Forestry commission bill passed -concern voiced at ministerial power

http://www.stabroeknews.com/index.pl/article?id=56525460

Forestry commission bill passed -concern voiced at ministerial power
Stabroek News, Friday, July 27th 2007

The government yesterday used its majority in the National Assembly to
have the Guyana Forestry Commission Bill passed with just two minor
amendments, even though the opposition benches voiced their concerns on
many issues, especially the wide powers given to the Minister of
Agriculture and the stiff penalties for sharing confidential
information.

At the end of the debate, the National Assembly considered the
legislation clause by clause and at that time, PNCR member Winston
Murray objected to Clause 16 (3). This clause, pertaining to the
reserve fund that the Commission will have set up, stated: "If the
reserve Fund is insufficient to cover any net loss of the Commission
recorded in its profit and loss account for any financial year, the
amount of the deficiency shall be charged on the Consolidated Fund."

Murray proposed that such monies come from appropriations approved by
the National Assembly and this amendment was carried.

The GFC Bill makes reference to a Forestry Bill, which is yet to see
the light of day, but is supposed to be tabled before Parliament goes
into recess in two weeks time.

Murray is of the view that unless it is known what is contained in the
forest act there is no way of knowing the impact of the proposals in
the GFC Bill.

He said that his party thought it apposite to seek a deferral of the
GFC bill for a week until its members had access to the Forestry Bill.

He called it "most unfortunate" that the government took such a stance
when the PNCR-1G was trying to function in the National Assembly on the
basis of cooperation. "We looked at this bill to try to assess the
framework…we have to strike a balance between the need for
independence in the sector and for political involvement," he said,
making reference to the concern that the Minister of Agriculture has a
major role within the new GFC.

He voiced concern that the Minister is allowed to choose the members of
the Commission and referred to this as "carte blanche."

Murray is of the view that by keeping policies separate from execution,
monitoring is better done.

He said that investors coming to Guyana shouldn't have to feel that
everything has a political hand in it.

Murray pointed out that as stated in Clause 24, the Minister should not
be keeping accounts to the satisfaction of the Minister but to the
satisfaction of international accounting standards and practices.

Also speaking in opposition to the Bill, Alliance for Change
front-bencher Khemraj Ramjattan yesterday called the bill a deception.
He said that the Bill was a departure from what he and others were
involved in during the consultation stages.

Clause 13 of the Bill makes it an offence to disclose information
garnered while as an employee, member, consultant or adviser to the
Commission and the penalties for this are harsh, ranging from six
months imprisonment to $1M fines.

Ramjattan said that this 'gag order' that the bill institutes will
cause persons with genuine complaints against corrupt goings-on to be
reluctant to even confer with their lawyers. But he did say that
confidential matters should not be revealed by such persons.

And Ramjattan also expressed concern that the Minister may be able to
improperly use the fund that the GFC has in place. "The Alliance for
Change for these reasons and some others will not support this bill,"
he said.

PPP/C back-bencher Odinga Lumumba, in supporting the Bill said that
Government's aim is to change the public's perception about the GFC.
"We need to ensure that there is confidentiality in the GFC," he said,
referring to the contentious Clause 13 of the Bill.

To the Bill's critics, Lumumba said that the Minister represents the
policy of the Government, and that he wouldn't manage the day to day
affairs of the GFC. He called the amendments to the 1979 version of the
legislation an attempt to rid the system of political influence.

PNCR member E. Lance Carberry called the Bill premature, since it
predates the passage of the Forestry Bill, on which the GFC Bill is
founded.

"This bill is premature. The bill that defines its core function has
not been presented to this House," he said, adding that this is nothing
short of contempt for the National Assembly.

He said that the drafters of the bill were unclear about what it means
to sustainably manage the national patrimony. He added that the forest
of Guyana "provides us with the opportunity to capitalize on the
benefits of the agreements that Guyana signed at the Rio Summit in
1992. He added that the country now lacks the capacity to maximize the
benefits of these forestry resources.

Carberry said that if the commission is to serve its purpose it must be
endowed with the capacity to manage the natural patrimony in a manner
that maximizes the benefits to this country. "But this bill is not
about that."

PNCR-1G member Aubrey Norton said: "The Minister is omnipotent,
omnipresent and I dare say, omniscient," he said referring to the
sweeping and far-reaching powers of the Minister. "This is a sinister
piece of legislation that should be withdrawn."

He suggested that the determination of payment of the members and staff
of the Commission should be done by the Commission and not the
Minister, as the Bill states. There should be a standard set of
criteria for determining payment for those members and staff of the
Commission.

Norton said that there should be objective criteria for determining if
someone is incompetent and he said that the bill doesn't bear this out.

In dealing with some of the charges before the passage of the Bill,
Persaud said that the size of the Commission's Board of Directors has
been expanded and that there is now widespread representation on the
Board.

On oversight, he said that the GFC falls within the purview of the
Natural Resources Committee and the Public Accounts Committee of the
National Assembly and the Auditor General's Office.