博客

On 8 September, both the lower and upper houses of Grenada’s Parliament gathered for a rare joint sitting, called to deliver a full public and legislative briefing on the island nation’s ongoing hydrocarbon development initiative, including the government’s controversial recent decision to end a key contract with foreign energy firm Global Petroleum Group (GPG).

The sitting was organized around three core priorities: upholding governmental accountability, boosting public awareness of a matter critical to the country’s long-term economic future, and ensuring full transparency around the management of Grenada’s offshore natural resources. During the session, lawmakers received a detailed progress report from the Grenada Hydrocarbons Technical Working Group (HTWG), the expert body appointed by the Cabinet of Ministers in October 2023 to oversee the programme.

The HTWG was created with a clear national mandate: to conduct independent assessments of Grenada’s offshore oil and gas potential, and if commercially viable reserves are identified, build a strategic roadmap for exploration, extraction, and revenue generation that prioritizes the well-being of current Grenadian citizens and future generations. Today’s presentation, led by HTWG Chairman V Nazim Burke and Lead Consultant Gilbert Yevi, a veteran senior petroleum engineer, covered advances across every key area of the programme, including technical surveys, economic modeling, commercial negotiations, operational planning, and regulatory policy development. Lawmakers also received an overview of the working group’s upcoming activities, designed to position Grenada to capture maximum economic benefit from any future hydrocarbon development.

A central focus of the briefing was a step-by-step breakdown of the events that led the government to terminate GPG’s Production Sharing Agreement and revoke the company’s Development Licence. The background of the agreement stretches back to 2008, when GPG was first granted exploration rights to 11 offshore blocks off Grenada’s coast. In 2013, the company was awarded a formal Development Licence and finalized a Production Sharing Agreement with the government covering four of those blocks, establishing a legal framework for resource development and revenue sharing between the firm and the state.

According to the HTWG’s testimony to Parliament, despite multiple formal attempts by the Grenadian government to secure compliance from the company, GPG never met its required contractual obligations under the terms of the licence and agreement. After a months-long comprehensive review of the case, the government officially published termination notices in the national Gazette on 29 July 2026, formally ending the agreement and revoking the licence.

The presentation laid out the full range of legal, economic, strategic, and operational factors that guided the HTWG’s recommendation and the government’s final action, with presenters repeatedly emphasizing that the decision was rooted in the non-negotiable goal of protecting Grenada’s national interests and upholding the country’s full sovereign rights over its own natural resources.

Following the presentation, the joint sitting opened for a live question-and-answer session, giving lawmakers from both houses the opportunity to engage directly with HTWG members and their technical experts. The interactive session allowed for in-depth discussion of all outstanding questions related to the overall hydrocarbon programme, the details of the GPG contract termination, and the planned next steps for the sector.

Closing the sitting, the government reaffirmed its ongoing commitment to keeping both Parliament and the Grenadian public fully updated as work on the hydrocarbon agenda moves forward. Officials restated that all future progress will be conducted in line with core principles of transparency, responsible resource management, and unwavering alignment with Grenada’s national priorities.

In a landmark address to a joint sitting of Grenada’s Parliament on Tuesday, the chairman of the island nation’s Hydrocarbons Technical Working Group (HTWG) Nazim Burke confirmed that the Dickon Mitchell administration was fully justified in terminating multiple energy exploration agreements with Russian-backed firm Global Petroleum Group (GPG) earlier this year, citing years of unmet contractual obligations and procedural non-compliance. Burke, a former Grenadian prime minister and finance minister, outlined the step-by-step process that led to the July 31 cancellation of GPG’s Development Production Sharing Agreement (PSA), Block Reservation Agreement and development license for four offshore exploration blocks, emphasizing the government went to extraordinary lengths to grant the company due process before taking final action.

Burke detailed the timeline of the termination process: in early June 2026, the government notified GPG of its intent to end the agreements, prompting the firm to issue a response denying any breach of contract on June 2. The government responded on June 10 by inviting GPG representatives to a June 17 hearing to present their case, and requested all supporting documentation to be submitted to the Attorney General by June 15. While GPG confirmed via email on June 12 that it would submit the required materials by the deadline, Burke told lawmakers no documents were ever received, and the scheduled hearing proceeded without any evidence from the company to back up its claims.

Following the hearing, Burke said the government conducted a full review of GPG’s position as required under the Grenada Petroleum and Natural Gas Deposits Act, but found the company failed to provide evidence to support most of its core claims. Critically, GPG did not take any steps to remedy the breaches outlined in the initial termination notice, nor did it offer adequate compensation for missed obligations or provide assurances that future contract violations would not occur. On July 27, the government formally issued the termination notice, with the cancellation taking effect on July 31, and the decision was published in the official government gazette three days later to meet statutory requirements.

Burke stressed that the Mitchell administration treated GPG with transparency and fairness, choosing termination only as a last resort after years of unmet performance targets. “The government considers that termination of the agreement with GPG was a prudent and appropriate course of action,” Burke said, noting that the PSA explicitly allows GPG to pursue international arbitration through the International Chamber of Commerce if it disputes the decision. He confirmed the government is fully prepared to defend its position if arbitration is initiated, and has frozen all activity on the four blocks pending resolution – meaning no new operators will be invited to submit proposals, nor will GPG be allowed to continue any work on the site. Burke added that the government has worked closely with international legal advisors to review the case, and is committed to protecting Grenada’s national energy interests against any potential claims from GPG.

