Dear Editor
In light of recent developments concerning the proposed agreement between the Government of Guyana and InterEnergy, a detailed analysis of the publicly circulated draft document is warranted. Since multiple sources have confirmed this agreement is indeed legitimate, this analysis, conducted in the interest of transparency and national accountability, seeks to objectively examine the potential implications of this agreement on Guyana’s power sector and broader public interest.
Guyana’s electricity sector, comprising entities such as Guyana Power and Light Inc. (GPL) and Power Producers and Distributors Inc. (PPDI), continues to face long standing structural and operational challenges. The need for modernisation and improved reliability is indisputable. However, the terms outlined in the InterEnergy proposal if confirmed, raise critical concerns about sovereignty, transparency, and long-term national benefit.
Key Observations from the Draft Agreement
- Procurement Irregularities: The proposal appears to sidestep established procurement laws by granting InterEnergy full discretion over contractor selection, thereby removing transparency and competition from the process.
- Absence of Financial Commitment: InterEnergy reportedly intends to assume control without incurring any capital investment. All operational and capital expenditure responsibilities would remain with the Government of Guyana, placing the financial burden squarely on taxpayers.
- Unrestricted Technical Authority: InterEnergy would obtain full technical control, justified based on its experience, yet no mention is made of third-party monitoring or governance structures to ensure accountability.
- Autonomy in Contractor Selection: Granting the company authority to select contractors, potentially including affiliates, introduces the risk of biased procurement and exclusion of capable local firms.
- Publicly Funded Severance: The proposed arrangement requires the government to fund severance and restructuring costs, should GPL or PPDI employees be displaced.
Review of Company Track Record
Publicly available records and international media reports raise red flags regarding InterEnergy’s past performance. In Jamaica, electricity outages reportedly increased by over 300% under InterEnergy’s oversight (Jamaica Gleaner, 2024). In the Dominican Republic, InterEnergy’s CEO, Mr. Rolando Gonzalez Bunster, was the subject of fraud-related investigations by ADOCCO, a local anti-corruption watchdog (Dominican Today, 2013). Similar controversies have surfaced in Panama, where InterEnergy faced scrutiny over state asset transactions (Univision, 2017).
Such precedents warrant cautious and comprehensive vetting before entrusting critical national infrastructure to a company with a controversial global footprint.
Transparency and Governance Concerns
Notably, the Guyanese public has not received official confirmation or denial from the Government regarding the authenticity of the leaked agreement. The absence of public consultation and parliamentary debate undermines trust and risks eroding the democratic process.
Further compounding concerns about transparency, a public statement published in Stabroek News on June 11, 2025, by the Ambassador of the Dominican Republic to Guyana inadvertently validated the legitimacy of the leaked InterEnergy agreement. While the Ambassador appeared to defend InterEnergy’s involvement, the statement confirmed key components of the deal that were previously unreleased to the public.
This diplomatic confirmation, although unofficial in its intent, reinforced the authenticity of the leaked document and highlighted the Government of Guyana’s failure to proactively disclose or clarify the terms and conditions of such a critical national agreement. The lack of government response or public engagement following this disclosure raises significant governance concerns and calls into question the administration’s commitment to transparency and accountability in managing strategic national assets.
Implications for Guyana
If the contract, as outlined, is signed without revision or oversight, it could result in a significant erosion of national control over Guyana’s energy infrastructure. The country would assume all financial liabilities while relinquishing operational authority—an unsustainable and inequitable arrangement.
This proposal, in its current form, provides limited benefit to the Guyanese people. Instead, it risks undermining local business participation, job security for GPL and PPDI staff, and the long-term fiscal health of the energy sector.
It is recommended that any agreement of this scale be subject to:
- Full public disclosure and consultation
- Competitive international tendering
- Independent technical and financial evaluation
- Parliamentary scrutiny and approval
Guyana’s energy future must be built on partnerships that are transparent, accountable, and aligned with national interests, not rushed deals that jeopardise public assets and democratic processes.
Yours truly,
Ricky Ramsaroop, MP
