Why there are no mass protests over the oil deal?

Oct 01, 2022 Features / Columnists, Peeping Tom

---

Kaieteur News – No one likes to be robbed. A person would rather drop accidentally or lose a $1000 bill than be mugged and deprived of $500.

There is something humiliating about being robbed. No one wants to experience being mugged and robbed of their possessions. There is outrage when this happens

But this appears to apply only to personal and business transactions. If you buy something from a store and you are shortchanged you would naturally be upset. But when the government or foreign multinational pickpockets you, the same degree of outrage does not occur.

One reason has to do with the direct impact of the transaction. Where persons are directly impacted by an act of robbery, they feel violated. But when the impact is indirect, they do not have the same strength of outrage. This accounts for one of the reasons why someone will be more inclined to protest something which directly affects them rather than some policy which shortchanges the country and by implication every citizen.

No one needs much convincing that the oil companies which signed the Production Sharing Agreement with the Government of Guyana did a number on the country. Guyana got the short end of the stick. The people were robbed almost blind.  Had Guyana gotten a fair deal, things would have been 10 times better in the country.

So why, given the magnitude of the pick-pocketing which took place, that persons are not marching on the streets demanding that the oil companies leave Guyana or that the government renegotiates the oil deal? Why is it that only a handful of persons are prepared to publicly stand up and say that Guyana got a bad deal and deserves better?

The first reason has to do with what was mentioned before. There is no direct impact of the deal on citizens. The oil companies did not impose a tax on citizens’ earnings or forced prices up and demanded that individuals hand over property. All they did was shortchange us with the royalties, the taxes, the concessions, the stability clause, the lack of ring fencing, the absence of full liability coverage, etc. Those have an indirect impact of citizens.

When matters directly impact on citizens, then they are likely to be taken more seriously. A case in point was the parking meters. Many professionals were affected by the installation of parking meters in the city because they could not afford the parking fees. They therefore took a stand against parking meters

The second reason why massive protests have not taken place over the oil contracts have to do with the political divisions in the country. Many of the supporters of the PPP/C know fully well that the oil contract should be renegotiated but to go against the wishes of their party, and especially after what happened with the elections, would in their estimation be weakening their party to the benefit of the opposition.

Similarly, many of supporters of the APNU+AFC believe that the Coalition blundered when they signed that agreement. But, like the PPP/C, supporters, they too do not want to be seen to be publicly opposing something which their party signed and defended for a long time.

The country is therefore caught in this partisan vice. And the oil companies know this all too well. This is why one of the tactics which they have traditionally employed is to keep the people divided.

The third reason why there are no mass protests against the oil contracts have to do with the lack of leadership. Outside of the PPP/C and the PNC/R the country is really barren of persons with substantive popular support. The non-governmental organisations and civil society groupings are generally elitist and therefore would be disinclined to oppose the oil companies. Those civil society groupings that are willing to do so are still in an embryonic stage of development and do not have strong support bases or are petrified of the Americans who are watching Exxon’s back. The various critics of the oil team are operating in different spheres  and there is no plan to bring them together to trigger a mass movement against the exploitation of the country’s oil wealth.

Fourth, the oil companies have been astute. They understand this society in which they operate. They have stayed clear of public confrontation on the oil contract. They have left it to the political parties and government to confront the critics. Instead, the oil companies make smart interventions winning public support by their donations and other acts of corporate social responsibility.

The truth, however, is that so long as this status quo exists, the Guyanese people are going to be robbed blind. By the time the oil companies finish draining the Stabroek Block, Guyanese would not have benefitted much from the oil revenues. The oil would be gone and the only persons smiling all the way to the bank would be the shareholders of the oil multinational corporations.

(The views expressed in this article are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of this newspaper.)

---

---