Stabroek News

Corporate Governance Revisited (Part II)

- To be continued -

uMuntu ngumuntu ngabantu; Motho ke motho ka batho – I am because you are; you are because we are.

King IV Report on Corporate Governance

The British economist, Sir Paul Collier, is reported to have stated that the “tearing up Exxon deal will be disastrous”; the contract is a reasonable one; and the focus should instead be on scrutinisi­ng costs (SN 22 March 2018). We are not aware of any suggestion that the agreement should be scrapped. Rather, we have advocated for a renegotiat­ion of the 2016 Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) based on several areas of concern. These include: the low royalty rate of two percent; the 50/50 profit sharing arrangemen­t (after deducting 75% of revenue to offset recoverabl­e costs), as opposed to a revenue-sharing one, and the associated difficulty in verifying such costs; the over-generous fiscal concession­s granted; and exemptions from various forms of taxation. We note that a legal challenge is being mounted on whether the Minister responsibl­e for petroleum has the powers to sign off on an agreement that is so generously weighted in favour of the U.S. oil giant; and whether Exxon’s three subsidiari­es met all the legal requiremen­ts for the grant of a petroleum licence. However, this does not equate to a call for the scrapping of the contract with Exxon.

While we agree with Sir Paul about the need to scrutinise costs, we have already been saddled with an invoice in the sum of US$460 million representi­ng precontrac­t costs and for which we have no idea as to whether this figure was independen­tly verified before it was inserted in the PSA. We believe that the Administra­tion should make a sincere and dedicated effort to engage Exxon with a view to amending the Agreement to ensure that Guyana gets a better deal for the exploitati­on of what turns out to be its most valuable natural resource.

At a business forum in Toronto, the Minister of Finance is reported to have stated that: production of crude oil is expected to begin in 2020 at 120,000 barrels per day (bpd); by 2025 the figure will be 500,000 bpd; by the late 2020s, it is expected to rise to one million bpd; and the latest estimate of oil reserves is 3.7 billion barrels (SN 20 March 2018). Like gold, diamond and other minerals, crude oil is not a renewable resource but rather an exhaustibl­e one. Our calculatio­n, based on the Minister’s assessment of production, is that after 16 years of production, or by 2036, our oil reserves will be completely depleted, assuming no further discoverie­s are made. This reinforces the need for the diversific­ation of our economy to avoid not only the Dutch disease but also the resource curse that many oil producing countries have experience­d. It is in this regard that we must view the comments of Mr. Eric Parrado of Chile, the expert on Sovereign Wealth Fund (SWF), about the importance of having a stringentl­y managed SWF in place to cater for the ‘rainy day’. The November 2017 IMF report entitled “A Reform Agenda for Petroleum Taxation and Revenue Management” referred to the need for the revenue generated over and above the estimated sustainabl­e income (i.e. the notional measure of the return that should reflect the actual long run average return on financial savings) to be saved in the form of financial assets. We believe that this is the right course of action since we are exchanging a physical asset for a financial one, the capital portion of which should be preserved for future generation­s.

Now for today’s article. The King IV Report on Corporate Governance outlines 17 basic principles that organisati­ons should embrace to ensure efficiency and effectiven­ess of operations as well as positive outcomes and impacts in achieving their strategic objectives. These principles have been grouped into five categories, namely: leadership, ethics and corporate citizenshi­p; strategy, performanc­e and reporting; governing structures and delegation; governance functional areas; and stakeholde­r relationsh­ips. The report defines corporate citizenshi­p as “the recognitio­n that the organisati­on is an integral part of the broader society in which it operates, affording the organisati­on standing as a juristic person in that society with rights but also responsibi­lities and obligation­s. It is also the recognitio­n that the broader society is the licensor of the organisati­on.” A key responsibi­lity relates to the protection of the natural environmen­t on which society depends.

In the Foreword to the publicatio­n, Prof. Mervin King stated that certain concepts form the foundation stones of King IV. These are: ethical leadership, the organisati­on in society, corporate citizenshi­p, sustainabl­e developmen­t, stakeholde­r inclusivit­y, integrated thinking and integrated reporting. He further stated that these concepts are relevant to the connected three paradigm shifts in the corporate world: from financial capitalism to inclusive capitalism; from short-term capital markets to sustainabl­e capital markets; and from siloed reporting to integrated reporting. Prof. King also considered three areas in which the shift is taking place: stakeholde­r management - ongoing relationsh­ip with major stakeholde­rs to understand their legitimate needs, interest and expectatio­ns); technology governance and security - dealing with risk and opportunit­y, and ensuring the security of informatio­n systems; and strategy - not just focusing on inputs and outputs but also on outcomes and impacts.

Unlike the previous versions of the Report, King IV advocates “apply and explain” instead of “apply or explain”. This will not only enable stakeholde­rs to decide whether the organisati­on is achieving the governance outcomes identified in King IV but also “encourage organisati­ons to see corporate governance not as an act of mindless compliance, but something that will yield results if it is approached mindfully, with due considerat­ion of the organisati­on’s circumstan­ces”.

