JavaScript is disabled in your web browser or browser is too old to support JavaScript. Today almost all web pages contain JavaScript, a scripting programming language that runs on visitor's web browser. It makes web pages functional for specific purposes and if disabled for some reason, the content or the functionality of the web page can be limited or unavailable.

Saturday, July 26, 2025

Too much political interference at the NGC

by

Curtis Williams
1654 days ago
20210113

Last week was not a good one for the Na­tion­al Gas Com­pa­ny (NGC) as it re­ceived the an­nounce­ment that its cred­it wor­thi­ness had been down­grad­ed by the rat­ing agency Cari­Cris and found it­self be­ing ac­cused by the chief ex­ec­u­tive of­fi­cers of the ma­jor down­stream com­pa­nies of hav­ing a con­flict of in­ter­est and threat­en­ing 30,000 jobs.

To be fair it has not been a good decade for the com­pa­ny as it suf­fered un­der the rap­ing of its re­tained earn­ings by the UNC gov­ern­ment; then had to deal with nat­ur­al gas cur­tail­ment; sev­er­al law suits for fail­ing to pro­vide con­tract­ed gas; found it­self ex­posed as its lawyers failed them by sign­ing deals with up­stream providers that had no penal­ty claus­es for fail­ure to pro­vide gas yet had those claus­es in its own agree­ment with the down­stream com­pa­nies.

And, as if things could not get worse for the com­pa­ny, it now has gas agree­ments with the up­stream com­pa­nies that hang like an al­ba­tross around its neck, signed sealed and de­liv­ered by Prime Min­is­ter Dr Kei­th Row­ley, the Min­is­ter of every­thing Stu­art Young and the tit­u­lar Min­is­ter of En­er­gy Franklin Khan.

You add to this pic­ture, a com­pa­ny that last year made its first ever loss and you can see why things are not well at the long her­ald­ed state en­ter­prise.

Last week, Cari­Cris low­ered NGC’s rat­ings on its US$400 mil­lion debt is­sue to Cari­AA (for­eign and lo­cal cur­ren­cy) on the re­gion­al rat­ing scale, and ttAA on the T&T (T&T) na­tion­al rat­ing scale from Cari­AA+ (for­eign and lo­cal cur­ren­cy) on the re­gion­al rat­ing scale and ttAA+ (lo­cal cur­ren­cy rat­ing) on the na­tion­al rat­ing scale.

Ac­cord­ing to Cari­Cris the down­grade is dri­ven by the high­er cost of gas from up­stream sup­pli­ers and his­tor­i­cal­ly low in­ter­na­tion­al com­mod­i­ty prices, which have re­sult­ed in com­pressed prof­itabil­i­ty mar­gins, ad­verse­ly im­pact­ed fi­nan­cial per­for­mance, and con­strained debt ser­vice met­rics.

Cari­Cris not­ed that the NGC’s ma­jor busi­ness is the pur­chase of nat­ur­al gas from up­stream com­pa­nies and then sell­ing it for a prof­it to the petro­chem­i­cal pro­duc­ers. How­ev­er with the col­lapse of methanol and am­mo­nia prices and the high ac­qui­si­tion costs of nat­ur­al gas from lo­cal pro­duc­ers it has left the NGC and the petro­chem­i­cal com­pa­nies in dif­fi­cul­ties.

Cari­Cris al­so as­signed a neg­a­tive out­look on the low­ered rat­ings. The neg­a­tive out­look it said is pred­i­cat­ed on the un­cer­tain­ties in the glob­al eco­nom­ic en­vi­ron­ment to­geth­er with the chang­ing busi­ness mod­el that is char­ac­terised by ris­ing nat­ur­al gas sup­ply costs and sub­stan­tial­ly re­duced in­ter­na­tion­al en­er­gy com­mod­i­ty prices, which are like­ly to have ad­verse im­pacts on NGC’s fi­nan­cial per­for­mance and debt pro­tec­tion met­rics go­ing for­ward.

“These rat­ing strengths are tem­pered by the com­pa­ny’s sig­nif­i­cant­ly re­duced earn­ings and prof­itabil­i­ty due to falling com­mod­i­ty prices and its high vul­ner­a­bil­i­ty to a chang­ing en­er­gy land­scape, char­ac­terised by com­pressed mar­gins on ac­count of falling en­er­gy prices and high­er up­stream prices,” Cari­Cris not­ed.

