No transparency on Rusal deal
Published:Saturday | November 24, 2012 | 12:00 AM
THE EDITOR, Sir:
The Ministry of Science, Technology, Energy and Mining has denied my Access to Information (ATI) request on very flimsy grounds for a copy of the 'agreement' that Minister Phillip Paulwell has allegedly signed with UC Rusal.
Until that agreement can be subjected to public scrutiny, everything that the minister is claiming should be taken with a grain of salt.
Which came first: (1) an offer from Paulwell or a request from UC Rusal for a one-year waiver of the US$7 million levy? Or, (2) a threat to close the plant and an offer for a waiver? These two scenarios could be quite unrelated, and they raise intriguing questions.
Did the minister get information that UC Rusal was about to lay off workers or close down the plant (again), which led to the granting of the waiver ostensibly to save those jobs? In other words, were strong-arm tactics being used against him, or was he just being a loving pussycat? And why?
Furthermore, are there really 600 workers employed at Ewarton by UC Rusal? We need a definite confirmation of the number, because I'm reliably told that the number is far less.
And if it is discovered that 600 workers are not employed there, how is that rectified? Does the 'agreement' require UC Rusal to increase the complement? And if not, is it not fair to question why Paulwell has been so generous to UC Rusal?
There are other suspicions about 'base operations', which seem like a wish on Mr Paulwell's part rather than something that makes sense from the financial standpoint of UC Rusal. This claim needs to be investigated.
Indeed, how is anyone to check on any of this if the agreement is a private affair between Mr Paulwell and UC Rusal?
COAL
Paulwell hinted very early into his term of office that "coal was coming sooner than you think". Who first raised the matter of coal to whom? UC Rusal, or Mr Paulwell?
At a public forum months before the announcement of Paulwell's 'agreement', I challenged Industry and Commerce Minister Anthony Hylton about Government's intention to introduce coal, which I argued would be an environmental disaster.
Mr Hylton replied that no discussion or decision about coal had taken place in the Cabinet. In fact, because of my insistence that it appeared to be a done deal, according to Paulwell, a joke was made by the chairman of the event that that decision must have been taken at the Cabinet meeting that I attended!
Well, no one should be laughing at this retrograde decision by Paulwell (not the Cabinet, it appears) to give UC Rusal the green light to use coal. Indeed, Mr Paulwell has gone further and hinted, during his discussion with Garfield Burford on 'Direct', that other bauxite companies will be using coal.
On the face of it, it appears that once again youthful exuberance may have taken hold of Mr Paulwell, and since he has a less-than-stellar track record as a minister - I once again repeat: publish the agreement now!
LLOYD D'AGUILAR
Kingston