposal to
block the new forest law about transparency, and accountability when
the revised law provides for all of these safeguards and the existing
law has all of these glaring loopholes?
The subsequent letter by the CEO of Demerara Timbers Limited refuting
the claims of Bulkanhas clarified the matter beyond doubt. It has
also embarrassed Bulkan, because here it is that Demerara Timbers
Limited is actually moving into the welcome area of added value, yet
Bulkan in her eagerness to misinform seizes the opportunity to spread
rumour. If I were the CEO of Demerara Timbers Limited, I would actually
consider taking legal action against this individual who it seems has a
vicious agenda against the Asians.
It is apparent to me that Bulkan has a definite aversion to Asians
coming and working in Guyana, making investments that very few locals
are prepared to make. She loses no opportunity to criticize them and in
this instance slanders the names of the companies.
However, she does not speak about her very close family members who
have been in the Forest sector for decades and have re-invested
practically nothing into the sector. In fact, Rich Resources, an Asian
controlled company is harvesting on a concession that was granted to
Bulkan’s family decades ago. This is the “land lordism” that Bulkan
should also speak out against.
It would be also good for Bulkan to recognize the tremendous assistance
that the Asian countries are providing to Guyana at the bilateral
level.
Guyana needs foreign investors. They must comply with our rulesand if
they are guilty of breaches, then they must be penalized. However, any
criticism must be justified, it must not be criticism that is seen to
be part of someones agenda to bring down Asian companies. This can be
construed as an attack to discredit the Asian companies and so reduce
competition with family members who are also in the forestry sector.
The general public now has more evidence to see that Bulkan’s campaign
in the forestry sector is mis guided, and lacks credibility.
The reviewers of her thesis at Yale should be requested to go through
her documentation to ensure that it is based on fact.
PreamnarineKaran
Guyana one of eleven countries with forests intact
Guyana one of eleven countries with forests intact
Guyana Chronicle, 29 August 2007
The Guyana Forestry Commission has had its New Act passed in Parliament
and the revised Forests Bill is to be hopefully debated in Parliament
in October 2007.
This is another in a series of positive initiatives that the GFC and
the Government have implemented recently.
When one looks at other tropical forest producing countries, Guyana
ranks very highly as shown by independent consultancies of ITTO and the
Environmental Sustainability Index.
A recent study done by Conservational International and published in
the Public Library of Science Biology Journal, lists Guyana as one of
11 countries that have avoided widespread destruction of their tropical
forests, but are still at risk of being left out of the emerging Carbon
market, because the Kyoto Protocol and upcoming negotiations on carbon
trading fail to include intact standing forest.
And this is the crux of the issue. Janet Bulkan and her other
colleagues, if they are true patriots, should be addressing unbalanced
and inconsistent positions such as the reluctance of the international
community to pay carbon credits for these well managed and conserved
forests; they should be promoting all of the good things that Guyana
has done to encourage responsible forestry utilization such as the
development of Codes of Practices, Guidelines for the preparation of
Forest Management Plans, Annual Operational Plans, Inventory
methodology guidelines, the log tagging and log tracking system etc.
Rather than focusing on the negatives, the Bulkan contingent needs to
be more aggressive in publicising the good things being done. It is
true that the GFC and the Government needs to do more, but let us be
realistic, everything cannot be done overnight. Policies in the
forestry sector must be developed in a consultative mode, and this
takes time to get the opinions of all stakeholders. And this again is
the crux of the matter with the forest legislation.
Bulkan writes that the 2004 bill has been altered to arrive at the
revised 2007 bill that has been submitted to Parliament.
Let us look at the process that should be followed. Stakeholders are
consulted and give their views. These views would vary depending on the
particular interest group. The government, which is responsible for
formulating the policy then takes all of the stakeholders’ views on
board and comes up with a position that best address all stakeholders
concerns.
Janet Bulkan wants to give the impression that she and her group have
the best vision for Guyana in terms of the forest sector. She quotes
from some international documents that suit her arguments; however,
there exists many other equally accepted international documentation
that goes contrary to her mode of thought.
Bulkan is however acting like a spoilt child; it is either her way or
no other way. Wake up Janet, this is what democracy is all about, the
consideration of all relevant points of view to arrive at a document
that is satisfactory to all. In this case, we have a Government
thattook on board the comments of all stakeholders in the 2004 draft.
This draft then went through a process of final legislative drafting at
the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that it did not conflict with
any other existing legislation. What Janet Bulkan should also note is
that this final 2007 revision was also reviewed by the World Bank which
recommended that some clauses should be amended to include a higher
degree of public participation; these recommendations were accepted by
this democratic Government.
I join with the Government and the Guyana Forestry Commission in asking
all parliamentarians to support this revised forests Bill. As a primary
stakeholder, I recognize that the revised forests bill places
additional requirements on us, but also recognize that it is the only
way forward in this challenging and environmentally conscious sector.
Also, I want to inform all stakeholders, especially Ms Bulkan that the
information on the process followed was obtained from the GFC itself. I
had absolutely no difficulty in getting access to it.
Amanda Joseph (Ms)
Guyana Chronicle, 29 August 2007
The Guyana Forestry Commission has had its New Act passed in Parliament
and the revised Forests Bill is to be hopefully debated in Parliament
in October 2007.
This is another in a series of positive initiatives that the GFC and
the Government have implemented recently.
When one looks at other tropical forest producing countries, Guyana
ranks very highly as shown by independent consultancies of ITTO and the
Environmental Sustainability Index.
A recent study done by Conservational International and published in
the Public Library of Science Biology Journal, lists Guyana as one of
11 countries that have avoided widespread destruction of their tropical
forests, but are still at risk of being left out of the emerging Carbon
market, because the Kyoto Protocol and upcoming negotiations on carbon
trading fail to include intact standing forest.
And this is the crux of the issue. Janet Bulkan and her other
colleagues, if they are true patriots, should be addressing unbalanced
and inconsistent positions such as the reluctance of the international
community to pay carbon credits for these well managed and conserved
forests; they should be promoting all of the good things that Guyana
has done to encourage responsible forestry utilization such as the
development of Codes of Practices, Guidelines for the preparation of
Forest Management Plans, Annual Operational Plans, Inventory
methodology guidelines, the log tagging and log tracking system etc.
Rather than focusing on the negatives, the Bulkan contingent needs to
be more aggressive in publicising the good things being done. It is
true that the GFC and the Government needs to do more, but let us be
realistic, everything cannot be done overnight. Policies in the
forestry sector must be developed in a consultative mode, and this
takes time to get the opinions of all stakeholders. And this again is
the crux of the matter with the forest legislation.
Bulkan writes that the 2004 bill has been altered to arrive at the
revised 2007 bill that has been submitted to Parliament.
Let us look at the process that should be followed. Stakeholders are
consulted and give their views. These views would vary depending on the
particular interest group. The government, which is responsible for
formulating the policy then takes all of the stakeholders’ views on
board and comes up with a position that best address all stakeholders
concerns.
Janet Bulkan wants to give the impression that she and her group have
the best vision for Guyana in terms of the forest sector. She quotes
from some international documents that suit her arguments; however,
there exists many other equally accepted international documentation
that goes contrary to her mode of thought.
Bulkan is however acting like a spoilt child; it is either her way or
no other way. Wake up Janet, this is what democracy is all about, the
consideration of all relevant points of view to arrive at a document
that is satisfactory to all. In this case, we have a Government
thattook on board the comments of all stakeholders in the 2004 draft.
This draft then went through a process of final legislative drafting at
the Attorney General’s Office to ensure that it did not conflict with
any other existing legislation. What Janet Bulkan should also note is
that this final 2007 revision was also reviewed by the World Bank which
recommended that some clauses should be amended to include a higher
degree of public participation; these recommendations were accepted by
this democratic Government.
I join with the Government and the Guyana Forestry Commission in asking
all parliamentarians to support this revised forests Bill. As a primary
stakeholder, I recognize that the revised forests bill places
additional requirements on us, but also recognize that it is the only
way forward in this challenging and environmentally conscious sector.
Also, I want to inform all stakeholders, especially Ms Bulkan that the
information on the process followed was obtained from the GFC itself. I
had absolutely no difficulty in getting access to it.
Amanda Joseph (Ms)
Two forestry body staffers disciplined over exports
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527832
Two forestry body staffers disciplined over exports
Stabroek News
Thursday, August 30th 2007
Two forestry body staffers disciplined over exports
Stabroek News
Thursday, August 30th 2007
Disciplinary action has been taken against two Guyana Forestry
Commis-sion (GFC) employees, as well as external stakeholders involved
in the breach of procedures regarding the export of forest produce from
Guyana, a press release from the commission has stated.
The statement said that the action was taken after the commission had
completed "its detailed investigation" into the matter. The export of
unprocessed logs had been in the spotlight recently.
None of the persons against whom the action was taken were identified
nor was the type of action taken outlined.
The breaches committed by the officers were also not disclosed. Efforts
to contact Commissioner of Forests, James Singh for a comment on the
matter proved futile as Stabroek News was told that he had left the
office.
The statement said that the two GFC officers were disciplined in
accordance with the Commission's Human Resources Policy Manual adding
that "disciplinary action has also been taken against the external
stakeholders who were involved in the identified breach of procedures".
