Oil Fund Under Fire as Campbell Flags US$2.6B in Withdrawals

Opposition parliamentarian Dr. Terrence Campbell, the lead parliamentarian for the A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) with responsibility for finance, has accused the government of misleading the public on the state of Guyana’s Natural Resource Fund (NRF), arguing that headline figures conceal what he describes as excessive withdrawals and the routine use of oil revenues to finance government operations.

Campbell’s letter was prompted by recent comments by Senior Minister with responsibility for Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh, during an interview on the Starting Point programme. Singh highlighted that the NRF stood at US$3.6 billion as of September 2025, framing the fund’s balance as evidence of sound fiscal management and noting that it is sufficient to pay off Guyana’s external debt.

However, Campbell said those figures obscure the scale of withdrawals over the same period. He pointed out that between September 2024 and September 2025, oil revenue inflows totaled US$2,393.14 million, while outflows amounted to US$2,136 million.

“These numbers make it clear that the rapacious PPP government, in which Mr. Singh holds responsibility for finance, spent eighty nine percent (89%) of our income earned from oil between September 2024 and September 2025,” Campbell stated.

Campbell argued that the approximately US$400 million growth in the fund over that period was not the result of prudent management, but rather statutory requirements under the NRF Act. He said the increase comprised US$143.66 million in interest income and US$257 million representing the excess of inflows over outflows.

He accused the minister of attempting to “obfuscate the profligacy of his government by highlighting the market value of the fund,” adding that withdrawals are limited by law, not by fiscal restraint.

Citing the First Schedule of the Natural Resource Fund Act, Campbell explained that withdrawals are calculated based on deposits made in the immediately preceding fiscal year, meaning revenues must accumulate before spending can occur.

“Those funds have been built up because the law requires this and not because of fiscal prudence,” Campbell wrote, adding that without these legal constraints, “the market value of the Fund would be less than US$600 million under this wasteful administration.”

He also criticised the interview itself, saying Singh faced little scrutiny. “Thankfully for Mr. Singh, this interview was being conducted on friendly ground with no serious attempt being made by his charmed interviewers to question his narrative,” Campbell said.

Legal Challenge Over NRF Withdrawals

February this year, Campbell initiated legal proceedings challenging the transparency and accountability of major withdrawals from the Natural Resource Fund, which he says have amounted to approximately US$2.61 billion, or more than half a trillion Guyana dollars, over the past three years.

According to the court application, withdrawals totalled US$607.65 million in 2022, followed by US$1,002.13 million in 2023. In 2024, withdrawals reached US$850 million between January and September, with an additional US$153.456 million withdrawn during the final quarter of the year.

Campbell, who was appointed as the Opposition Member to the NRF Investment Committee on July 8, 2024, argues—based on official government records—that these withdrawals are being used to finance regular government operations, rather than the specific purposes outlined in the law.

He pointed to the National Estimates for 2025, which show current expenditure deficits of G$46,016 million for 2024 and G$75,929 million for 2025, as evidence that NRF proceeds are being used to plug routine budgetary shortfalls.

According to Campbell’s application, this practice violates Section 16(2) of the Natural Resource Fund Act 2021, which restricts withdrawals to clearly defined national development priorities.

The legal filing also alleges serious breaches of the Santiago Principles, which are incorporated into Guyanese law through Section 4 of the NRF Act. These internationally recognised standards govern the transparency, accountability, and governance of sovereign wealth funds.

Campbell’s application states that the government’s current management of the NRF violates Principles 2, 4, 6, 17, and 24, which mandate strict accountability, transparent decision-making, and responsible investment strategies.

The legal challenge seeks court declarations that all NRF withdrawals must be used exclusively to finance national development priorities, including green economy initiatives and essential projects aimed at mitigating the effects of major natural disasters.

The government has not yet responded publicly to Campbell’s latest assertions.