Protest aborted…Barama contradicts previous statements, says no retrenchment forthcoming ‘GFC acted unconstitutionally' - Lalaram

Protest aborted…Barama contradicts previous statements, says no
retrenchment
forthcoming
‘GFC acted unconstitutionally' - Lalaram
Kaieteur News, 26 October 2007
Hundreds of employees attached to Barama Company Limited yesterday
converged on Square of the Revolution to protest the recent sanctions
imposed on the company that, according to its chairman, Girwar Lalaram,
threatened job security.

However, before they could stage the protest, the Barama management
informed them that they need not fear losing their jobs; that there
would be no retrenchment.

And in what appeared to be a contradiction of a statement issued
earlier, Lalaram told the workers that he had taken a position not to
retrench anyone and assured them of their job security and their wages
for the lost days.

“I promise faithfully as chairman of the company, there will be no job
loss, irrespective…We will continue to bear the cost…I am publicly
saying that there will be no loss of jobs.”

He continued a few minutes later to say, however, that he was scheduled
to meet with Agriculture Minister Robert Persaud at 15:30 hrs yesterday
to discuss the issue of job security for his workers among other
issues.

Persaud acknowledged that he did speak with Lalaram and arranged a
tentative meeting based on his availability.

The meeting never came to fruition; further, Kaieteur News understands
that Lalaram never showed up for the meeting.

The chairman yesterday vehemently defended his company saying that
there was no intention to defraud the government of anything but noted
that with a company of such magnitude, procedural as well as human
error would occur.

When the news of the collusion to defraud the state of royalties was
made public Lalaram had disclosed “such a sudden suspension means there
will be workers without jobs immediately.”

In a release to the media on Wednesday, Lalaram is quoted as saying,
“Barama is deeply concerned that the penalties will cost jobs and have
a detrimental impact on Barama's continued investment in the country.”

Yesterday, Lalaram acknowledged to Barama employees at Square of the
Revolution that he did make a statement to the press saying that there
would be immediate loss of jobs. “I want to assure that I've been
engaged in discussions with Government officials and I will continue
talk with (them) to have the issue resolved.”

According to Lalaram, the government was willing to meet with Barama to
have an amicable solution.

He continued to emphasise that the allegations against Barama were
unfounded. “It has brought the integrity and credibility of the company
and employees to a level of disgrace.”

Lalaram told media operatives yesterday that the action taken by the
workers was not a protest but rather that it evolved out of the
statement that insinuated that there would be loss of jobs for which
the workers were fearful.

According to Lalaram, after the announcement of the alleged collusion
he responded to the Guyana Forestry Commission but this was not
acknowledged.

Instead, the GFC stated, “(It) communicated the findings of the
investigation to the Minister of Agriculture who then directed that
these be shared with the four companies for written responses to the
identified breach of procedures…All four companies submitted responses,
but did not adequately address the concerns outlined by the GFC.”

When confronted with the statements by GFC pertaining to responses,
Lalaram questioned the government's intentions or objective. He added
that he would engage in discussions with the government given that the
welfare of his workers was at stake.

According to Lalaram, the company was only confronted with the
allegations and not the findings.

He also blasted the GFC for acting irrationally in its disclosure of
the information rather than discussing it with Barama.

He added that the fine of $96M was questionable. “I don't know how they
arrived at that figure.”

He also accused the GFC of acting unconstitutionally saying that they
had no right to impose a fine, contending that only the police were
entrusted with that power.

Lalaram insisted that all logging by Barama was legal and that he could
prove such with the relevant documentation. He has not ruled out the
possibility of a legal appeal.

Less than a month after a forestry probe was launched into an apparent
collusion between Barama Company Limited and Guyana Forestry Commission
(GFC) officials to defraud state of revenue, the suspicions were
confirmed and the company fined $96.4M.

Also implicated in the racket are A. Mazaharally and Sons Limited,
Barakat Timbers Limited, and N. Sukul and Sons.

Barama was found culpable of under declaration of forest produce
harvested as well as the false declaration with respect to the origin
of forest produce harvested.

According to the GFC, in July 2007, Barama transported a quantity of
logs harvested from a concession issued to Barakat Timbers Limited, to
Buck Hall and the quantity of logs declared to the GFC were below the
harvested amount.

The findings of the investigation also revealed that Barama harvested
and removed without GFC permission, a large quantity of logs from a
concession issued to A. Mazaharally and Sons Limited further, tags
issued to Barama and Barakat Timbers Limited were used on stumps
located within the concession issued to A. Mazaharally and Sons.

Barama was also found guilty of removing a quantity of logs from
concessions issued to N. Sukul and Sons without approval from the GFC.

Additionally the two GFC officers cited for ineffective monitoring of
the concession that resulted in the breaches being possible have been
dismissed.