The GFC said that it wishes to remind all staff and stakeholders that
there are established procedures governing the export of forest produce
from Guyana which must be complied with adding that any stakeholder who
is unsure of these procedures can obtain a copy from the nearest GFC
forestry station.
"GFC will continue to monitor closely the implementation of its export
and all other procedures, and will take the necessary action against
all defaulters", the statement declared.
Furniture manufacturers still operating at Lusignan
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527849
Furniture manufacturers still operating at Lusignan
Stabroek News
Thursday, August 30th 2007
Furniture manufacturers still operating at Lusignan
Stabroek News
Thursday, August 30th 2007
Dear Editor,
I have a close relative who lives at Lusig-nan West, East Coast
Demerara. His family is constantly affected by dust and noise emanating
from furniture manufacturers operating in this area.
These workshops continue to operate, although the Ministry of Home
Affairs and the Environmental Protection Agency have restricted them
from operating until they have proper authority from the NDC and
Central Housing and Planning Authority. This clearly shows that these
manufacturers have no regard for the laws of Guyana.
These workshops are not sound proof and no dust extractor systems are
installed. Noise and dust are still emanating from these workshops.
Mr Editor I would like to emphasize that these workshops have machines
such as electrical planes, electrical saws etc. which are all
industrial machinery and are not suitable for every day use in a
residential area and it would be a breach of the Environmental
Protection Act if permissions are granted to these operations.
I hope that the authorities will ensure that all the necessary
environmental regulations for such operations are fully adhered to.
Yours faithfully,
Murtland Williams
Ms Bulkan should have clarified the position with Demerara Timbers Limited
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527853
Ms Bulkan should have clarified the position with Demerara Timbers
Limited
Stabroek News
Thursday, August 30th 2007
Ms Bulkan should have clarified the position with Demerara Timbers
Limited
Stabroek News
Thursday, August 30th 2007
Dear Editor,
Janette Bulkan is once again exposed as a promoter of rumour rather
than factual information. She should take time off to get the facts
rather than jump to conclusions on the basis of rumour.
Bulkan in her eagerness to attack the Government and the Guyana
Forestry Commission at every angle, does not do the accepted thing and
seek clarification on an issue, instead she lambastes the Government
and Guyana Forestry Commission for not following some procedures in the
"transfer" of a concession by Demerara Timbers Limited to Bai Shan Lin
Limited.
If Bulkan had simply called Demerara Timbers Limited, the Guyana
Forestry Commission or Bai Shan Lin she would have gotten the real
facts and would not have embarrassed herself.
I myself was concerned when I read her letter about the transfer.
However, I sought clarification from the commission and was informed
that no such thing had happened. I was also told that the procedure
that Bulkan was referring to was really in respect to the transfer of a
concession from one company to another (involving also a name change),
and did not cover the movement of shares within a specific company.
I was however pleased to note that the revised forest law which is to
be debated soon in Parliament, and which is being, ironically, opposed
by Bulkan, actually addresses the transfer of shares within a company.
The revised law makes it compulsory for the GFC to be prior informed,
and also to give approval after completing the necessary due diligence.
The existing law of 1953 does not allow for this, and companies are
therefore free to have a change of shares until the revised law is
passed.
How serious are the Bulkans and petitioners of the proposal to block
the new forest law about transparency, and accountability when the
revised law provides for all of these safeguards and the existing law
has all of these glaring loopholes?
The subsequent letter by the CEO of Demerara Timbers Limited refuting
the claims of Bulkan has clarified the matter beyond doubt. It has also
embarrassed Bulkan, because here it is that Demerara Timbers Limited is
actually moving into the welcome area of added value, yet Bulkan in her
eagerness to misinform seizes the opportunity to spread rumour.
It would be good for Bulkan to recognize the tremendous assistance that
the Asian countries are providing to Guyana at the bilateral level.
Guyana needs foreign investors. They must comply with our rules and if
they are guilty of breaches, they must be penalized. However, any
criticism must be justified, it must not be criticism that is seen to
be part of someone's agenda to bring down Asian companies. This can be
construed as an attack to discredit the Asian companies and so reduce
competition with family members who are also in the forestry sector.
Yours faithfully,
Preamnarine Karan
Editor's note
We sent a copy of this letter to Ms Bulkan for her comments and
received the following response:
"The Forests Act of 1953 and the associated Forest Regulations are
quite explicit, as you would hope from the drafting of Conservator of
Forests, W A Gordon, a barrister and later the author of the first
comprehensive text on forest law. The relevant legislation is detailed
below:
"Landlording" is the practice in which the legal holder of a forest
harvesting concession gives up managerial control and rents it out to
another enterprise. This practice is illegal under Forest Regulations
1953, Article 12 -
"No transfer of any lease or timber sales agreement shall be made by
any forest officer without the prior approval of the President where
such lease or timber sales agreement grants exclusive rights to any
person over an area estimated to exceed three thousand acres or is for
an unexpired period exceeding three years".
Landlording is illegal under Condition 13 of Timber Sales Agreements -
"The grantee shall not transfer, sublet, mortgage or otherwise dispose
of any interest arising under this agreement except in accordance with
the Forest Regulations and any purported disposition made except in
accordance with such regulations shall be null and void."
Landlording is also illegal under Condition 2 of 16 of State Forest
Permis-sions -
"This Permit is not transferable without the prior consent in writing
of the Commissioner. It may not be assigned or sublet nor may the
grantee allow any person to work under it on payment to the Grantee of
any consideration whatsoever".
Landlording can be permitted only with express Presidential authority
(the President being the Minister of Forestry, as opposed to the
quotidian control by the Minister for Forestry, who is usually also the
Minister of Agriculture).
The contention of Preamnarine Karan that the 1953 legislation does not
provide for the GFC to be informed / requested in advance, and for
prior permission to be granted by the President, is thus incorrect. I
appreciate that some people having interests in forest harvesting
concessions may have difficulty in obtaining a sight of the current
(1953) legislation, as amended.
Landlording is differentiated from "sprinting" which was a
long-standing practice by which concession holders would contract in
labour for specific tasks, but without in any way passing on managerial
control. "Sprinting" is a way of keeping recurrent costs low but being
able to respond to specific orders for timber. Sprinting is useful to
companies which do not positively market Guyana's wonderful timbers.
"Sprinting" in Timber Sales Agreements is covered by Condition 14 -
"The grantee [that is, the holder of the TSA concession] shall inform
the Grantor [the Guyana Forestry Commission] in writing immediately
upon engagement of the names of the agents and contractors who are and
the dates when they cease, to carry out its operations in the Area."
Mr S K Chan of DTL has already clarified that the arrangement between
DTL and Bai Shan Lin is not simply the provision of labour ("Demerara
Timbers only deals with logs harvested by itself in its licensed
areas", SN 07.08.26) but is a Technical Assistance Management
Agreement. As DTL staff have informed Guyanese citizens at Mabura Hill
(allegedly) that some of them are likely to be replaced by Chinese
workers, and that Bai Shan Lin would not continue to subsidize
community services like the Mabura Primary School, and as the new road
sign at Mabura Hill (observed and photographed in early August 2007)
indicates a dominant role for Bai Shan Lin, it was reasonable for a
concerned citizen to question through the columns of Stabroek News if
proper procedure had been followed.
The draft Forest Bill 2007 provides in Section 16 (1) b, c and d for a
variety of kinds of controlling interests in the management of a forest
concession, and the final sentence in Section 16 (1) notes that
transfer covers any form of disposition. That is, not just changes in
name or in share ownership. This sub-section spells out in more detail
and more obscure language what is now contained in the current law.
Over the last year or so I have called in letters and articles in the
press for more attention to the national and PPP policies favouring
added value in relation to forest products. So I am all in favour of
more in-country added value at the Mabura Hill mill and in secondary
mills to which DTL and its associated businesses may sell logs and
lumber.
I am aware of financial assistance given by Guyana to Bai Shan Lin, and
we have some indication from the Hong Kong stock exchange of proposals
for investment in Guyana by Bai Shan Lin. Like the Minister for
Forestry, I am anxious to see these proposals being converted into new
jobs and new skills for Guyanese and more revenue retained in Guyana
from such operations. My calls are not for bringing down Asian
companies but for them to be subject to the same obligations as
Guyanese companies, including full attention to the laws and
regulations.
Four Asian loggers in Guyana legally hold at least 2,746,168 ha or 56
percent of 4.9 million ha allocated under large-scale concessions.
Through their illegal renting of concessions, those four Asian loggers
control at least an additional 524,000 ha, and will no doubt soon have
their other pending State Forest Exploratory Permits (SFEPs) upgraded
to long-term concessions. As a consequence of legal and illegal
holdings, Asian loggers now control the overwhelming majority of the
long-term large-scale forestry concessions. Why should this be a matter
of concern to our Government, and all its citizens?
1. Over 50 percent of allocated State Production Forests are under the
control of four Asian companies under long-term concessions, in spite
of violations of the terms of their FDI awards and non-compliance with
forest law and policy.
2. As far as can be ascertained, only one long-term concession has been
rescinded since 1985. This means that the Asian loggers are secure in
their long-term possession of the best-stocked commercial timber
forests of Guyana.
