Latest update February 5th, 2025 11:03 AM
Oct 19, 2016 Letters
Dear Editor;
I have in my possession a document put out by Guyana Sugar Corporation in May 26th 1976, wherein GuySuCo is presented as a food production unit, formerly a monoculture organization being diversified into an agro-business entity. The then new GuySuCo will be divided into six distinct divisions being:- Sugar, Grains, Root Crops, Orchard Crops, Livestock and Aquaculture. Principal among the divisions is the Sugar Division.
Extensive expenditure of money and man-power has been expended on the above with colossal failure being the result. Whatever the cause of the demise of the much touted diversification, there does not exist evidence, at least in public print, that this nation was informed as to the cause/s for such gigantic loss of money, time and expectation of what could have been, among other reasons for the failure of the costly diversification.
So now GuySuCo has fallen on hard times. The State of Guyana, meaning all of its population, is expected to provide monetary assistance to keep it afloat; the word is subsidy. We, the owners, all believe that sugar must not fail, that sugar is bonded to the sinews of this Guyana; its doom may spell the destruction of the country.
Rather than operate as an entity on the verge of extinction, that it should circle the wagons, tighten its belt, drop off dead weight, or some other evidence that it is seeing the writing on the wall, what does the leadership of the present GuySuCo do? They go on a retreat and surface with; “New GuySuCo concept captures the essence of the direction” in which the entity is progressing. It will include sugar cane cultivation, sugar production and a Diversification Division that will focus on a variety of ventures, some of which include aquaculture, fruit crops, dairy farming, livestock farming, and rice cultivation.
Notice that in the 1976 diversification plans, GuySuCo was not receiving subsidy to the tune of billions of dollars per year, as at present.
The price of sugar on the world market was not 19 US cents per pound. Production cost was not 41 US cents per pound. Its management structure in the 1976 period comprised efficient and decent persons.
What of the management structure at present, and what has GuySuCo gone through with all the rogues and malcontents who passed for Board Members, persons who bankrupted major investments, Chief Executives rolling in Jaguars and other expensive autos, corruption at all levels of the Corporation’s life, not to leave out its trade unions operating as if GuySuCo belonged to the hated Imperialists.
GuySuCo must not be allowed to do anything except concentrate on its core operation. Produce sugar at those sugar plantations owned by the inhabitants of Guyana. Dairy farming failed at West Bank Demerara during the First Diversification. Do we know why? What happened to all the machinery and equipment in that location? What happened to the milking parlours, cow pens, all the equipment in the cheese making factory, fences, grass plots that cost money to lay out, etc? How much money did this country lose in the dairy debacle?
What about the rearing of fish in ponds which have to be constructed from neatly made sugar beds and drains. There is the threat of fish being stolen, predators, both animals and human, and other risks, unforseen in a fish operation of great acreages. What happens when the overseas customer says his patrons do not like the flavour of the fillet; this happens to inland fisheries.
To talk about rice cultivation sounds like some persons at the GuySucCo retreat ended up sleeping. At this time when rice farmers may not be able to continue cultivation due primarily to the action of the millers, continued increase of inputs to production, loss of preferential markets, falling yield per acre due to genetic adulteration of the varieties and other factors, and when there is talk of diversification from rice, how could in good conscience normal executives of the State owned GuySuCo treat citizens of Guyana as if we are children.
All persons involved in rice cultivation know that in as much as rice can be cultivated almost anywhere in this country, no farmer will attempt to grow rice in riverain areas, due to high rainfall patterns. GuySuCo must be prepared to make sugar alone its reason for receiving billions it is getting and may have to be given until its Executives and the Board put their house in order.
Wales sugar estate lands should soon pass to small farmers, among them former sugar workers, landless people in the Wales surrounding areas. They will take care of diversification. As the Wales experiment pick up steam, we would have all the experiences necessary for an over-all diversification of sugar in Region 3.
Would GuySuCo investigate why DDL and Banks DIH use refined sugar imported from Belgium at the rate of forty twenty foot containers per month, each container holding 420 to 425 one hundred pounds sacks per container?
In the First Diversification of 1976 – GuySuCo used to import to its West Bank cheese factory, milk from Leguan, where farmers could not produce rice, due to lack of inputs to rice production. The milk launch also ferried passengers on the Leguan to Parika run. One would have thought that someone in Govt. would have discerned the inventiveness of the Leguan farmers, and encourage that the milk remain in Leguan where a viable cheese and other milk products could have existed up to today.
Hafiz Rahaman
Feb 05, 2025
Kaieteur Sports- Released via press statement, the Barbados Cricket Association (BCA) and Guyana Cricket Board (GCB) have agreed to attend the meeting of February 9 2025, set by CWI to discuss the...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Some things in life just shouldn’t have an expiration date—like true love, a fine bottle... 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]