Political rhetoric will not solve problems facing the sugar industry

Oct 24, 2017 Letters

---

Dear Editor,
The Guyana Agricultural and General Workers Union (GAWU) finds it necessary to offer a response to the October 17, 2017 editorial of Guyana Chronicle titled “Cease subverting the minds of cane cutters”. While we hold no brief for the PPP/C which was also mentioned in the editorial, we cannot let the Chronicle spout inaccuracies and market them as gospel. The editorial contends that the industry is in terminal decline as a result of mismanagement during the 23-year administration of the PPP/C. We find this to be absurd and it seems that the Chronicle’s editors have been living under a rock.
Had the Chronicle been out and about, the paper would have known that between 2002 and 2004 sugar production reached an average of 319,583tonnes, the highest since 1978 and a sharp recovery from an average production of 157,492 tonnes between 1988 and 1991 (both years inclusive). The Chronicle also would have known that sugar production in the last two (2) years has fallen as much as 25 per cent, assuming the 2017 target is realized. We contend, however, the realisation of the 2017’s target is far from realisable. Such decline has to be taken against the State support, which the Chronicle called to attention. Certainly, if there is any era of “criminal mis-management” it has to be under the leadership of the current IMC and the sugar company’s top-heavy, high-cost support team.
GAWU is then accused of deceiving workers. We wonder, “Where is the deception that the Chronicle speaks?” Were we being deceptive when we said thousands of workers would be pushed onto the breadline as a result of the State’s sugar plans? But GuySuCo said just days ago, that it would slash employment by about 7,000 workers. Or, is it that we were deceptive when we said that the closure and sellout of estates would bring about difficulty, hardship, and misery? But here again, we heard from the ex-workers of Wales, about a week and a half ago, about the trying times and harsh realities they now face. It’s often easy to criticize but not as easy to back-up those criticisms.
The editorial contends that the support provided to the sugar industry could have been better spent elsewhere. We find this to be a most disheartening statement and it is disturbing that such an assertion would have been made in the first place. It seems the Chronicle has forgotten about the billions the industry channeled to the Treasury as Sugar Levy between 1976 and 1996; or the massive sums paid over as taxes accruing from workers income, their consumption, and the industry’s profits; or the support, costing billions over the years, in preventing a large swathe of the coastal belt from being inundated in the rainy periods; or the sums saved by the public health sector as a result of the dispensaries managed by the industry; or the cost it bore to train thousands of Guyanese artisans whose skills have benefitted the economy and the country, among the many other contributions the sugar industry made to the country and Guyanese well-being.
We wish to remind the Chronicle that sugar workers and their families are Guyanese who live within the borders of Guyana. They, like any other Guyanese, are deserving of the support of the State in difficult times. The fact that the Chronicle dares to make such an incredulous assertion is reflective of the disdain that is held for sugar workers who have contributed so much to the nation. Incidentally, has the Government taken into consideration the collateral damage that would arise from the displacement of thousands of workers?
There would be enormous costs considering the loss of foreign exchange from a reduction of sugar exports; the significant dwarfing of the number of NIS contributors; the fall in income tax and VAT revenues and its budgetary implications; the cost in addressing the heightened criminal activities; the substantial economic and social costs that will arise from household problems which will likely come about, including family break-ups; the impairment of workers’ children education progress all of which are among the real and important factors that the Government has to consider. Putting the sugar industry right was the wise path and the correct choice rather than the selfish, partisan and destructive closure and sell-out thrust.
The editorial goes on to tout the Corporation’s Alternative Livelihood Programme (ALP). While the effort, on the surface, seems to be admirable, we hold that the devil lies in the details. GAWU disappointingly is yet to be briefed by GuySuCo on the ALP and our knowledge is limited to what appears in the media. From what we have read, however, we cannot fail to express our concern. We recognise that many of the skills being spoken about have been and are heavily promoted through Government-sponsored training programmes. Thus the ALP will inculcate skills which are already heavily-subscribed and, therefore, will see the increased competition among such service providers and would surely lead to a reducing of incomes from such activities.
The Chronicle also speaks about the possibilities of leasing lands for the displaced sugar workers to engage in farming. Again, this seems to be a worthy thought. But, in the sugar communities with the high levels of unemployment, the ability of the ex-sugar workers/farmers to sell their output will be near to impossible and thus discouraging. More so, when taking account that the FAO not-too-long-ago disclosed that some 30 per cent of all farmers output is either wasted or has to be thrown away, do we really, at the national level, want to expand the farming community without processing facilities or being aware of market demand and requirements. It seems we are putting the cart before the horse and ill-considered, maybe unworkable, suggestions are just thrown up as answers to the serious situation that will confront workers.
Seepaul Narine
General Secretary
GAWU

---

---