Latest update February 12th, 2025 8:40 AM
Aug 06, 2015 Letters
DEAR EDITOR,
I am very appreciative of the efforts of the new administration to appoint Prof. Clive Thomas as the Chairman of the Committee of Inquiry on GuySuCo. I have never personally met Prof. Thomas, but I have only heard great things, fairness and a strong opinion, traits I hope to emulate.
With reference to his opinions mentioned in the article “EU customer warns COI… GuySuCo must bring costs down to remain alive” (Kaieteur News – July 1, 2015), I do agree that GuySuCo can compete within the Caribbean and preferential European Markets (at least until 2017) at the moment.
But I do not believe sugar production needs to be altered, in fact, if measures can be implemented to boost the production that can be very advantageous for the coming years.
The reasons I say this are many fold. I understand the Commission is charged with “fixing” a broken system, but mending using “duct-tape” and scaling back is not the way forward.
The Commission of Inquiry could have called on the Brazilians for guidance. A few days ago, his Excellency, David Granger was pictured in most of the dailies shaking hands and greeting President Dilma Rousseff. Brazil is a superpower today because of the abundance of fertile land, natural resources, a skilled labour force, international collaborative research projects and frankly, a reduction in corruption.
Guyana has much to learn, hence I am a little disappointed that the media choose to cover the story about Venezuela’s aggression and no mention was made on how the Brazilians can help us forge forward the sugar industry. Again, the same can be said when his Excellency met with Prime Minister Kamla Persad-Bissessar.
It’s either his liaison team is doing a poor job of briefing the media outlets or no discussions or measures were put in place to assist Guyana with its Petroleum Development Programme. Nevertheless, I would like to add my two cents to the issue.
GuySuCo cannot be profitable, survive, or even break even, with the preferential markets or if the production is scaled back
. The production of sugar is one of the many streams of commodities that can be obtained from the sugar cane plant. The residue can be used for many purposes with values that are comparable with the price of sugar or better. For example, a substantial portion of the crop is bagasse, a material that can be efficiently converted to biofuels such as ethanol.
Five years ago, the production of bioethanol from lignocellulosic residue (such as bagasse) was not competitive, but strides in technological improvements and cheap feedstock have resulted in the commissioning of many production facilities worldwide.
Instead of plugging a leaking tap, the government should dispatch a team whose sole responsibility would be to add value to the stream of by-products from the industry. We can harness these technologies with the assistance of the United States of America government, the Brazilian expertise, and our local skilled labour force.
The solution to GuySuCo demands short and long term goals. In the short term, there needs to be improved production and yields (better agronomy and solving the mystery to the Skeldon Factory) while in the long term (5 – 10 years), there needs to be diversification and implementation of technologies suited to our raw material and demand worldwide.
In the end, I hope the Commission does consider some of the avenues that can create value while debating over how to reduce or stop the debt accumulation.
Michael George
Feb 12, 2025
Kaieteur Sports- The Ministry of Culture, Youth and Sport (MCY&S) will substantially support the Mashramani Street Football Championships ahead of its Semi-Final and Final set for this Saturday...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News-Guyana has long championed the sanctity of territorial integrity and the rejection of aggression... more
Antiguan Barbudan Ambassador to the United States, Sir Ronald Sanders By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The upcoming election... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]