“Not Our Job”: The Three  Words That Reveal Exxon’s Attitude Toward Guyana

 “Not Our Job”: The Three  Words That Reveal Exxon’s Attitude Toward Guyana

OPINION BY: Dr. Vincent Adams October 2026.

My Response to  Exxon ‘s Routledge Insulting Remark “not our job to build the nation”

Exxon’s Alistair Routledge usual full of himself outburst that “It’s not our job to build the nation…they didn’t vote for us…we are not representatives of the people” in response to a media question about Guyanese demanding more from his company, was typical of his imperiousness and disdain for the Guyanese people from the day he set foot in Guyana, to the extent that distinguished Attorney Christopher Ram joined by others, publicly called for his removal. See October 25, 2025 Kaieteur News article “Ram calls for dismissal of Exxon Guyana President…”.

It must be noted that this is not about Exxon, since Routledge’s behavior is like chalk and cheese compared to his predecessor Mr. Rod Henson, who, though a fervent company loyalist, was an exemplary professional who exhibited great mindfulness and respect for the country’s rule of law, Government authorities, and the people of Guyana.

I challenge Routledge to name a single Guyanese who would have ever indicated any expectation that it was Exxon’s “job to build Guyana”; so, his melodramatics in answer to a fair and predictable question in context of his company hauling off record breaking profits from a country with 58% poverty, was uncalled for, and unnecessary.

Instead of washing his mouth on the Guyanese people, I wish that Routledge would for once, have the common decency and manners to at least fess up that his company needs Guyana far more than Guyana needs his company; and express his gratitude to the people for resuscitating his company. It was Guyana’s oil that bailed Exxon out of a financial crisis when it was laying off employees, shedding its high liability assets such as the Canadian tar sands, and yes, being kicked off of the Dow Jones Industrial list of the US 30 blue chip companies; and it is Guyana’s oil that accounts for 60% of his company’s 19.3 billion barrels of worldwide proved equivalent oil reserves, even with his company’s dishonest lowballing of Guyana’s reserves to Exxon’s financial advantage.

In other words, there will be no Exxon without the people of Guyana’s oil.

Was  Mr. Henson’s respect, care and concern for  Guyana and its people, the reason  he was removed and replaced by Mr. bombastic Routledge?

The answer became obvious as Routledge, since his  arrival, a has been taking full advantage of the “derelict, pliant and submissive” PPPC Govt, to, perpetrate his numerous atrocities:

1. Falsely declaring that “prior to 2023, we were not making profits here in Guyana, so there were no tax credits from that”, though Exxon’s own income statements recorded profits of G$132 billion in 2021 and G$637 billion in 2022.
2. Putting up billboards across Guyana, falsely propagandizing and misleading  the nation that Guyana is receiving 52% of oil revenues, which is contractually  impossible, the  fact is , Guyana  is only receiving- 14.5%. 
3. Reverse the prohibition on flaring of billions of tons of toxic produced gas into the atmosphere, allowing unlimited flaring for a paltry fee that is miniscule to the money Exxon makes from the flaring.
4. Contemptuously justify flaring, saying that poor Guyana needs the money charged for the flaring and that flaring in Guyana is OK because Guyana’s atmosphere is clean; so, there is  room to take up more pollutants, when, at the same time, Exxon had committed to cut flaring by almost half in the rest of the world.
5. Publicly threaten that if Guyana doesn’t cooperate and allow for  flaring, Exxon may take its business elsewhere.
6. Join with the Govt. to fight tooth and nail in court to overturn the full liability assurance enshrined in environmental permits to cover oil spills, without which, would leave an environmental catastrophe and bankrupt Guyana and the Caribbean countries.
7. Join with the Govt to drop the EPA’s legal proceedings against Exxon for refusing to pay the small fine of $500 USD for six small oil spills, with the bonus of the removal of the EPA Attorney prosecuting the case for EPA.
8. Illegally exceeding the safe oil production rate enshrined in the permits, compromising the health, safety and environment, and increasing the risk of an oil spill without liability coverage.
9. Tripling the timeline- to 9 days, the time to deploy the capping stack equipment to stop an oil spill, thus, recklessly allowing an extra 6 days of oil gushing into the ocean.
10. Imposing upon the Govt that there shall be no talk of renegotiation of the lopsided oil contract, despite both President Ali and VP Jagdeo prior shouting from the rooftop that it was the worst contract ever which steals the nation’s patrimony and will be renegotiated as soon as they get into office; but when in office, became so cowardly muted that scared to even request renegotiations under the cover of “sanctity of contract”.
11. Add further insult with his recent ridiculousness that Guyana’s oil reserves have dropped from the already preposterous 11 billion barrels, further increasing Exxon’s withholdings by $ billions for decommissioning.  

For Exxon to recover any semblance of credibility and confidence of the people as seen during Mr. Henson’s tenure, I join with Christopher Ram and the others in calling for the removal of Mr. Routledge.

Editor’s Note 

“Alistair Routledge’s declaration that building the nation is “not our job” should outrage every Guyanese. Exxon’s executives cannot celebrate record production, extract Guyana’s finite petroleum wealth, and facilitate the export of billions in profits, then wash their hands of any obligation to the country that has made that windfall possible.

This is not merely an unfortunate comment. It is a blunt admission of Exxon’s corporate posture: Guyana’s oil is its business, but Guyana’s development, people, infrastructure, environmental security, and future are somebody else’s problem. That is the mindset of a company treating a sovereign nation as an extraction zone rather than a partner deserving respect and a fair share.

We concur with  and  fully endorse Dr. Vincent Adams’s  call for Routledge to go and would caution him in our local vernacular ‘don’t bite the hand the feed you ‘.