Dear Editor

THE lowest forms of information/data quality are rumors, group and personal opinions. Quality writing uses inferences and facts, the highest forms of information/data quality. In the October 12th, 2018 Kaieteur News, Christopher Ram viscously attacked the contents of an advertisement seeking an auditor for the Liza pre-contract cost. Ram’s piece titled “Audit advertisement suggest that guyana will receive deficient work”, contained his personal opinions with no substantiating information.

Ram described the advertisement in the following terms: deficient, mediocrity, lacked fundamental issues, uninformed, amateurish, short of knowledge and understanding. The problem is Ram never once attempted to explain to the readers why the advertisement was deficient, mediocrity, lacked fundamental issues, uninformed, amateurish or short of knowledge and understanding. No one reading the newspaper column knows why Ram used the descriptions to characterise the advertisement; no supporting information for his criticisms was provided… none. Somehow, Ram believes he can say anything, [and] does not have to explain why he is making the criticisms and his opinions are to be accepted as facts. Christopher Ram should respect the intelligence of the Guyanese people. His newspaper column is composed of low quality information; it should never have been published.

One of Ram’s many opinions that need further exploring for accuracy is his repeated contention that the 1999 Production Sharing Agreement (PSA) expired prior to [the] 2016 PSA signing. If correct, the Minister of Natural Resources and his team had tremendous leverage to change the oil sharing formula and increase Guyana’s oil take in the 2016 PSA. Of course, if the 1999 PSA was still in effect, ExxonMobil (XOM) and partners–Hess and CNOOC Nexen–had the leverage, and no significant change to the country’s oil share would be expected. The operator and partners would choose to continue under the 1999 PSA if demands were not to their approval. The 2016 PSA oil sharing formula had one change i.e. royalties increased from 1% to 2%. XOM and its partners would never conduct deep-water exploration off Guyana’s coast and the 1999 PSA would be expired after finding oil. No international oil company would ever make such a mistake. Christopher Ram, please print the evidence supporting your repeated expressed opinion that the 1999 PSA contract expired before [the] 2016 PSA was signed?

Ram wants a Commission of Inquiry (CoI) to investigate the 1999 and 2016 PSAs. What is the value in a CoI? The only likely goal to be achieved is Ram gets a forum to criticize current and former government officials. How about moving forward working together; opportunities to increase the country’s oil take are likely to arise in the future. Let us be prepared for such an opportunity and not waste time blaming each other at a CoI. Guess who Ram wants at the CoI? His buddies Melinda Janki, Nigel Hinds and Ramon Gaskin…really. Here is a flavour of their false opinions. Janki said Guyana will have to sell its share of oil to pay XOM US $900 million pre-contract cost or generations of Guyanese would be saddled with US $900 million debt. She went full conspiracy, suggesting XOM’s

announcement of 3.2 Billion BOE discovery was not to be trusted as the company had written down a similar value of reserves. Oil production in five years and expansions in the pipeline, yet Janki conspires about oil find. Janki talked a lot about the ills of returning separated water and sewage to the Atlantic Ocean. Do other deep-water operations not return separated water and sewage to the oceans/seas. Janki should say whether she is in favour of recovering the oil under any circumstances? Hinds said, “Guyana’s oil is cheaper to refine”. This is false; refinery economics is not that simple. Hinds said the pre-contract cost was a “Debt on Guyana Books” and he is an accountant. Hinds went on to say pre-contract cost should not be recoverable. Hinds should tell us which country has a deep-water PSA that does not allow recovery of investment cost. Ramon Gaskin, who is still mourning the fall of communism, said the operator and partners are in Guyana “to thief our oil”; responsible statement indeed.

Ram’s criticisms of the advertisement are emblematic of the criticisms by the self-appointed gas and oil experts; lots of opinions held up as facts. Many opinions are lacking a “feel” for the oil and gas industry. Others lack context or are simply inaccurate.
Regards
Deryck Daly