search

GSA / participate-nap4

Participate in the 4th U.S. National Action Plan for Open Government
https://open.usa.gov/national-action-plan/4/
13 stars 10 forks source link

Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative #26

Open KristenHoney opened 7 years ago

KristenHoney commented 7 years ago

[submitted through Federal interagency process]

Topline Description

Institutionalize EITI at the Department of the Interior by mainstreaming government production and revenue data and promoting public awareness issues on the governance of revenue collection from energy and mineral resources on Federal and Indian lands.

Key Objective(s)

Rather than relying only on the EITI reporting mechanism to bring about transparency, the U.S. Department of the Interior is committing to mainstream government data required by the EITI Standard through the existing data portal.

Paragraph Description

Since the launch of the Open Government Partnership, the U.S. has been committed to implementing the Extractive Industries Transparency Initiative (EITI), an international standard aimed at increasing transparency and accountability in the payments companies make and the revenues governments receive for their natural resources. The United States worked towards complying with the EITI standard, including publishing the first United States EITI report in 2015, and the Second in 2016. In the long term, extractive industry transparency should not be confined to EITI reporting, rather be recognized an integral part of how Government manages. Therefore, managing to ensure EITI principles of transparency and public awareness, the United States will:

Measurable Metrics

Complete the third Annual USEITI Report by December 2017, to include additional contextual narrative on forestry; non-energy minerals; employment by commodity and by State; and an expanded Tribal overview.

miasteinle commented 7 years ago

I am providing feedback as someone who has been closely involved in the USEITI process for the past several years. I am the coordinator of the USEITI civil society sector, though I am not a member of the USEITI multi-stakeholder group (MSG). I am writing on my own behalf.

In order to be published, the third USEITI Report must be approved at a meeting by the members of the USEITI MSG. Given that the Department of the Interior indefinitely postponed the June USEITI meeting, it does not seem likely there will be a November meeting. As such, any report that Interior publishes in December cannot be considered a collaborative, multi-stakeholder product and will not meet the criteria of the EITI Standard.

The civil society members of the USEITI MSG previously voiced their concerns about the future of USEITI in the following letter: http://www.pogo.org/our-work/letters/2017/pogo-and-colleagues-object-to-actions.html

And the Interior Inspector General reported earlier this that the US is unlikely to pass EITI validation, even if a third report were produced. See here: https://www.doioig.gov/sites/doioig.gov/files/AIE_EITI_FinalInspectionReport_Public.pdf

While Interior's ongoing efforts to increase its transparency and accountability surrounding energy and mineral resources are commendable, these efforts should not be mistaken for being equivalent to the multi-stakeholder process outlined in the EITI Standard.

pbugala commented 7 years ago

I provide this feedback as a full member of the USEITI MSG representing civil society from its founding. Paul Bugala

Industry associations and companies represented on the USEITI MSG (multi-stakeholder group) have acted in bad faith both within and outside of the process, such that USEITI cannot meet the EITI Standard in terms of both operating guidelines and disclosure. (The details of these points are documented in the following public statements by USEITI CSO MSG members http://www.pogo.org/our-work/letters/2017/pogo-and-colleagues-object-to-actions.html and http://www.pwypusa.org/pwyp-news/useiti-cso-statement-march-20-2017/). These facts complicate any consideration of mainstreaming in a manner consistent with the EITI Standard.

Mainstreaming of EITI payment data has its virtues and Interior's own disclosure of payment data related to EITI has improved commendably, especially relative to its status documented in this 2006 study (https://www.oxfamamerica.org/static/media/files/transparency-begins-at-home.pdf). However, the EITI Board has been clear that mainstreaming should not be undertaken at the expense of data quality and the requirements of the EITI Standard. Unfortunately, the USEITI mainstreaming effort falls short on both counts, to date.

The government and industry representatives on the MSG have long supported an effort to simplify the reconciliation process for USEITI. As such, they have begun an effort to determine whether reconciliation of receipts between the U.S. Treasury Department and the Department of the Interior that are reconciled by KPMG may be sufficient to meet the requirements of Section 4.9 of the EITI Standard. Civil society has expressed concerns with this approach, but has received commitments from our government colleagues that it will not pursue this approach unless it is determined to be consistent with Section 4.9. A USEITI working group had been conducting a gap analysis along these lines.

During the February 2017 USEITI MSG meeting, the USEITI Independent Administrator, Deloitte, made a presentation titled "Mainstreaming Feasibility In-Progress Update" (https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/mainstreaming_feasibility_in_progress_update_feb_msg.pdf). Slide six of the presentation indicated that at the time, Deloitte was in the process of "completing a feasibility study" of mainstreaming. The same slide indicated that MSG approval of the feasibility study would lead to the need for MSG agreement on a schedule for disclosure and assurance, which would form the basis for a mainstreaming application. Next, slide six says the "MSG must approve an application to the EITI Board seeking approval of the proposed workplan", which in turn must be approved by the International Board. To be as brief as possible, there's no way for the MSG to approve mainstreaming, prepare an application, and have that application approved by the EITI board with no MSG meetings. Even if the MSG met, it would only have until the April 2018 validation deadline to get through all of this.

In fact, USEITI MSG has not met since February 2017. It is not functioning and the USEITI report being developed by the Department of the Interior and Deloitte does not sufficiently represent the work of USEITI work groups or the consensus-based approval of the MSG as required by the EITI Standard and the USEITI Charter (https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/filed_charter_skmbt_c55216082412230.pdf), and the USEITI Terms of Reference (https://www.doi.gov/sites/doi.gov/files/uploads/msg_updated_useiti_terms_of_reference_06282016.pdf).

Further, USEITI public reporting does not include company tax disclosures fundamental to any EITI process, even though MSG member companies make tax payments to the US government public in other venues (for example, http://tools.morningstar.co.uk/tsweu6nqxu/globaldocuments/document/rnsNewsItem.aspx?DocumentId=384822628095094 and http://www.extractafact.org/blog/oil-company-data-on-payments-to-governments-is-now-coming-thick-and-fast) and industry members of the USEITI MSG sit on the EITI International Board (https://eiti.org/sites/default/files/documents/eiti_board_members_2016-2019_as_of_09_september_2017.pdf).

The following is a good faith critique of the Interior Inspector General's assessment of USEITI compliance with the EITI Standard published in May 2017 (http://www.pwypusa.org/interior-inspector-general-misses-chance-to-help-save-useiti/). It includes further detail on the bad faith actions of industry and the failure of the MSG to maintain operation in a manner consistent with the EITI Standard and the USEITI Charter, and the USEITI Terms of Reference.