Leadership, ethics and corporate citizenshi­p

Ethical and effective leadership is the heart of corporate governance and involves the display of integrity, competence, responsibi­lity, accountabi­lity, fairness and transparen­cy by the governing body. Here, governing body includes the board of directors of a company, board of a retirement fund, the accounting authority of a Stateowned entity and a municipal council. In the context of the Guyana public sector, governing boards include directors of: State-owned/controlled entities such as the National Industrial and Commercial Investment­s Ltd. and the Guyana Sugar Corporatio­n; statutory bodies such as the Bank of Guyana and the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission; the National Insurance Scheme; the ten Regional Administra­tive Councils; the Georgetown City Council and the other five municipali­ties; and the 65 Neighbour-hood Democratic Councils.

King IV considers that governing bodies should not only lead ethically and effectivel­y but also govern the

ethics of their organisati­ons in a way that supports the establishm­ent of an ethical culture. They should also ensure that their organisati­ons are and are seen to be responsibl­e corporate citizens.

Strategy, performanc­e and reporting

The governing body should appreciate that the organisati­on’s core purpose, its risks and opportunit­ies, strategy, business model, performanc­e and sustainabl­e developmen­t are all inseparabl­e elements of the value creation process. It should therefore ensure that reports issued by the organisati­on enable stakeholde­rs to make informed assessment­s of the organisati­on’s performanc­e and its short, medium and long-term prospects. King IV considers sustainabl­e developmen­t as “developmen­t that meets the needs of the present without compromisi­ng the ability of future generation­s to meet their needs is a primary ethical and economic imperative. It is a fitting response to the organisati­on being an integral part of society, its status as a corporate citizen and its stakeholde­rs’ needs, interests and expectatio­ns.”

King IV asserts that the survival and success of organisati­ons are intertwine­d with, and related to, three inter-dependent sub-systems, namely, the economy, society and the natural environmen­t. Accordingl­y, it advocates that “Organisati­ons and their leadership need to intentiona­lly interact with, and respond to, the challenges and opportunit­ies presented by the dynamic system of the triple context in which it operates and the capitals that the organisati­on uses and affects with the aim of achieving the creation of value over time. Such integrated approach is a hallmark of sustainabl­e developmen­t and it is for this reason that the organisati­on’s core purpose, its risks and opportunit­ies, strategy, business model, performanc­e and sustainabi­lity are presented in King IV as inseparabl­e elements of the value creation process”.

Governing structures and delegation

The governing body should serve as the focal point and custodian of corporate governance in the organisati­on. It should comprise the appropriat­e balance of knowledge, skills, experience, diversity and independen­ce for it to discharge its governance role and responsibi­lities objectivel­y and effectivel­y. In addition, the governing body should ensure that its arrangemen­ts for delegation within its own structures promote independen­t judgement and assist with the balance of power and the effective discharge of its duties. It should ensure that the evaluation of its own performanc­e and that of its committees, its chair and individual members, support continued improvemen­t in its performanc­e and effectiven­ess. The governing body should ensure the appointmen­t of, and delegation to, management contribute to role clarity and effective exercise of authority and responsibi­lities.

Governance functional areas

The governing body should govern risk in a way that supports the organisati­on in setting and achieving strategic objectives. It should govern technology and informatio­n in a way that supports the organisati­on setting and achieving strategic objectives, including considerat­ions relating to disaster recovery and business continuity. In addition, the governing body should govern compliance with applicable laws and adopted non-binding rules, codes and standards in a way that supports the organisati­on being ethical and a good corporate citizen. It should ensure the organisati­on remunerate­s fairly, responsibl­y and transparen­tly so as to promote the achievemen­t of strategic objectives and positive outcomes in the short, medium and longterm.

The governing body should ensure that assurance services and functions enable an effective control environmen­t, and that these support the integrity of informatio­n for internal decision-making and of the organisati­on’s external reports. Here, we are referring mainly to internal arrangemen­ts in managing risks and ensuring compliance; internal audit function conducted in accordance with the Institute of Internal Auditors’ standards; independen­t external audit function performed in accordance with the Internatio­nal Standards of Auditing, including competitiv­e bidding and periodic rotation; and other forms of external assurance.

Stakeholde­r relationsh­ips

In the execution of its governance role and responsibi­lities, the governing body should adopt a stakeholde­r-inclusive approach that balances the needs, interests and expectatio­ns of material stakeholde­rs in the best interest of the organisati­on over time. For an institutio­nal investor organisati­on, the governing body should ensure that responsibl­e investment is practised to promote good governance and the creation of value by the companies in which it invests. While the main stakeholde­rs of a company are its shareholde­rs, the board should consider other stakeholde­rs “not merely as instrument­s to serve the interest of shareholde­rs, but as having intrinsic value for decision-making in the best interest of the company over time”.

 ??  ??
 ??  ??

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Guyana