3. Asian loggers export the best commercial hardwoods suitable for fine
flooring and furniture in log form, and at low declared FOB prices for
comparable species in the international trade.
4. Asian loggers import foreign workers while the rate of unemployment
in Guyana is high and have a poor record of training Guyanese forest
workers. Asian loggers pay Guyanese workers less than the foreign
workers.
Ms Karan is only the most recent letter writer who attacks the
messenger instead of the message. In this climate of mud-slinging and
personal invective, it is little wonder that there are few Guyanese who
will publicly challenge violations of law and policy."
Wood products sector saw 63 investments in 18 months -Go-Invest
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527780
Wood products sector saw 63 investments in 18 months -Go-Invest
Stabroek News
Wednesday, August 29th 2007
Wood products sector saw 63 investments in 18 months -Go-Invest
Stabroek News
Wednesday, August 29th 2007
Go-Invest CEO Geoffrey Da Silva says from January 2006 to June 2007,
Go-Invest, the Guyana Forestry Commission and the Forest Products
Marketing Council have promoted and facilitated 63 investment projects
in the wood products sector with 32 coming from local investors.
DaSilva also noted that 'downstream production' is increasing to new
markets and he disclosed that most of the new foreign direct
investments (FDI) and joint venture (JV) projects are, or will be,
manufacturing finished products such as shingles, flooring, mouldings,
decking and dimensional kiln-dried lumber for new markets in North
America and China. He observed too that manufacturers have also been
making use of the lesser used species.
63 private sector projects
In a statement the Go-Invest CEO said the agency has had a very good
year and a half with 63 private sector investment projects coming from
24 foreign direct investments, 7 joint ventures with foreign investors
and 32 local investors.
The statement added that full details on the 63 projects, including the
names and investments of the companies, will be published shortly.
He puts the total investment at $16.1B or US$80.7M, adding that a total
of 1,740 new jobs were directly created.
Da Silva also disclosed that the foreign exchange earnings for 2005 was
US$48M and in 2006 it jumped to US$62M while for this year US$74M is
projected.
Highlighting (FDI) Foreign Direct Private Sector Investment which drew
24 foreign investors and JVI (Joint Venture Private Sector Investment)
with 7 Guyanese together with foreign investors, the Go-Invest CEO said
that amounted to US$72.6M - that is 90% of the total US$80.7M that was
invested in the sector.
Moreover, he said, 1,191 new direct jobs were created.
According to Da Silva, the 31 foreign direct and joint venture (FDI and
JV) private sector investments, including 10 overseas-based Guyanese,
came from the United States (6), Holland (2), Canada (4), Malaysia (4),
China (5), Trinidad and Tobago (2), Brazil (1) the United Kingdom (3),
Denmark (1), Cayenne (1), Venezuela (1) and Germany (1).
The six investments from the US, he stated, are a carbon credits and
reforestation project; a forest conservation project; two small
sawmills with overseas-based Guyanese; another small sawmill with an
American investor; and a joint venture shingles factory.
Local investors
DaSilva said further that 32 local investors invested $1.6B or US$8.1M
and created 549 new direct jobs. Of equal importance, he observed,
these 32 domestic investors are manufacturing finished products,
increasingly from the lesser used species, for the Guyanese and export
markets - doors, outdoor furniture, flooring, dressed and kiln-dried
lumber, office furniture, shingles, pre-fabricated wooden homes,
spacers, bedroom furniture, nibbi furniture, crane mats, joinery lumber
and mouldings.
Meanwhile, a very exciting new trend in this sector is the
establishment of offices in Guyana by five internationally-renowned
companies that are buying downstream tropical hardwood products,
including the lesser used species, from Guyanese companies. They are
McCorry Limited (from Malaysia/United Kingdom), DLH Nordisk (from
Denmark), KM Trading (from Venezuela), ATC (from Holland) and Totem
Forest Products (from the United States).
New projects at 37%
Forty of the projects are expansions/re-investments and the other 23
(37%) are new investments. This is better than the international
average, Da Silva added, where usually 20% of the total annual number
of investment projects are new. Forty-seven (75%) of the private sector
investments are at present in operation, and 14 are in the
"pipeline"/pre-operation phase, while 2 small projects have stopped
their operations.
Fiscal concessions
According to the Go-Invest CEO, 18 local companies, 11 FDI (Foreign
Direct Investment) and 2 JV (Joint Venture) companies applied for and
were granted through Investment Agreements (IAs) significant fiscal
concessions (waivers of Customs Duty, Value Added Tax and Excise Tax on
equipment, machinery and vehicles) amounting to hundreds of millions of
Guyana dollars.
The Investment Agreements (IAs) for another 9 companies are being
processed, while 23 companies did not apply for fiscal concessions
because they were seeking land or they are buyer companies.
In terms of size, 7 are large projects (11%), 21 are medium (33%), 34
are small (54%) and 1 is micro.
And looking at their geographic locations, 24 are in Region Ten (38%),
21 are in Region Four (33%), 3 are in Region Three, 3 are in Region
Nine, 2 are in Region One, 2 are in Region Two, 1 is in Region Six, 1
is in Region Five and 1 in Region Seven while 5 companies are operating
in more than one region.
Wednesday, August 29, 2007
Barama upgrading Buck Hall - operations to double capacity
Barama upgrading Buck Hall - operations to double capacity
Kaieteur News, 29 August 2007
Barama Company Limited is currently recruiting employees to complement
its 600 staffers at Buck Hall in the Essequibo River .
Chief Executive Officer Girwar Lalaram stated that the reason behind
the current recruitment drive is based on the fact that Barama has
installed two more sawmills at the facility.
He added that the company has also installed a veneer plant at the Buck
Hall facility in the company's bid to upscale operations into a
complete wood processing complex.
Lalaram said that among the reason for the installation of the sawmill
at Buck Hall was the cost effective nature of the plan.
He said that previously the company had to bring material from the
Northwest District to the plywood plant which proved to be most
expensive and will be significantly alleviated by the installation of
the mills.
Lalaram added that another of the factors that influenced the decision
was the prior plague of high staff turnover.
He noted that with the larger accommodation in place to house the 1200
expected workers by year end, it could prove to be a positive factor
towards employees staying at the firm.
In light of the growing concerns about safety in the workplace, Lalaram
emphasised that Barama Company Limited surpassed the requirements
stipulated in the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
He noted that the company was striving for international standards
having already been recognised as having the highest level of forest
management in Guyana .
Kaieteur News, 29 August 2007
Barama Company Limited is currently recruiting employees to complement
its 600 staffers at Buck Hall in the Essequibo River .
Chief Executive Officer Girwar Lalaram stated that the reason behind
the current recruitment drive is based on the fact that Barama has
installed two more sawmills at the facility.
He added that the company has also installed a veneer plant at the Buck
Hall facility in the company's bid to upscale operations into a
complete wood processing complex.
Lalaram said that among the reason for the installation of the sawmill
at Buck Hall was the cost effective nature of the plan.
He said that previously the company had to bring material from the
Northwest District to the plywood plant which proved to be most
expensive and will be significantly alleviated by the installation of
the mills.
Lalaram added that another of the factors that influenced the decision
was the prior plague of high staff turnover.
He noted that with the larger accommodation in place to house the 1200
expected workers by year end, it could prove to be a positive factor
towards employees staying at the firm.
In light of the growing concerns about safety in the workplace, Lalaram
emphasised that Barama Company Limited surpassed the requirements
stipulated in the Occupational Health and Safety Act.
He noted that the company was striving for international standards
having already been recognised as having the highest level of forest
management in Guyana .
The government has consulted many stakeholders in drafting the forests bill
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527805
The government has consulted many stakeholders in drafting the forests
bill
Stabroek News
Wednesday, August 29th 2007
The government has consulted many stakeholders in drafting the forests
bill
Stabroek News
Wednesday, August 29th 2007
Dear Editor,
The Guyana Forestry Commission has had it new act passed in Parliament
and the revised forests bill is to be hopefully debated in Parliament
in October 2007.
This is another in a series of positive initiatives that the GFC and
the government have implemented recently.
When one looks at other tropical forest producing countries, Guyana
ranks very highly as shown by independent consultancies of ITTO and the
Environmental Sustainability Index.
A recent study done by Conservational International and published in
the public library of Science Biology Journal, lists Guyana as one of
11 countries that have avoided widespread destruction of their tropical
forests, but are still at risk of being left out of the emerging carbon
market, because the Kyoto Protocol and upcoming negotiations on carbon
trading failed to include intact standing forest.
And this is the crux of the issue. Janet Bulkan and her other
colleagues, if they are true patriots, should be addressing unbalanced
and inconsistent positions such as the reluctance of the international
community to pay carbon credits for these well managed and conserved
forests; they should be promoting all of the good things that Guyana
has done to encourage responsible forestry utilization such as the
development of codes of practice, guidelines for the preparation of
forest management plans, annual operational plans, inventory
methodology guidelines, the log tagging and log tracking system etc.
Rather than focusing on the negatives, the Bulkan contingent needs to
be more aggressive in publicizing the good things being done. It is
true that the GFC and the government needs to do more, but let us be
realistic, everything cannot be done overnight. Policies in the
forestry sector must be developed in a consultative mode, and this
takes time to get the opinions of all stakeholders. And this again is
the crux of the matter with the forest legislation.