The down­grade came the same week as the largest Methanol pro­duc­er in the world, Methanex an­nounced that it was un­like­ly to reach a gas sup­ply agree­ment with the NGC in the fore­see­able fu­ture and there­fore was send­ing home 60 work­ers. That is 60 more fam­i­lies who have lost an in­come. There is re­al pain hap­pen­ing in the en­er­gy sec­tor and the strat­e­gy of pre­tend­ing it is not so by sim­ply not deal­ing with it is no strat­e­gy at all.

Cari­Cris’ as­sess­ment is cor­rect and rub­bish­es the En­er­gy Min­is­ter and the gov­ern­ment’s talk­ing point that the chal­lenges fac­ing the down­stream sec­tor is dri­ven by his­tor­i­cal­ly low com­mod­i­ty prices. This is sim­ply not true and even if you re­peat it time and time again, Min­is­ter, Prime Min­is­ter it does not change the fact that the ac­qui­si­tion costs for nat­ur­al gas is sim­ply too high and not sus­tain­able.

It is clear in my mind that the gov­ern­ment’s strat­e­gy in the en­er­gy sec­tor is two fold, tax as much as you can get from a small­er pie and hope for a re­bound of en­er­gy prices. Nei­ther strat­e­gy will lead to re­vival of this coun­try’s en­er­gy for­tune.

Whether we like it or not the en­er­gy sec­tor is still cru­cial to each na­tion­al’s every­day life. The de­ci­sion to raise in­sur­ance rates is dri­ven to a large mea­sure by the lack of forex in the sys­tem. Why is there less forex? Its caused by low­er en­er­gy prices and pro­duc­tion.

The same it true of im­pend­ing in­creas­es in food prices. Un­til we can find things that can re­place the earn­ing ca­pac­i­ty of the en­er­gy sec­tor we have to do all in our pow­er to fix and max­imise re­turns.

I am all for a fair rent for our nat­ur­al re­sources, but one has to con­sid­er what role tax re­form, par­tic­u­lar­ly the rates of tax­es on nat­ur­al gas pro­duc­tion and even cor­po­ra­tion tax may be hav­ing on the de­sire to fix the val­ue chain. Gov­ern­ment must con­sid­er what fis­cal mea­sures it has to put in place for the long term sur­vival of the NGC and to pre­vent the col­lapse of Point Lisas.

Part of what is need­ed is to en­sure that the NGC and its group is re­struc­tured. I have al­ready writ­ten on the is­sue of the or­der staffing of the NGC and point­ed to the com­mu­ni­ca­tions de­part­ment with its 25 em­ploy­ees as an ex­am­ple of the wastage that oc­curs in the mo­nop­oly. That is not unique but when the gov­ern­ment tells the NGC it can re­struc­ture as long as it does not send home any­one it is sim­ply play­ing smart with fool­ish­ness. When the gov­ern­ment in­structs the NGC to take risks and spend hun­dreds of mil­lions to keep At­lantic LNG’s Train 1 go­ing on some no­tion that af­ter 2023 there will be ex­cess gas and does not say whether such a project has a pos­i­tive NPV or how tax pay­ers are go­ing to re­cov­er their in­vest­ments or the in­creased gear­ing ra­tio its like­ly to lead to, then this gov­ern­ment is bet­ting the house on the as­sump­tion that it will buy enough lot­to tick­ets to guar­an­tee the jack­pot.

The lead­ing CEOs of the petro­chem­i­cal com­pa­nies are right to raise the is­sue of con­flict of in­ter­est. More than a year ago I wrote about how the NGC is con­flict­ed and com­pet­ing with its own cus­tomers by sell­ing gas to it­self, due to its in­ter­est in the Caribbean Gas Chem­i­cal’s Methanol Plant. Yes methanol and methanol to DME.

Its ven­ture in Train 1 is a dis­as­ter wait­ing to hap­pen and while there is a tem­po­rary blip in LNG prices, un­less there are ma­jor near shore gas dis­cov­er­ies or gi­gan­tic deep wa­ter gas we are un­like­ly to have prices or pro­duc­tion lev­els nec­es­sary to sup­port what the gov­ern­ment says is its strat­e­gy.

The coun­try has made many mis­takes with the NGC, the good days of in­ef­fi­cient op­er­a­tions and poor deals, masked by large mar­gins are over. The com­pa­ny must now be run as a busi­ness, be­cause if the NGC fails we are all in trou­ble.


Related articles

Sponsored

Weather

PORT OF SPAIN WEATHER

Sponsored