The presentation of the HTWG report was not without controversy, however. Before Burke delivered his 35-minute address, Democratic People’s Movement leader Peter David raised objections to allowing an external body to address the full legislature, questioning the procedural legitimacy of the arrangement. Speaker of the House Leo Cato defended the decision, noting that parliamentary standing orders do not explicitly ban the practice, and government consultation determined that the highly technical nature of the energy review made presentation by expert officials the most appropriate path.

The main opposition New National Party (NNP) went a step further, announcing a boycott of the joint sitting ahead of time over the procedural arrangement. Opposition Leader Emmalin Pierre told reporters that while the NNP supports parliamentary updates on oil and gas exploration, the party objected to what it views as a departure from standard parliamentary protocol that undermines the legislature’s authority. “This matter must not be handled through a process that misuses Parliament and departs from proper parliamentary procedures and practises,” Pierre said.

Beyond the GPG termination, the HTWG – led by internationally recognized petroleum expert Dr. Gibert Yevi, with technical specialists drawn from Trinidad and Tobago, the United States, Scotland, Australia and Spain – presented a broader update on its mandate to assess Grenada’s offshore hydrocarbon potential. If viable commercial reserves are identified, the working group will develop a full strategy to explore, develop and monetize reserves for national economic benefit, alongside a stakeholder engagement plan to involve local communities, civil society and the private sector, and a framework to attract credible international investment.

Burke noted that the oil and gas sector requires massive upfront capital investment and highly specialized technical expertise, meaning Grenada must only partner with firms that meet strict standards of credibility, financial stability and technical proficiency. The HTWG’s mandate requires it to evaluate all existing and prospective operators against these same standards, including GPG, which has held exploration rights in Grenada since the mid-2000s. Burke traced the history of GPG’s presence in Grenada back to 2008, when the company was granted exploration licenses for 11 offshore blocks, followed by a 2013 development license and production sharing agreement for four of those blocks. Critically, Burke explained, GPG never completed exploratory drilling or made a commercial discovery – a required prerequisite for developing a viable production plan, something that never materialized during the firm’s 13 years holding the development license. “In this particular instance, this did not occur with GPG,” Burke said.

Burke added that the HTWG’s review of GPG’s contract also looked at historical disputes involving Grenada’s offshore energy sector, dating back to 2003 arbitration proceedings against another operator, RSM Production Corporation’s Jack Reinburg. The working group’s review confirmed that GPG’s longstanding failure to meet contractual milestones left the government with no other viable option than termination, he said.

A major political dispute has unfolded in Grenada this week after opposition lawmakers boycotted a landmark joint parliamentary session called to receive a long-awaited report from the Hydrocarbons Technical Working Group (HTWG), drawing sharp disappointment from Prime Minister Dickon Mitchell.

Mitchell, who leads the current administration, addressed the sitting Tuesday and voiced deep regret over the opposition’s decision to skip the key briefing focused on the country’s oil and gas exploration efforts. “It is extremely disappointing and sad that members have chosen to boycott such an important session designed to share clear, first-hand information about the work we have completed,” the prime minister told assembled legislators.

The boycott was announced one day earlier by Opposition Leader Emmalin Pierre, head of the main opposition New National Party (NNP). Pierre told reporters that her caucus had significant procedural concerns about how the special joint sitting was organized, and members would not attend under the existing framework. The NNP leader clarified that the party does not oppose the government updating parliament on the progress of oil and gas exploration, but argued the current process deviates from long-standing parliamentary rules and norms.

At the core of the opposition’s objection is the government’s decision to have the HTWG present its findings directly to the full joint sitting, rather than first formally laying the report before the House of Representatives per standard procedure. Former foreign affairs minister Peter David, the only opposition lawmaker who attended Tuesday’s session, doubled down on this criticism, noting that the HTWG is neither a joint select committee of parliament nor an officially appointed parliamentary body. “It is therefore irregular to invite such a committee to address the House of Representatives,” David stated.

However, Speaker of the House Leo Cato defended the procedural arrangement put in place for the session. Cato explained that parliamentary authorities consulted with the government ahead of the meeting, and agreed that the highly technical nature of the HTWG’s report made direct presentation by the expert group the most effective approach. “It is a highly technical report and that it is best presented by the experts,” Cato said.

Prime Minister Mitchell echoed this reasoning, and extended public appreciation to HTWG members for their work and their accessible presentation to lawmakers. He confirmed that the full report, led by internationally recognized petroleum energy expert Dr. Gibert Yevi, will be formally laid before parliament in the coming days through his office as the responsible cabinet minister.

Mitchell emphasized that the decision to bring in the HTWG for direct questioning and presentation stemmed from a commitment to transparency and clarity, not procedural misconduct. “The oil and gas industry as a commercial business industry is highly technical, highly commercial in nature and requires people with the expertise to lead it,” Mitchell noted. He added that elected leaders have a responsibility to recognize the limits of their own expertise and leverage specialist knowledge to keep the public and parliament fully informed, arguing that substance should always take priority over procedural formalities when it comes to critical national issues.

The prime minister also used the session to address long-standing public concerns about the governance of Grenada’s emerging oil and gas sector, noting that for years the industry has been shrouded in secrecy, with little accessible documentation or public accountability. He pointed to the lack of official recorded data for previously drilled wells as evidence of past opacity, arguing that the current administration’s push for a public, expert-led parliamentary briefing is a deliberate break from that non-transparent approach.

“If I wanted to be partisan, if I wanted to politicise this issue, I would not ask for a joint sitting of the House. I would not ask the experts to come and subject themselves to our questioning and our scrutiny. We would not make the reports available,” Mitchell said. He added that the government has gone to great lengths to organize not just technical briefings for lawmakers, but opportunities to share updates with the general public, to clarify what work has been completed, what steps lie ahead, and the government’s plan for moving the sector forward.