Bulkan writes that the 2004 bill has been altered to arrive at the
revised 2007 bill that has been submitted to Parliament.
Let us look at the process that should be followed. Stakeholders are
consulted and give their views. These views would vary depending on the
particular interest group. The government, which is responsible for
formulating the policy then takes all of the stakeholders' views on
board and comes up with a position that best addresses all
stakeholders' concerns.
Janet Bulkan wants to give the impression that she and her group have
the best vision for Guyana in terms of the forest sector. She quotes
from some international documents that suit her arguments; however,
there exists other equally accepted international documentation that
goes contrary to her mode of thought. Bulkan here is however acting
like a spoilt child; it is either her way or no other way. Wake up
Janet, this is what democracy is all about, the consideration of all
relevant points of view to arrive at a document that is satisfactory to
all. In this case, we have a government that took on board the comments
of all stakeholders in the 2004 draft. This draft then went through a
process of final legislative drafting at the Attorney General's office
to ensure that it did not conflict with any other existing legislation.
What Janet Bulkan should also note is that this final 2007 revision was
also reviewed by the World Bank which recommended that some clauses
should be amended to include a higher degree of public participation;
these recommendations were accepted by this democratic government.
I join with the government and the Guyana Forestry Commission in asking
all parliamentarians to support this revised forests bill. As a primary
stakeholder, I recognize that the revised forests bill places
additional requirements on us, but also recognize that it is the only
forward in this challenging and environmentally conscious sector.
Also, I want to inform all stakeholders, especially Ms Bulkan that the
information on the process followed was obtained from the GFC itself. I
had absolutely no difficulty in getting access to it.
Yours faithfully,
Amanda Joseph
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Loggers, miners abusing Amerindian labourers • names will be published says Minister Rodrigues
Loggers, miners abusing Amerindian labourers
• names will be published says Minister Rodrigues
Kaieteur News, 28 August 2007
By Leonard Gildarie
Government has received well in excess of 100 complaints over the past
year from Amerindian men about labour abuses in the logging and mining
industries.
This is in stark contrast to the perception that only Amerindian girls
were being abused, as far as hinterland residents are concerned. The
labour abuses of the men are far more than the women.
Promising stern action against some timber concession owners and errant
miners, Minister of Amerindian Affairs, Carolyn Rodrigues, yesterday
said that unscrupulous businesses are mainly targeting the Amerindians
from the Region One area (Barima/Waini). The majority of complaints
concern payment of wages and salaries.
In some cases, the Ministry was forced to shell out travel money for
Amerindians who were left stuck - unable to travel back to their
communities because they were broke.
In an exclusive interview with this newspaper, Rodrigues threatened to
start going public with names of the interior businesses that refuse to
pay their employees. However, it was noted that efforts by the ministry
are hampered by the fact that many of the Amerindians from Guyana's
far-flung communities, desperate to secure their jobs, would enter into
private arrangements where more than likely there are no labour
agreements and no National Insurance Scheme (NIS) contributions being
made. There are some cases where in accidents, the Amerindians were
abandoned after injuring themselves.
Although the Ministry does not have hard figures, and with the
assumption that only a fraction of the abuses fall under the radar of
Government's eye, the abuse is not confined to the logging companies or
miners.
In one case, even a lawyer was allegedly involved in the abuse of
Amerindians. In other cases, Amerindians were brought down and promised
all kinds of benefits to work on farms along the highway. However, the
reality quickly steps in and after not receiving their pay, the men
would contact the ministry for help.
“I think that people know now that we (the ministry) are here to assist
them (the Amerindians).”
Amerindians, because of their intense knowledge of the forest, are
preferred to others when it comes to working in the logging industry.
Some of the excuses being used by the miners are that they were not
paid for the gold produce so they are unable to pay the Amerindian
worker. In one instance, several Amerindian men were hired by a large
timber company (name given) from Region One to work in Region 10.
However, on arriving at the work site, the Amerindians found that there
was no work for them.
With no money in their pockets, the men came seeking help at the
ministry. The same ploy is used by loggers when time comes to pay the
workers. Either the wood has not been sold or money is not there. In
one instance, one of the loggers, after hiring an Amerindian to cut
logs, refused to pay because the man refused to transport the log from
the concession area.
“I understand that in the majority of these cases, the men
(Amerindians) are more than concerned about securing their jobs. But
perhaps a little investigation in the businesses hiring them will go a
long way in minimizing these incidents. Be vigilant. Be less trustful,
more suspicious,” the minister urged.
Another issue is that in many cases, it is hard to track down the
errant loggers or miners. The names given by abused workers are
sometimes only one name and in many instances the businessman would
simply not answer his phone.
On a positive note, more and more Amerindians are taking the initiative
and getting into the business of logging themselves, especially in
areas like Santa Cruz and Karau where the communities are involved in
logging. With a micro-project for a $100,000 credit programme in place
for Amerindians, the minister expressed confidence that things are
improving because attention is being paid to the concerns of
Amerindians.
According to the minister, she has had several meetings with officials
of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission and Guyana Forestry
Commission, the bodies in charge of mining and forestry respectively,
to examine the possibilities to reworking the current regulations. In
explaining, she pointed out that for the miners and logging companies
to feel pressure, it may be better if it is understood from the
inception, when a concession for land is issued, that proper labour
practice is a condition. Perhaps the introduction of a much-needed Code
of Ethics may be the answer, she noted.
The import of this argument by the minister is mirrored in the recent
announcement that Bai Shan Lin, a Chinese logging company, is about to
take over the operations of Demerara Timbers Limited. Bai Shan Lin is
facing allegations of illegal labour practices.
• names will be published says Minister Rodrigues
Kaieteur News, 28 August 2007
By Leonard Gildarie
Government has received well in excess of 100 complaints over the past
year from Amerindian men about labour abuses in the logging and mining
industries.
This is in stark contrast to the perception that only Amerindian girls
were being abused, as far as hinterland residents are concerned. The
labour abuses of the men are far more than the women.
Promising stern action against some timber concession owners and errant
miners, Minister of Amerindian Affairs, Carolyn Rodrigues, yesterday
said that unscrupulous businesses are mainly targeting the Amerindians
from the Region One area (Barima/Waini). The majority of complaints
concern payment of wages and salaries.
In some cases, the Ministry was forced to shell out travel money for
Amerindians who were left stuck - unable to travel back to their
communities because they were broke.
In an exclusive interview with this newspaper, Rodrigues threatened to
start going public with names of the interior businesses that refuse to
pay their employees. However, it was noted that efforts by the ministry
are hampered by the fact that many of the Amerindians from Guyana's
far-flung communities, desperate to secure their jobs, would enter into
private arrangements where more than likely there are no labour
agreements and no National Insurance Scheme (NIS) contributions being
made. There are some cases where in accidents, the Amerindians were
abandoned after injuring themselves.
Although the Ministry does not have hard figures, and with the
assumption that only a fraction of the abuses fall under the radar of
Government's eye, the abuse is not confined to the logging companies or
miners.
In one case, even a lawyer was allegedly involved in the abuse of
Amerindians. In other cases, Amerindians were brought down and promised
all kinds of benefits to work on farms along the highway. However, the
reality quickly steps in and after not receiving their pay, the men
would contact the ministry for help.
“I think that people know now that we (the ministry) are here to assist
them (the Amerindians).”
Amerindians, because of their intense knowledge of the forest, are
preferred to others when it comes to working in the logging industry.
Some of the excuses being used by the miners are that they were not
paid for the gold produce so they are unable to pay the Amerindian
worker. In one instance, several Amerindian men were hired by a large
timber company (name given) from Region One to work in Region 10.
However, on arriving at the work site, the Amerindians found that there
was no work for them.
With no money in their pockets, the men came seeking help at the
ministry. The same ploy is used by loggers when time comes to pay the
workers. Either the wood has not been sold or money is not there. In
one instance, one of the loggers, after hiring an Amerindian to cut
logs, refused to pay because the man refused to transport the log from
the concession area.
“I understand that in the majority of these cases, the men
(Amerindians) are more than concerned about securing their jobs. But
perhaps a little investigation in the businesses hiring them will go a
long way in minimizing these incidents. Be vigilant. Be less trustful,
more suspicious,” the minister urged.
Another issue is that in many cases, it is hard to track down the
errant loggers or miners. The names given by abused workers are
sometimes only one name and in many instances the businessman would
simply not answer his phone.
On a positive note, more and more Amerindians are taking the initiative
and getting into the business of logging themselves, especially in
areas like Santa Cruz and Karau where the communities are involved in
logging. With a micro-project for a $100,000 credit programme in place
for Amerindians, the minister expressed confidence that things are
improving because attention is being paid to the concerns of
Amerindians.
According to the minister, she has had several meetings with officials
of the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission and Guyana Forestry
Commission, the bodies in charge of mining and forestry respectively,
to examine the possibilities to reworking the current regulations. In
explaining, she pointed out that for the miners and logging companies
to feel pressure, it may be better if it is understood from the
inception, when a concession for land is issued, that proper labour
practice is a condition. Perhaps the introduction of a much-needed Code
of Ethics may be the answer, she noted.
