Just to be clear on the Belize position - as so many misleading posts are being put up here. The facts below indicate:
1) Princess do not have an oil concession in Belize (so neither does Treaty)
2) An injunction has been issued by a Belize Supreme Court judge to cease all operations on the 6 PSAs that were declared null and void (so - in my view - it would be an illegal act by Treaty to resume drilling until their onshore oil rights had been legally established in a court of law)
3) Belizeans don't want offshore oil (in my view due to concerns about the environmental impact)
4) Belizeans and the Belize Coalition to Save Our Natural Heritage (which includes both Oceana and COLA) want onshore oil (in my view because they understand that their country's economy would greatly benefit from it)
-----------------------------------------------------
Background Info - The Facts
The below are just facts, with anything marked "in my view" being an opinion.
6 PSAs with Offshore Acreage have been declared Null and Void
On 16th April 2013, Supreme Court Justice Legall ruled for multiple reasons that 6 Production Sharing Agreements (PSAs) issued by previous and current Governments in Belize were null and void. Oceana in Belize, Citizens Organised for Liberty through Action (COLA) and The Belize Coalition to Protect Our Natural Heritage brought the court action against the Minister of Natural Resources and the Environment. The list of PSAs included that held by Princess Petroleum Ltd, which licenced the company to explore on 1.8 million acres offshore (of which 500,000 acreas were relinquished in November 2012) and 200,000 acres onshore. The judge also issued an injunction against the defendant, their servants and agents (in my view including Princess Petroleum and Treaty Energy Belize) that all work should stop on these PSAs.
Oceana Belize, who's VP spoke in the press conference of 8th May, is set up to Protect the Oceans
By their own statement, Oceana is:
MARINE-FOCUSED: Oceana is 100 percent dedicated to fighting on behalf of oceans.
GLOBAL: We have campaign offices in North America, South America, Central America and Europe.
CAMPAIGN-DRIVEN: We channel our resources towards a limited number of strategic, directed campaigns to achieve measurable outcomes that will help return our oceans to former levels of abundance. Some of our campaigns are regional, others are international.
FACT-BASED: We believe in the importance of science in identifying problems and solutions.
Oceana Belize is Supportive of Onshore Oil Exploration and Development
The Oceana Belize VP at the press conference also strayed onto the subject of Treaty's press release of 7th May 2013, stating that they planned to restart onshore drilling in Belize. Her comments about this and about PM Dean Barrow's statements in the press following the judgement were (in my view) driven by the fact that she is an Attorney-at-law as in the PM. I know for a fact that she has in the past publically supported onshore oil exploration and development in Belize.
The Belize Coalition to Protect Our Natural Heritage Supports Onshore Oil Exploration and Development
I quote:
Belize Coalition to Save Our Natural Heritage
An organization dedicated to the planned development of Belize's petroleum industry, outside of economically and environmentally sensitive areas of Belize (offshore and protected areas).
Mission
To serve as a channel for the voice of the people through advocacy, education, research and actions, which promote the best interest of Belize and its people
In February 2012 the Coalition Organised a Peoples Referendum that Showed That 96% of the Belizeans who voted Don't Want Offshore Oil
At a press conference in late Febraury 2012, the Coalition released the result of the People’s Referendum which showed that 29,235 registered voters voluntarily visited the 51 polling stations across the country to cast their vote. Of the 29, 235 voters, 96% or 28,208 voted against exploration and drilling offshore.
