Who commissioned this report?

Jun 03, 2018 Letters

Dear Editor,

Having noticed what made the state-owned Guyana Chronicle’s headlines on June 1, 2018, makes it necessary to lament the problem that is the ‘third world syndrome’ of accepting as gospel a report that emanates from the ‘North’ without examining the motivation driving such a publication. Must Guyanese simply accept this? Do we not, as a people, owe it to ourselves to raise questions?
The featured article in ‘Stabroek Business’ on June 1, 2018, gives an insight into the need for these questions to be raised. The report pointed out that the company, Rystad Energy, which did the report advocating for the ‘pot to be sweetened’ for ExxonMobil, commonly works for “energy owners” and for “governments” as part of its operations.
Who commissioned this report?

Editor, it is worth noting also that the company’s Espen Erlingsen was quoted in the Guyana Chronicle as saying, “In retrospect, one can argue that the government has succeeded in generating the activity they were hoping for.” However, ExxonMobil was already in Guyana before the ‘pot was sweetened’ with the questionable renegotiated contract. ExxonMobil had already found oil before the ‘pot was sweetened’. There was no need to ‘kick-start’ offshore ambitions for this company.
What is the link between Rystad Energy and ExxonMobil, other than both have major offices in Texas, USA?
Rystad Energy’s connection to a local company also raises eyebrows. TOTALTEC Oilfield Services Limited’s principal was previously connected to the foreign company Welltec A/S, which had links to Rystad Energy. It is a fact that TOTALTEC benefits from positive reviews of the oil industry and hence has an interest in the prospects of the local oil sector being talked up, since it means more business for them.

What influence did TOTALTEC have on Rystad Energy doing its report? Is it all just a coincidence that Rystad Energy was engaged?

Editor, these questions are ones that must be asked and answered.

Sincerely,
David Williams