The import of this argument by the minister is mirrored in the recent
announcement that Bai Shan Lin, a Chinese logging company, is about to
take over the operations of Demerara Timbers Limited. Bai Shan Lin is
facing allegations of illegal labour practices.
Labour Ministry will be more vigilant on enforcement
After Region 10 tour…
Labour Ministry will be more vigilant on enforcement
Guyana Chronicle, 28 August 2007
MINISTER of Labour, Mr. Manzoor Nadir has warned that his Ministry will
be more vigilant in the enforcement of laws, including those dealing
with occupational health and safety (OHS).
A release said he issued the warning after he and a high-powered team
of officials from his Ministry paid a one-day visit to Region 10 (Upper
Demerara/Berbice).
According to the release, Nadir said, for 2007, inspections of
workplaces have increased many times and has resulted in greater
compliance by workers.
The release said the ministerial party visited several businesses and
found the need for more awareness, among employers, of the labour laws.
The statement said, at one supermarket, the officials detected at least
three violations, including not granting enough time (one and a quarter
hours) for the lunch break; not providing at least one seat for every
three employees and lack of knowledge of the minimum wage for shop
workers.
They also discovered that workplaces had staff lifting heavy objects on
uneven floors while there was no OHS overseeing committee as stipulated
in the related legislation and one employer had a number of foreigners
whose work permits had expired.
The release said improvements in working conditions were noted at the
operations of Bai Shan Lin but there was one instance of a difference
in pay between male and female workers.
As a consequence of their findings, Minister Nadir promised that,
within six weeks, an awareness workshop would be organised for
employers and employees.
He said it is also clear that the Labour and Occupational Health
Officers must be better trained and be more thorough with their
inspections.
The release said Nadir exhorted employers to sign on to the HIV/AIDS
prevention campaign and be involved in greater collaboration on it.
Labour Ministry will be more vigilant on enforcement
Guyana Chronicle, 28 August 2007
MINISTER of Labour, Mr. Manzoor Nadir has warned that his Ministry will
be more vigilant in the enforcement of laws, including those dealing
with occupational health and safety (OHS).
A release said he issued the warning after he and a high-powered team
of officials from his Ministry paid a one-day visit to Region 10 (Upper
Demerara/Berbice).
According to the release, Nadir said, for 2007, inspections of
workplaces have increased many times and has resulted in greater
compliance by workers.
The release said the ministerial party visited several businesses and
found the need for more awareness, among employers, of the labour laws.
The statement said, at one supermarket, the officials detected at least
three violations, including not granting enough time (one and a quarter
hours) for the lunch break; not providing at least one seat for every
three employees and lack of knowledge of the minimum wage for shop
workers.
They also discovered that workplaces had staff lifting heavy objects on
uneven floors while there was no OHS overseeing committee as stipulated
in the related legislation and one employer had a number of foreigners
whose work permits had expired.
The release said improvements in working conditions were noted at the
operations of Bai Shan Lin but there was one instance of a difference
in pay between male and female workers.
As a consequence of their findings, Minister Nadir promised that,
within six weeks, an awareness workshop would be organised for
employers and employees.
He said it is also clear that the Labour and Occupational Health
Officers must be better trained and be more thorough with their
inspections.
The release said Nadir exhorted employers to sign on to the HIV/AIDS
prevention campaign and be involved in greater collaboration on it.
Transfer of assets between forest companies must meet approvals -Jagdeo
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527724
Transfer of assets between forest companies must meet approvals -Jagdeo
Stabroek News,
Tuesday, August 28th 2007
Transfer of assets between forest companies must meet approvals -Jagdeo
Stabroek News,
Tuesday, August 28th 2007
President Bharrat Jagdeo says that the transfer of any assets of
Demerara Timbers Limited (DTL) to Chinese forest company Bai Shan Lin
has to meet strict due diligence before garnering approval and this he
made clear to the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC).
"I made it clear that the GFC [must] be involved…this is not an
automatic process," he said yesterday at a press conference at the
Office of the President. He added that the GFC would have to establish
the track record of the companies and do the necessary due diligence
before deciding on anything final. He said that the issue was discussed
in Cabinet.
Forest researcher Janette Bulkan stated in a letter that a transfer of
ownership of a forest harvesting concession requires government
approval (Timber Sales Agreement, condition 13). She had asked in her
letter when and under what conditions did the Board of Directors of the
Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) agree to this transfer.
She also stated that the President, as Minister of Forestry, must give
prior approval to such transfer (Forest Regulations 1953, Clause 12).
According to Bulkan, the implication of the National Forest Policy 1997
(Part III A 4 and Part IV B 3) and of the National Forest Plan 2001
(Section NFP 320) is that concessions which cannot be operated by the
licensees should be rescinded by the GFC (Forest (Miscellaneous
Provisions Act, 1982, Clause 11) and either placed in a strategic
reserve of unallocated forest or advertised publicly for new bidding.
She said too that under the Exploratory Permits amendment to the
Forests Act in 1997, such advertisement should call for the offering of
a price premium for the right to have exclusive access to the forest
timber resources within the concession boundary.
According to President Jagdeo, he didn't think the Government still
owned shares in DTL, but he said that he needed to check on this. He
said that in the past the company was sold without any public tender
and people involved were paid monies improperly.
In a statement recently, DTL CEO S.K. Chan said that DTL was in "full
control of the company" and that the two entities have entered into a
management partnership that will add processing equipment to its
existing mills at Mabura to produce a wider range of value added timber
products.
Recently Bai Shan Lin was banned from making log exports because it
failed to live up to investment timelines as outlined in its agreement
with the Government. Further, the company was also recently found
non-compliant with basic safety and labour laws and regulations on a
recent visit to its Coomacka operations.
Monday, August 27, 2007
The crux of the matter
The crux of the matter
Kaieteur News, 26 August 2007
Dear Editor,
In her letter printed in Kaieteur News, August 23, 2007, Ms Samantha
Griffith charges that ‘petitioners have their own devious and
clandestine agenda' in drawing attention of the National Assembly to
the unilateral replacement of the draft Forests Act 2004 with the
Forest Bill 2007, without explanation and with scant justification for
the deliberate removal of some, and insertion of new clauses, which,
taken together, weaken the Draft Forests Act 2004.
The Commissioner of Forests, Mr James Singh, has stated with regard to
the draft Forests Act that, “The real consultation period only ended in
2004” (‘The figure quoted as being earned by the country from forestry
investors does not take into account the employment provided and other
important spinoff activities', (Letter to the Editor, SN, November 17,
2006).
This is the crux of the matter – the substitution of a Forest Bill 2007
in place of the earlier drafts on which stakeholders were consulted.
Neither the 2004 nor the 2007 versions conform to best international
practice, which has advanced as greater understanding of forest
criminality has developed (an excellent guide was recently published in
the Law, Justice, and Development Series of the World Bank/FAO, titled
Forest Law and Sustainable Development: addressing contemporary
challenges through legal reform, by Lawrence Christy, Charles E. Di
Leva, Jonathan Lindsay, and Patrice Talla Takoukam).
Petitioners, including me, support legislative reform, but that should
conform to best international practice as regards a fully participatory
process and contents which use the simplest possible language and are
precise, transparent, equitable and reduce administrative discretion to
a minimum; administrative discretion being one of the key features
indicated by the World Bank and Transparency International as being
associated with government corruption and regulatory capture.
As much of the 2007 draft of the Forest Bill does not have these
characteristics, and so would not be conducive to implementation of
Article 36 of the National Constitution or of the National Forest
Policy 1997, or the National Forest Plan 2001, sending it back to the
participatory drawing board is in the best interests of Guyana.
Kaieteur News, 26 August 2007
Dear Editor,
In her letter printed in Kaieteur News, August 23, 2007, Ms Samantha
Griffith charges that ‘petitioners have their own devious and
clandestine agenda' in drawing attention of the National Assembly to
the unilateral replacement of the draft Forests Act 2004 with the
Forest Bill 2007, without explanation and with scant justification for
the deliberate removal of some, and insertion of new clauses, which,
taken together, weaken the Draft Forests Act 2004.
The Commissioner of Forests, Mr James Singh, has stated with regard to
the draft Forests Act that, “The real consultation period only ended in
2004” (‘The figure quoted as being earned by the country from forestry
investors does not take into account the employment provided and other
important spinoff activities', (Letter to the Editor, SN, November 17,
2006).
This is the crux of the matter – the substitution of a Forest Bill 2007
in place of the earlier drafts on which stakeholders were consulted.
Neither the 2004 nor the 2007 versions conform to best international
practice, which has advanced as greater understanding of forest
criminality has developed (an excellent guide was recently published in
the Law, Justice, and Development Series of the World Bank/FAO, titled
Forest Law and Sustainable Development: addressing contemporary
challenges through legal reform, by Lawrence Christy, Charles E. Di
Leva, Jonathan Lindsay, and Patrice Talla Takoukam).
Petitioners, including me, support legislative reform, but that should
conform to best international practice as regards a fully participatory
process and contents which use the simplest possible language and are
precise, transparent, equitable and reduce administrative discretion to
a minimum; administrative discretion being one of the key features
indicated by the World Bank and Transparency International as being
associated with government corruption and regulatory capture.
