Seventy-four days later…Speaker yet to provide update on Opposition’s gas to shore motion
…Patterson writes letter of reminder
Citing his assertions of impartiality and lack of bias, APNU+AFC Member of Parliament David Patterson has written to the Speaker of the National Assembly reminding him that they are yet to receive word on the fate of the October 27, 2021 motion relating to the proposed gas-toshore project.
According to Patterson, who served as Minister of Public Infrastructure under the David Granger administration, House Speaker Manzoor Nadir is yet to give a decision relating to the motion that was submitted 74 days ago.
“Based on your publicly stated position ‘it is my duty as Speaker of the National Assembly to ensure that the business of the National Assembly is conducted in a fair, transparent, and orderly manner and this I will do to the end of my tenure’, it is my expectation that my Motion will be approved in the shortest possible time in accordance with the principles of fairness, transparency, and good order,” Patterson said in his January 08, 2022 letter to Nadir.
He prefaced his letter on the statements made by the Speaker in response to allegations of bias from Leader of the People’s National Congress Reform (PNCR) Aubrey Norton. Norton, during a virtual press conference on Friday, tore into Nadir, accusing him of being biased and suppressing the Opposition from asking pertinent questions in relation to matters of national importance.
Nadir, in his response, said “Speakers, from time immemorial, due to the nature of the work, that is, preserving order and decorum within the Assembly and disciplining members, among other things, have always been accused of biasness. This allegation is therefore expected.”
He added “I wish to state, that as Speaker of the National Assembly, I have always conducted the business of the House in keeping with the Standing Orders of the Parliament of Guyana and other Parliamentary Procedures and Practices of the Commonwealth. Persons who are not familiar with Parliamentary Rules of Procedure would interpret the way I have been approving and disapproving questions and motions, and my rulings on certain matters would claim that I am (biased).”
Citing the very claims in his statement, Patterson wrote “In this light, I am seeking an update on my Motion on the Gas to Shore Project, which was submitted to the Parliament since October 27, 2021. Seventy-three (73) days after submission, this Motion is yet to obtain your approval or disapproval.”
It is unclear whether Patterson’s letter was responded to since efforts to contact Nadir proved futile.
Patterson’s motion was supported by Alliance For Change Leader Khemraj Ramjattan and states “Be it further resolved that the Gas-to-Shore Project’s final decision be put on hold until the National Resources Committee presents its report to Parliament for debate and approval.”
The motion contended that the US$900 million project is shrouded in secrecy as there was a lack of research and consultation.
The gas-to-energy project entails the construction and operation of a 12-inch pipeline, approximately 220 kilometres
long, from the Liza Phase 1 and Liza Phase 2 Floating, Production, Storage and Offloading (FPSO) vessels in the offshore Stabroek Block, to an onshore natural gas liquids (NGL) and natural gas processing plant (NGL Plant) located at Wales. Government also has plans for a development zone in the area, which once accommodated a thriving sugar plantation and factory.
Esso Exploration Production Guyana
Limited (EEPGL), Exxon’s local affiliate, is the operator of the project and has since submitted a proposal seeking environmental authorization to construct and operate components mentioned in the project.
The pipeline is expected to transport up to approximately 50 million standard cubic feet per day (MMSCFD) of dry gas to the NGL Plant while the maximum flow of pipeline is approximately 120 MMSCFD. The NGL plant onshore will remove propane, butane and pentanes+ liquids with the ability to be sold; and treat remaining gas to specifications required by the power plant, including dehydration and pressure letdown of gas.
According to the schedule, the pipeline will commence at Nouvelle Flanders with a corridor of approximately 30 metres in width. It will continue in a southerly direction to the side dam between Vreed-enHoop and Nouvelle Flanders and will pass through L’Union, Rotterdam, Mary and Harlem, Wallers Delight, Ruimzigt, Klein Pouderoyen, Malgre Tout, Versailles, Lust en Rust, Java, Canal Number One, L’Oratoire, Bordeaux, Resource and Alliance, and Canal Number Two.
The Opposition, in its motion, has argued that the PPP/C government selected Wales, West Bank Demerara as the location of the project despite the absence of data to support that decision. The introductory clause of the motion further argued that the pipeline would have to land in residential, commercial and agricultural areas but the government has not embarked on any studies to understand the environmental and safety risks from pipeline leaks and ruptures that may be caused by defective construction, aging, corrosion, sea bed land forms, mudslides, hurricanes, faults, fractures, and seismic activities such as earthquakes and volcanoes.
In addition, the motion also notes that gas leakages and exposures in the marine environment have been shown to be highly toxic to fish, and living organisms and the ecology, which could devastate the fishing industry.