The Tribune

By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

ATTORNEY General Carl Bethel sought to allay fears of “ordinary Bahamians” concerning due diligence involving the controversial $5.5bn Oban Energies deal, saying if the government decides the project cannot be done in an environmentally safe way, additional safeguards can be proposed.

And if the developer does not feel that the government’s mandates to better protect the environment are “commercially reasonable” the developer has the option to “abandon the project,” he said. 

His comments and earlier statements from Deputy Prime Minister Peter Turnquest prompted Progressive Liberal Party Deputy Leader Chester Cooper to question if the Minnis administration “has lost confidence” in Oban.

Mr Cooper said if the government plans on ending the “badly conceived deal,” it should say so and do it through the proper channels.

Mr Bethel’s comments came days after Mr Turnquest shot down as “nonsense” speculation the government was “locked” into the project because a heads of agreement with the developer has been signed. He said as a sovereign nation, the Bahamas has the right to terminate any agreement, adding just because the document has been signed it does not automatically mean a licence to operate will be issued.

Still Mr Turnquest defended the project last week, saying the “noise” has distracted from the potential good of the development.

Speaking in the Senate yesterday about Oban and the issue of Crown land, Mr Bethel insisted the land was being leased to developers, not granted, for $1,700 per acre with no intention or agreement to sell it.

Mr Bethel noted the previous administration signed a heads of agreement for the Carnival Port in the months before the general election, which leased “vast areas” of seabed Crown land for $1,000 per acre.

He acknowledged the practices and procedures of the Investment Authority were antiquated, and had been demonstrably deficient since the mid-1990s, but made clear he was not seeking to ascribe blame for the government’s admitted missteps. Mr Bethel noted that operational changes flagged by Prime Minister Dr Hubert Minnis to reform and improve due diligence practices have begun.

As for environmental concerns, Mr Bethel said allegations that the heads of agreement clauses offer no protection, and administrative fines for environmental infractions or clean-up costs were too low, are untrue.

He explained while there was a cap on administrative fines, there were no limits on the right of the government to sue for damage caused to the environment and for the cost of clean-up.

“The developer must develop an EIA for every stage of the proposed development,” Mr Bethel said.

“If at any stage the government decides that the development as proposed cannot be done in an environmentally safe and sustainable way,” he continued, “the government can propose additional safeguards for environmental protection.

“If the developer does not feel that the government’s mandates to better protect the environment are ‘commercially reasonable’ the developer has the option to abandon the project.”

He continued: “Nowhere does the HOA deal with or limit the right of the government to sue for damages caused to the environment and for the costs of clean-up of the environment, just as the United States government did after the Deepwater Horizon oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

“Nowhere in the HOA is there any limitation or restriction on liability for class-action lawsuits in respect of any un-remediated personal or environmental damage.”

Yesterday, Mr Cooper released a statement questioning the motive of Mr Bethel’s and Mr Turnquest’s recent statements.

“Over the past few days, not one, but two Cabinet ministers have publicly stated without prompting that the government has a way out of the Oban Energies heads of agreement it signed with the company in February,” he said.

“Notwithstanding that these assurances come from the government essentially two months after the heads of agreement was completed and the subsequent deafening public uproar, it is remarkable to see as senior a member of Cabinet as the attorney general tell the public in Parliament that the government can essentially coerce a developer into ‘packing up’ and going ‘so long, bye-bye.’

“. . . It is clear to see that the government has no such right to exit the Oban heads of agreement based on any environmental impact assessment,” Mr Cooper added. “The deputy prime minister’s refusal to accept what appears in the government’s poorly constructed agreement is more than a little troubling.

“Where was the deputy prime minister’s voice and certainty about the government’s ability to get out of this deal when the government was grilled during the mid-year budget debate in the House of Assembly about their sheer folly and clumsy handling of this important matter?

“The statements by Bethel are very serious. I cannot recall another time in history when an attorney general has openly opined on how to get out of a deal the administration they are a part of just signed with a foreign investor.

“While I do not support the Oban Energies project in its current form it is imperative that the government of the Bahamas be clear as to its intention in having numerous Cabinet ministers speak to getting out of the heads of agreement it just recently signed.

“The government must state clearly if it has lost faith in Oban and if it intends not to move forward with this project,” the Exuma and Ragged Island MP said.