As much of the 2007 draft of the Forest Bill does not have these
characteristics, and so would not be conducive to implementation of
Article 36 of the National Constitution or of the National Forest
Policy 1997, or the National Forest Plan 2001, sending it back to the
participatory drawing board is in the best interests of Guyana.
Janette Bulkan
There have been many instances of glaring corruption in which nothing has been done
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527618
There have been many instances of glaring corruption in which nothing
has been done
Stabroek News, Sunday, August 26th 2007
Dear Editor,
It is the perception of many that corruption in Guyana in its various
forms is a major problem of governance. Stella Ramsaroop who writes a
column for Kaieteur News referred to corruption as Guyana's primary
enemy. I would add racial politics with corruption. This perception of
corruption is the cause for the low ranking Guyana received from
Transparency International on the Corruption Perception Index.
Apparently this low ranking and its inherent criticism of governance in
Guyana, like most criticisms of Jadgeo's administration, have incensed
the President, so as usual he lashed out at his critics. The focus of
the President's "cussing out" this time is Transparency International.
According to a release by the Government Information Agency (GINA),
Jagdeo was quoted as telling media operatives after a visit to Guyana
by the President of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), Luis
Alberto Moreno that, "I don't have a problem with those factual,
specific types of protests and investigations because, if there is a
case of corruption and it is made known, it could be investigated and
the results made known to the public. My problem though is when people
come in (to Guyana) and make blanket statements and have a corruption
perception index. If I were to manage this country on perception,
people would say it is bad governance."
Perhaps if President Jagdeo were to manage the country on perception he
would indeed do a better job since it means that he would be listening
to the people of Guyana who employ him and deal decisively with this
issue. In most democracies politicians pay close attention to
perception. Opinion polls are based on people's perception of
governance. Of course opinion polls are not part of Guyana's political
system.
However, it may be prudent to remind President Jagdeo of factual
specific cases of corruption in which either no serious investigations
were commenced or no one was held accountable. Accountability relating
to corruption does not mean dismissal or resignation, only to be hired
again in another capacity at another government entity. In countries
serious about fighting corruption the perpetrators are made an example
of, and as such are send to jail. The cases I will refer to will have
no chronological order but pertain to the PPP's government since 1992.
1) The well known multi-million dollar milk scam, where low grade
vegetable milk was supplied to the Social Impact Amelioration Programme
(SIMAP) in place of cream milk by Hanson Import/Export, then chaired by
PPP parliamentarian, Dr Hughley Hanoman. A low level officer was
dismissed and Dr Hanoman resigned from parliament, end of case. No
charges were brought and no one went to jail.
2) The multi million dollar stone importation scam relating to the
Essequibo Road Project in the Ministry of Public Works. This was
investigated after it was made public but no charges were brought and
again no one went to jail.
3) The 50 million wildlife fraud involving an advisor to the President.
The Government blamed Bal Persaud, head of the Environmen-tal
Protection Agency who publicly refuted the charges. Again no one went
to jail. Nothing else was ever heard about the case.
4) Old age Pension Fraud; this was financial fraud alleged to have been
perpetrated by staffers of the Ministry of Labour, Human Services and
Social Security and officers in the Guyana Post Office Corporation.
Some officers were dismissed after an investigation No charges were
brought and no one went to jail.
These are well known cases of corruption.
There are also many other cases of fraud in the construction industry.
It is well known that most of the companies which are awarded contracts
have close ties to the PPP government. Many of these contracts produced
extremely shabby work. Billions of dollars are spent on infrastructural
work in Guyana from billions borrowed from international financial
institutions, which eventually have to be paid back by poor tax payers.
The rich in Guyana do not pay their share of taxes. The cases of fraud
and corruption in the construction industry include
A koker collapsed on the upper east coast, one month after it was
built. No one was prosecuted;
A new multi-million dollar wharf at Charity sank less than a year after
it was built, no one went to jail;
A multi-million dollar sea defence at Mon Repos was breached months
after it was built;
The bridge at Mandela Avenue collapsed one month after it was built, no
one was prosecuted.
The village road that was asphalted on First Street, Gove, ECD broke up
into potholes, within months after it was built, no one was prosecuted.
These are only a few cases of corruption in the construction industry.
This sector is prime for corruption because of the billions of dollars
of contracts awarded for infrastructural work in a shroud of secrecy.
The opposition raised the question of unskilled workers being used as
skilled engineers by companies awarded contracts with budgets submitted
for salaries of professional engineers. The Jadgeo administration
dismissed the opposition without an investigation and adequate
explanation.
There was the US$222,500 contract to update the laws of Guyana, awarded
to the New York based company, New Global Consults Inc, which was not
advertised in Guyana because according to the Minister of Finance, Mr.
Kowlessar, he did not think anyone in Guyana could provide CDs. It
turned out, "one of the key persons in preparing the contract is not a
legal expert, and a sample copy from New Global was sent to only one
law student for a review. New Global is owned partially by one Mr.
Kawal Totaram, a well-known PPP campaigner.
Perception about corruption is not drawn out of thin air, it is usually
based on how citizen's perceive their government and society. The fact
is citizen opinion is a key source in the system of good governance.
Perception is obviously informed by what citizens senses reveal to
them. One only has to look at the standard of living of some government
ministers before they became ministers in 1992 and their standard of
living now.
People in Guyana have information and know what is taking place but are
afraid to speak.
President Jagdeo has to stop talking and get serious about fighting
corruption in government, he can begin with his cabinet, or else
perception will remain an important factor in judging his government.
Let me conclude by saying to Freddie Kissoon, history will look upon
you favourably for the relentless struggle you are waging to make
Guyana a better society. A struggle is not only forged with physical
action, it is also forged with intellect and willingness to educate the
masses.
Yours faithfully,
Denis Wiggins
There have been many instances of glaring corruption in which nothing
has been done
Stabroek News, Sunday, August 26th 2007
Dear Editor,
It is the perception of many that corruption in Guyana in its various
forms is a major problem of governance. Stella Ramsaroop who writes a
column for Kaieteur News referred to corruption as Guyana's primary
enemy. I would add racial politics with corruption. This perception of
corruption is the cause for the low ranking Guyana received from
Transparency International on the Corruption Perception Index.
Apparently this low ranking and its inherent criticism of governance in
Guyana, like most criticisms of Jadgeo's administration, have incensed
the President, so as usual he lashed out at his critics. The focus of
the President's "cussing out" this time is Transparency International.
According to a release by the Government Information Agency (GINA),
Jagdeo was quoted as telling media operatives after a visit to Guyana
by the President of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB), Luis
Alberto Moreno that, "I don't have a problem with those factual,
specific types of protests and investigations because, if there is a
case of corruption and it is made known, it could be investigated and
the results made known to the public. My problem though is when people
come in (to Guyana) and make blanket statements and have a corruption
perception index. If I were to manage this country on perception,
people would say it is bad governance."
Perhaps if President Jagdeo were to manage the country on perception he
would indeed do a better job since it means that he would be listening
to the people of Guyana who employ him and deal decisively with this
issue. In most democracies politicians pay close attention to
perception. Opinion polls are based on people's perception of
governance. Of course opinion polls are not part of Guyana's political
system.
However, it may be prudent to remind President Jagdeo of factual
specific cases of corruption in which either no serious investigations
were commenced or no one was held accountable. Accountability relating
to corruption does not mean dismissal or resignation, only to be hired
again in another capacity at another government entity. In countries
serious about fighting corruption the perpetrators are made an example
of, and as such are send to jail. The cases I will refer to will have
no chronological order but pertain to the PPP's government since 1992.
1) The well known multi-million dollar milk scam, where low grade
vegetable milk was supplied to the Social Impact Amelioration Programme
(SIMAP) in place of cream milk by Hanson Import/Export, then chaired by
PPP parliamentarian, Dr Hughley Hanoman. A low level officer was
dismissed and Dr Hanoman resigned from parliament, end of case. No
charges were brought and no one went to jail.
2) The multi million dollar stone importation scam relating to the
Essequibo Road Project in the Ministry of Public Works. This was
investigated after it was made public but no charges were brought and
again no one went to jail.
3) The 50 million wildlife fraud involving an advisor to the President.
The Government blamed Bal Persaud, head of the Environmen-tal
Protection Agency who publicly refuted the charges. Again no one went
to jail. Nothing else was ever heard about the case.
4) Old age Pension Fraud; this was financial fraud alleged to have been
perpetrated by staffers of the Ministry of Labour, Human Services and
Social Security and officers in the Guyana Post Office Corporation.
Some officers were dismissed after an investigation No charges were
brought and no one went to jail.
These are well known cases of corruption.
There are also many other cases of fraud in the construction industry.
It is well known that most of the companies which are awarded contracts
have close ties to the PPP government. Many of these contracts produced
extremely shabby work. Billions of dollars are spent on infrastructural
work in Guyana from billions borrowed from international financial
institutions, which eventually have to be paid back by poor tax payers.
The rich in Guyana do not pay their share of taxes. The cases of fraud
and corruption in the construction industry include
A koker collapsed on the upper east coast, one month after it was
built. No one was prosecuted;
A new multi-million dollar wharf at Charity sank less than a year after
it was built, no one went to jail;
A multi-million dollar sea defence at Mon Repos was breached months
after it was built;
The bridge at Mandela Avenue collapsed one month after it was built, no
one was prosecuted.
