$52M GuySuCo COI report yet to be debated in National Assembly

Oct 26, 2016 News

…Economic Services Committee currently unable to discuss the document

By Kiana Wilburg

The controversial report on the $52M Commission of Inquiry into the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo) is yet to be discussed in the Economic Services Committee or even debated at a sitting of the National Assembly.
There are a number of reasons for this, some of which are perhaps grounded in the negligence of some Members of Parliament (MPs).
The GuySuCo report was first tabled in the National Assembly last year December and speaking to it was Minister of Agriculture, Noel Holder. It was anticipated that the report would have been discussed in the Economic Services Committee (ESC).
However, this newspaper was informed that the work of the ESC on the report had been halted since it was told that the document was not properly sent to the Committee.
PPP Member on the ESC, Juan Edghill said, “The report was supposed to be considered by the Committee but we were advised by the Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs, that the report was not properly sent to us. Since this was made known to us, the ESC Chairman, Jaipaul Sharma, disallowed further examination of the report.”
Edghill said that when the report was actually tabled by the Minister of Agriculture, he never specifically asked for it to be sent to the ESC.

Opposition Member on the Economic Services Committee, Juan Edghill

Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs

The former Junior Finance Minister said that on behalf of the Opposition, he has urged the Agriculture Minister to go before the Assembly and have it sent to the ESC for perusal. He said that Holder is yet to do this.
He said, “I am extremely disappointed and concerned with what is taking place. Since February, the report has been stuck and the Committee is stuck at a stage where it cannot move forward on the report. I do not feel that the Government is attaching the level of seriousness that it is supposed to where the sugar industry is concerned.”
The ESC Member stressed that it is a matter which needs to be clarified. “After all, it was the Government which said that it would await the outcome of the ESC on the report before making significant moves in the sugar industry,” added Edghill.
Clerk of the National Assembly, Sherlock Isaacs also addressed this issue.
He said that as far as he is aware, no member has made any move at the Parliamentary level to fix the situation. He said that all it would take is a simple motion to be moved by any member to have the report sent to the Committee for discussion.
The Clerk said, “A standing committee cannot just pick up any report laid in the National Assembly and run with it…And that is what happened in the case of the GuySuCo report. It was not referred to the Economic Services Committee. For them to consider it, a motion is needed. Once passed, then they can deal with it…”
Since January the Opposition made known its intentions to challenge the Government to a debate on the GuySuCo report.
Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo, had said that prior to the report being laid in the National Assembly on December 31, 2015, statements were already being made in the media that the sugar industry should be privatized.
The Opposition Leader expressed, “It was also implied that in the short term, costs should be contained. When I examined the CoI report, those were exactly the two recommendations coming out of the report. Now after spending some $50 million, we seem to have a situation where evidence was just being gathered to suit preconceived notions about the way forward for GuySuCo.”
He continued, “Also, I have argued that statements made by Minister of Agriculture, Noel Holder, in the Parliament when he laid the report, were totally unfair because it did not give us a chance to reply in Parliament…”
When Holder laid the reports on the CoI in the National Assembly, he had said that GuySuCo under the PPP was made into a “chronic loss maker.”
Holder said that the increasing output costs, combined with poor management, strategically placed the state-owned company on the path of no return.
Jagdeo said that the Minister’s comments were unmerited and with the debate as his platform, he (Jagdeo) and his team would prove to the nation that costs cannot be reduced, especially at the cost of the workers.
While Government has not yet moved to implement all of the recommended changes needed for GuySuCo’s sustainability, the company’s Chairman, Dr. Clive Thomas, has made it clear that moves are apace to get GuySuCo involved in the sale of electricity. This was one of the recommendations of the CoI report.
He noted too, that while the recommendations for the industry appear “extreme”, those working in the sector should not be worried for one bit whether the sector would be closing shop.