PNCR track record with rice industry dismal

Oct 25, 2009 News

---

…as GRDB says it never attempted to protect farmers

The Guyana Rice Development Board (GRDB) yesterday lambasted the Peoples National Congress Reform (PNCR) and to some extent the Alliance for Change for what it called a dismal track record and not doing anything to protect rice farmers.
In a statement issued to media it stated that it is not surprised by the party’s condemnation of the recent amendment of the Rice Factories Act to provide additional protection for farmers from the few unscrupulous millers who delay and or deny payment to farmers for paddy purchased.
GRDB also responded to the Alliance for Change’s (AFC), Chairman, Khemraj Ramjattan who criticized the government for seeking to put in place a legal framework for what it called protecting farmers and ensuring a functioning and viable rice industry.
According to the GRDB statement, the PNCR should recall its mismanagement and neglect of the rice industry which led to production to just over 90,000 tonnes per annum and export was just 25,000 tonnes per annum around the period when it left office.

“In fact, the run down state of the industry under the PNCR saw only about 93,000 tonnes of rice produced, today the PNCR no doubt ashamed of its performance and the AFC now joining to discredit the sound management of the industry and hard work of our farmers, millers, processor and exporters.”
The GRDB said that the PNCR’s solution, while at the helm of the country, was based on neglect and running away from the issues, and after a process of nationalization, just simply giving away all the major rice mills.
“Continually over the past several years, this year will see cultivation of the highest in Guyana’s history and production reaching the highest in our history is some of the record breaking developments in the rice sector….The absence of the PNC/R during yesterday’s Parliamentary Debate is indicative of their non-support for farmers, particularly rice farmers.”
According to the GRDB the Bill that was presented is a display of the government’s continued commitment to find solutions and new measures to protect farmers and ensure timely payment to continue their activities.
“Today, despite many global market and natural challenges, the government has made numerous strides to modernize and make more competitive Guyana’s rice industry…The PNCR term in office and while in opposition- there was no attempts to protect farmers. Today the Guyana Rice Development Board as the lead agency is advancing necessary measures and action to protect farmers and other stakeholders in this very important economic sector.”
The GRDB noted that in the PNCR days, there was not a bill to protect farmers and now this government is enacting relevant regulations to protect farmers every effort is being made to discredit the ruling government.
“This is the kind of discrepancy the government has to face from the opposition, while protecting the rights of our farmers and the rice industry as a whole…In fact, the conclusion of the Venezuela Rice Purchase Agreement is testimony to government’s commitment to ensure the rice industry remains competitive and sustainable.”
On Thursday last the PNCR’s Vice Chairperson, Basil Williams, told media operatives that it would not be partaking in the debate given that the Bill would not effect any significant positive change to the industry.
He did say that the PNCR obviously supports the prompt payment of rice farmers but the Bill, “is another manifestation of the PPP/C incompetent management of the rice sector”.
He stated that several years ago, the PPP propagandized that it had addressed all the issues affecting rice farmers when the well publicized cases of non-payment forced rice farmers to take protest action against the Government and delinquent rice millers.
“The Minister of Agriculture rushed to Parliament with a law, which the Government boasted would solve this problem permanently…The fact of there being need to return to Parliament with another bill is clear evidence of their incompetence.”
He asserted that the problems of the rice industry cannot be solved by legislation.
“In the absence of a coherent policy with incentives and support for both millers and farmers, the problems of the rice sector will be a continuous one.”
Ramjattan, in his objection to the passage of the Bill during the Parliamentary called it draconian especially in light of the fact that there was no analysis done as to why the millers are sometimes unable to honour the commitments to farmers with shorter delays.
He said that the Bill also seeks to criminalise millers while removing the provisions for contracts to be established between farmers and millers.
Ramjattan also stated that the move could cause a monopoly with persons not having milling license to purchase the paddy and thus evade the bill.
He stated, too, that the Bill also removes the millers’ right to move to the courts to seek redress.
The Opposition parliamentarian suggested to the Minister that the Government remove export commissions on rice as well as implement the several measures that the administration has been talking about for years that would alleviate the woes of farmers and millers.
He spoke, too, of capital being made available to farmers as well as crop insurance, an issue that Persaud had alluded to in his presentation.
Ramjattan also suggested that Bill will have dire social consequences society.
When enacted the rice millers will have to pay 50 per cent of payments to farmers within two weeks of the delivery of paddy and will then have 42 days to complete payments.
The amendment to the legislation now will ensure that the millers not owe any individual farmer a debt amounting to more than five percent of the value of paddy supplied unless approved by the board and will have its licence revoked.

---

---