The village road that was asphalted on First Street, Gove, ECD broke up
into potholes, within months after it was built, no one was prosecuted.
These are only a few cases of corruption in the construction industry.
This sector is prime for corruption because of the billions of dollars
of contracts awarded for infrastructural work in a shroud of secrecy.
The opposition raised the question of unskilled workers being used as
skilled engineers by companies awarded contracts with budgets submitted
for salaries of professional engineers. The Jadgeo administration
dismissed the opposition without an investigation and adequate
explanation.
There was the US$222,500 contract to update the laws of Guyana, awarded
to the New York based company, New Global Consults Inc, which was not
advertised in Guyana because according to the Minister of Finance, Mr.
Kowlessar, he did not think anyone in Guyana could provide CDs. It
turned out, "one of the key persons in preparing the contract is not a
legal expert, and a sample copy from New Global was sent to only one
law student for a review. New Global is owned partially by one Mr.
Kawal Totaram, a well-known PPP campaigner.
Perception about corruption is not drawn out of thin air, it is usually
based on how citizen's perceive their government and society. The fact
is citizen opinion is a key source in the system of good governance.
Perception is obviously informed by what citizens senses reveal to
them. One only has to look at the standard of living of some government
ministers before they became ministers in 1992 and their standard of
living now.
People in Guyana have information and know what is taking place but are
afraid to speak.
President Jagdeo has to stop talking and get serious about fighting
corruption in government, he can begin with his cabinet, or else
perception will remain an important factor in judging his government.
Let me conclude by saying to Freddie Kissoon, history will look upon
you favourably for the relentless struggle you are waging to make
Guyana a better society. A struggle is not only forged with physical
action, it is also forged with intellect and willingness to educate the
masses.
Yours faithfully,
Denis Wiggins
The petition against the forest bill 2007 contains misleading statements
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527616
The petition against the forest bill 2007 contains misleading statements
Stabroek News, Sunday, August 26th 2007
Dear Editor,
I have been able to get access to a petition by some stakeholders,
under the caption "Appeal to the national assembly from Citizens of
Guyana."
I have also had the opportunity of accessing the Forests Bill 2007,
which is misrepresented by this group as an unsuitable bill.
Firstly there is a section "the special hazard of the current draft."
This section deals with general statements and absolutely nothing
specific and of substance. It is again an attempt to malign the
integrity of the government, and the reference to the level of
functional literacy of the forest dependent people in Guyana is most
insulting. It suggests that some citizens still have the erroneous
impression that our forest people are a bunch of illiterates, who must
be spoon fed.
The comment "We note the simplicity and clarity of the forests act
1953 in comparison with the convoluted and unclear wording in the
forest bill 2007" is really unacceptable. Surely these concerned
citizens must be aware that the 1953 act is completely inadequate to
address the tremendous developments that have occurred in the forest
sector over the past 50 years.
The petition has statements such as "unlike the 2004 draft, there are
few safeguards in the Forests Bill 2007 against a bureaucracy captured
by special interests."; "we must ensure that the bureaucracy does not
take to itself discretionary powers without public oversight." In that
same petition there is also the statement "the over 30 references to
the Minister in the draft forests act 2004 have been reduced to fewer
than 5, thereby eliminating even the nominal control by elected
Ministers." Isn't this rather contradictory?
The statement that the forests bill 2007 transfers and enlarges broad
powers to the Commission without criteria for their use is inaccurate.
The Forests Bill has to be taken in the context of the GFC Act. The GFC
Act clearly states in section 8 that the commission is responsible to
the Minister for the discharge of its functions.
The section dealing with "Amerindian customary rights in state
forests" gives the impression that the commission can grant a
concession on claimed Amerindian land. This is another attempt to
misguide the public. What the law clearly states is that a person may
in relation to state forest, exercise or perform any right, power,
duty, or privilege held by any Amerindian Commu-nity under custom
immediately before the commencement of this act if the right, duty,
power, privilege is exercised or performed sustainably in accordance
with the spiritual relationship of the group with the land. So rather
than preventing access to the land, the act allows for customary rights
to be continued.
The part of the petition dealing with private trading of public forest
assets is again misleading since the argument presented conveniently
avoids referencing to clause 16 on Transfer of state forest
authorization or change in effective control. This clause clearly
spells out that except with the prior written consent of the
Commission, no holder shall engage in anything that can result in
change of effective control of the holder, or transfer of any
concession.
On the issue of payment of money to the consolidated fund, the petition
seeks to misinform that only revenues coming from the small
concessions, or current state forest permissions will be paid into the
consolidated fund. The forest act actually states "a charge payable by
the holder of any state forest authorisation on forest produce take
under the authorization, shall be paid into the Consolidated fund. The
term authorisation includes all types of concessions, large and small.
Contrary to what the petition tries to portray to the general public,
the GFC has paid in substantial money to the Consolidated fund in
accordance with the necessary procedures.
It is hoped that these few comments would serve to provide the general
public with the real facts on the new legislation, which is sorely
needed to take the sector further along in the positive direction it is
going; and to expose the petitioners for what they are- persons who
seek to sensationalize, misinform, manipulate, and distort the real
facts to satisfy their narrow agendas.
Yours faithfully,
Paul Taylor
The petition against the forest bill 2007 contains misleading statements
Stabroek News, Sunday, August 26th 2007
Dear Editor,
I have been able to get access to a petition by some stakeholders,
under the caption "Appeal to the national assembly from Citizens of
Guyana."
I have also had the opportunity of accessing the Forests Bill 2007,
which is misrepresented by this group as an unsuitable bill.
Firstly there is a section "the special hazard of the current draft."
This section deals with general statements and absolutely nothing
specific and of substance. It is again an attempt to malign the
integrity of the government, and the reference to the level of
functional literacy of the forest dependent people in Guyana is most
insulting. It suggests that some citizens still have the erroneous
impression that our forest people are a bunch of illiterates, who must
be spoon fed.
The comment "We note the simplicity and clarity of the forests act
1953 in comparison with the convoluted and unclear wording in the
forest bill 2007" is really unacceptable. Surely these concerned
citizens must be aware that the 1953 act is completely inadequate to
address the tremendous developments that have occurred in the forest
sector over the past 50 years.
The petition has statements such as "unlike the 2004 draft, there are
few safeguards in the Forests Bill 2007 against a bureaucracy captured
by special interests."; "we must ensure that the bureaucracy does not
take to itself discretionary powers without public oversight." In that
same petition there is also the statement "the over 30 references to
the Minister in the draft forests act 2004 have been reduced to fewer
than 5, thereby eliminating even the nominal control by elected
Ministers." Isn't this rather contradictory?
The statement that the forests bill 2007 transfers and enlarges broad
powers to the Commission without criteria for their use is inaccurate.
The Forests Bill has to be taken in the context of the GFC Act. The GFC
Act clearly states in section 8 that the commission is responsible to
the Minister for the discharge of its functions.
The section dealing with "Amerindian customary rights in state
forests" gives the impression that the commission can grant a
concession on claimed Amerindian land. This is another attempt to
misguide the public. What the law clearly states is that a person may
in relation to state forest, exercise or perform any right, power,
duty, or privilege held by any Amerindian Commu-nity under custom
immediately before the commencement of this act if the right, duty,
power, privilege is exercised or performed sustainably in accordance
with the spiritual relationship of the group with the land. So rather
than preventing access to the land, the act allows for customary rights
to be continued.
The part of the petition dealing with private trading of public forest
assets is again misleading since the argument presented conveniently
avoids referencing to clause 16 on Transfer of state forest
authorization or change in effective control. This clause clearly
spells out that except with the prior written consent of the
Commission, no holder shall engage in anything that can result in
change of effective control of the holder, or transfer of any
concession.
On the issue of payment of money to the consolidated fund, the petition
seeks to misinform that only revenues coming from the small
concessions, or current state forest permissions will be paid into the
consolidated fund. The forest act actually states "a charge payable by
the holder of any state forest authorisation on forest produce take
under the authorization, shall be paid into the Consolidated fund. The
term authorisation includes all types of concessions, large and small.
Contrary to what the petition tries to portray to the general public,
the GFC has paid in substantial money to the Consolidated fund in
accordance with the necessary procedures.
It is hoped that these few comments would serve to provide the general
public with the real facts on the new legislation, which is sorely
needed to take the sector further along in the positive direction it is
going; and to expose the petitioners for what they are- persons who
seek to sensationalize, misinform, manipulate, and distort the real
facts to satisfy their narrow agendas.
Yours faithfully,
Paul Taylor
Demerara Timbers only deals with logs harvested by itself in its licensed areas
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527619
Demerara Timbers only deals with logs harvested by itself in its
licensed areas
Stabroek News
Sunday, August 26th 2007
Demerara Timbers only deals with logs harvested by itself in its
licensed areas
Stabroek News
Sunday, August 26th 2007
Dear Editor,
Demerara Timbers Limited (DTL) refers to the letter by Janette Bulkan
captioned "Was this sale by Demerara Timbers to Bai Shan Lin approved
by the Forestry Commission" (07.08.23) and thanks her for refreshing us
with the various Forestry Regulations.
