MISINFORMATION, prejudice and hostility were the key factors influencing the decision of Muri Brasil Ventures Incorporated to scrap its local investment venture.The company will no longer pursue its geographical and geophysical survey under the Permission for Geographical and Geophysical Survey (PGGS)in the New River Triangle area, which was granted by the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission (GGMC).

In a statement, Muri Brasil Ventures, said: “Although the process was legal and transparent, this decision is due to the misinformation, prejudice and hostility to this proposed survey by persons and agencies, which are fostering an adverse investment climate in Guyana.”

The decision made on December 30, 2013 makes the company the latest major investor Guyana has lost.
The company, a local company registered in Guyana under the Companies Act with local shareholders, expressed its appreciation for those who supported the project

CONTROVERSY
The project was the feature of controversial debates over the last few weeks. The PGGS document signed between the GGMC and Muri Brasil Ventures Inc. was leaked to the press, and led to allegations that Natural Resources and Environment Minister, Robert Persaud, had not been forthright in supplying information for public consumption – an allegation he has denied. Minister Robert Persaud was among signatories for the PGGS, which had been issued on November 7, 2012 for several types of minerals in the New River area in south-eastern Berbice.

Muri Brasil Ventures Inc. itself joined the debates, making clear that there was nothing “opaque” about its deal with the Natural Resources Ministry in acquiring the PGGS. In a statement issued in mid-December, the company had made clear that it had applied for the PGGS following an advertisement by the Government.

In clarifying its activities, the company had said: “Exploration activities have not commenced because permission is being awaited for the construction of a small airstrip to facilitate the airborne aspect of the survey. Other research activities have taken place.”

The clause within the PGGS that paves the way for the granting of at least 18 prospecting licences is the main bone of contention, since the Natural Resources Ministry had indicated that no mining activity was being done in the New River Triangle.

However, Muri Brasil Ventures Inc. explained that these kinds of exploration activities cost millions of U.S. dollars, which can only be sourced as exploration investments from outside of Guyana. The company said: “No such investments would be available if the investor is given no assurance that he will be granted prospecting licences. The investor takes a risk. If he or she is not assured of a potential return, investment capital will dry up, and so will Guyana’s mining industry.”

According to the company, constant exploration activities are essential to accelerate the mining industry. However, before a prospecting licence is issued, a work programme and financial and technical capabilities of a company must be supplied.

The company said: “A prospecting licence does not necessarily lead to a mining licence, because minerals in commercial quantities may not be available.

“It has been asserted that there is an impropriety inherent in the fact that the PGGS is issued for seven different minerals, rather than a single one.

“The Mining Act permits the Guyana Geology and Mines Commission to issue permits or licences over the same area to different persons for different minerals. The company made it clear that a PGGS is “qualitatively different” from a mining permit.

Amidst the controversy over activity in the New River Triangle area, Muri Brasil Ventures Inc. had expressed hope that there would be no adverse impacts on the PGGS.
Written By Vanessa Narine