In line with government policy of further downstream processing of
timber products, DTL has a Technical Assistance Management Agreement
with Bai Shan Lin to secure the market linkages in China so as to add
processing equipment to our existing mills at Mabura to produce a wider
range of value-added timber products.
DTL is in full control of the company hence the need to seek the said
approvals as mentioned in her letter do not arise.
The following practices of DTL are consistent with that of the industry:
* That DTL only deals with logs harvested by itself in its licensed
areas of operations under Forest Management Plan and Annual Operations
Plan as approved by the Guyana Forestry Commission.
* That DTL has a Union Agreement and its categories of workers are
unionized. Major changes if any as to the status of its workforce must
be addressed with the Union and the Ministry of Labour.
* Rich Resources Inc. (RRI) an associate company of DTL does have a
partnership agreement with a local concessionaire. To operate this
Agreement, the local partner has its own management staff and field
personnel to operate its own equipment fleet to harvest its production
portion. It also has a self-owned sawmill for processing into lumber.
Yours faithfully,
S K Chan
Chief Executive Officer
Demerara Timbers Limited
Saturday, August 25, 2007
On what targets are the GFC and Customs focusing?
http://www.kaieteurnewsgy.com/letters.htm
On what targets are the GFC and Customs focusing?
Kaieteur News, 25 August 2007
Dear Editor,
I note from your report by Leonard Gildarie: “Guyana robbed almost 80
per cent of timber royalties – source – Customs, loggers in cahoots
with sawmills” (Kaieteur News, 07.08.22) that the government seems to
be putting into practice part of the assurance given by Minister Robert
Persaud at his press conference on forestry on December 8 last year.
He promised, then, that exports would be checked 100 per cent.
Now you report that sawmills and lumber yards are being checked for
collusion with the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) staff.
After over five years of playing blind man's bluff, the GFC seems at
last to be implementing some of its own legislation and procedures. But
why is it focusing on the small actors?
The mills in Guyana , including Barama, exported only 45,000 cubic
metres (m3) of sawn lumber in 2006. Are the GFC and Customs
Administration also checking on the exports of unprocessed logs?
The Minister said that data would be published, and the Commissioner of
Forests then refused to release critical information on log shipments.
Now the Forest Products Marketing Council reports that the average
value of purpleheart logs exported in the first half of 2007, declared
to Customs, was US$146 per cubic metre. The same kind of timber is
being purchased in China at a CIF price of US$672 - US$712 per cubic
metre of log (merbau).
Deducting ocean freight and insurance of US$130 per cubic metre, the
FOB cost ex-Georgetown for purpleheart logs should be US$542 –US$582.
So something like US$400 per cubic metre is going astray.
Multiplied by the 191,000 cubic metres of log exports in 2006, that is
US$76.4 million. Are the GFC and Customs focusing on the right targets,
or just the soft targets?
Mahadeo Kowlessar
On what targets are the GFC and Customs focusing?
Kaieteur News, 25 August 2007
Dear Editor,
I note from your report by Leonard Gildarie: “Guyana robbed almost 80
per cent of timber royalties – source – Customs, loggers in cahoots
with sawmills” (Kaieteur News, 07.08.22) that the government seems to
be putting into practice part of the assurance given by Minister Robert
Persaud at his press conference on forestry on December 8 last year.
He promised, then, that exports would be checked 100 per cent.
Now you report that sawmills and lumber yards are being checked for
collusion with the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) staff.
After over five years of playing blind man's bluff, the GFC seems at
last to be implementing some of its own legislation and procedures. But
why is it focusing on the small actors?
The mills in Guyana , including Barama, exported only 45,000 cubic
metres (m3) of sawn lumber in 2006. Are the GFC and Customs
Administration also checking on the exports of unprocessed logs?
The Minister said that data would be published, and the Commissioner of
Forests then refused to release critical information on log shipments.
Now the Forest Products Marketing Council reports that the average
value of purpleheart logs exported in the first half of 2007, declared
to Customs, was US$146 per cubic metre. The same kind of timber is
being purchased in China at a CIF price of US$672 - US$712 per cubic
metre of log (merbau).
Deducting ocean freight and insurance of US$130 per cubic metre, the
FOB cost ex-Georgetown for purpleheart logs should be US$542 –US$582.
So something like US$400 per cubic metre is going astray.
Multiplied by the 191,000 cubic metres of log exports in 2006, that is
US$76.4 million. Are the GFC and Customs focusing on the right targets,
or just the soft targets?
Mahadeo Kowlessar
GCA postpones competitions -has management pact with Bai Shan Lin
http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56527510
GCA postpones competitions
-has management pact with Bai Shan Lin
Stabroek News, Saturday, August 25th 2007
GCA postpones competitions
-has management pact with Bai Shan Lin
Stabroek News, Saturday, August 25th 2007
Janette Bulkan
CEO of Demerara Timbers Limited (DTL) S. K. Chan says DTL is in full
control of the company and hence the need for approvals from the
Government and the Guyana Forestry Commission for a partnership with
Bai Shan Lin as outlined by activist Janette Bulkan does not arise.
Chan said in a letter to Stabroek News yesterday that in line with
Government's policy of further downstream processing of timber
products, the company has embarked on a technical assistance management
agreement with Bai Shan Lin "to secure the market linkages in China…"
It did not provide any further details on this agreement.
However, Earl Julien, Site Manager at Bai Shan Lin's Coomacka
operations in Region 10, had earlier told Stabroek News that his
company was in the process of "taking over the operations" at DTL's
Mabura location. This was backed up by Bai Shan Lin's Administrative
Manager Karen Canterbury, who said that the company would have been
providing the details.
In the letter, Chan said that the arrangement with the Chinese-owned
company will add processing equipment to its existing mills at Mabura
to produce a wider range of value added timber products.
He said too that DTL only deals in logs harvested by itself in its
licenced areas of operation under the Forest Management Plan and Annual
Operations Plan as approved by the Guyana Forestry Com-mission.
He said that DTL has a Union Agreement and its categories of workers
are unionized. He said that major changes if any as to the status of
its workforce must be addressed with the union and the Ministry of
Labour.
The statement said that Rich Resources Inc (RRI), an associate company
of DTL does have a partnership agreement with a local concessionaire.
To operate this agreement, the local partner has its own management
staff and field personnel to operate its own equipment fleet to harvest
its production timber.
The statement said too that RRI has a self-owned sawmill for processing
logs into lumber.
Recently Bai Shan Lin was banned from making log exports because it
failed to live up to investment timelines as outlined in its agreement
with the Government. The company was also recently found non-compliant
with basic safety and labour laws and regulations on a recent visit to
its Coomacka operations.
Writing in a letter to the Stabroek News on Thursday, Bulkan stated
that a transfer of ownership of a forest harvesting concession requires
government approval (Timber Sales Agreement, condition 13). She had
asked in her letter when and under what conditions did the Board of
Directors of the Guyana Forestry Commission (GFC) agree to this
transfer.
She also stated that the President, as Minister of Forestry, must give
prior approval to such transfer (Forest Regulations 1953, Clause 12).
According to Bulkan, the implication of the National Forest Policy 1997
(Part III A 4 and Part IV B 3) and of the National Forest Plan 2001
(Section NFP 320) is that concessions which cannot be operated by the
licencees should be rescinded by the GFC (Forest (Miscellaneous
Provisions Act, 1982, Clause 11) and either placed in a strategic
reserve of unallocated forest or advertised publicly for new bidding.
She said too that under the Exploratory Permits amendment to the
Forests Act in 1997, such advertisement should call for the offering of
a price premium for the right to have exclusive access to the forest
timber resources within the concession boundary.
She asked why this procedure was not used by the GFC and what the
details were of the compensatory premium which has been offered by Bai
Shan Lin to balance the cost saving of not having to compete for the
concession or concessions.
She asked, "Given that Bai Shan Lin has agreed not to export
unprocessed logs, what precautions are in place to prevent Bai Shan Lin
from selling logs to front companies for log exports such as Rong-An
Inc., Natural Wealth Development Inc., Demerara Timber Resources Inc.,
Newray Group Guyana Inc. and a host of other newly incorporated
companies?"
"What other elements of a time-bound action plan with progress
indicators associated with the FDI agreement of Bai Shan Lin will apply
to the DTL and landlorded concessions?"
She asked. She added: "The two legal Timber Sales Agreements held by
DTL cover 522,000 ha and its two [rented] concessions cover a further
91,000 ha. Surely it is in the interest of Guyana that over six hundred
thousand hectares of prime public forest assets should be publicly
tendered rather than slipped under the table from one Asian logger to
another?"
Speaking to this newspaper, General Secretary of the Guyana
Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) Seepaul Narine said that
after reading the articles on the relationship between DTL and Bai Shan
Lin, the company had concerns for the DTL workers its represents.
Narine said that after speaking to the companies, it was explained that
it was a management contract and not a takeover that had been reported.
Efforts to reach Minister of Agriculture Robert Persaud and
Commissioner of Forests James Singh on the issue proved futile
yesterday.
Asked for a comment, the Forest Products Association of Guyana (FPA)
said through its Executive Director Mona Bynoe that the body has
consulted with DTL and Bai Shan Lin and has been informed that they
will be making an official statement in due course. "The FPA therefore
prefers not to make any comment at this time on what is an entirely
speculative article," Bynoe said.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)