SUGAR IN REGION THREE

Nov 07, 2018 Letters

Dear Editor,
In reviewing the facts, I cannot find supporting documentation or justification for the closure of Wales Estate.
Wales Estate wasn’t doing as bad as the government puts it. In fact, the estate showed great signs of improvement from 2015 to 2016. Cane yield, according to the GUYSUCO 2015 and 2016 annual report, increased from 42.4 tonnes per hectare in 2015 to 44.5 tonnes in 2016.
Of total cane production, farmers contributed more than 60%, the largest of all the estates. In 2015 alone, Wales cane farmers were directly responsible for the production of 10,884 tonnes of sugar. If you multiply that by the average price of sugar on the world market for that year, it means that the cane farmers of Wales were able to contribute US$2.9 million to Guyana’s economy.
So, if Wales estate showed signs of improvement, why did the government insist on having it closed? The answer is, Wales has the single largest number of sugarcane farmers in Guyana. According to a survey carried out by the World Bank in 2009, the estate had a workforce of over 1,800 people and 772 farmers.
Of the total number of farmers interviewed, 84% were the main income earner of the family, while the wives supplemented the household income by doing gardening and livestock rearing. So by closing the estate, the main source of income for hundreds of families in Region Three who are predominantly PPP supporters would be cut.
The economic hardship that would ensue would spell disaster in the PPP support base area. That is the plan of this government. And if one is to take a look at Skeldon, which also has a large number of cane farmers, the same atrocity was committed.
Thus, this is a calculated, callous and vindictive move by the government to destroy the livelihood of innocent Guyanese, and in doing so, realizing the economic and social consequences that would likely follow.
Another reason for the estate closure is that GUYSUCO would no longer have obligations in maintaining the drainage and irrigation system. Hence, a domino effect will ensue. Cash crop and rice farmers would become prone to flooding. Even livestock would be affected.
Adding insult to injury, the government, from 2014 to 2017, collected an additional $55 billion in revenue. Of this amount, $47 billion was expended on recurrent expenditure, while a mere $8 billion was spent on capital.
Under recurrent expenditure (expenditure that does not add to the existing capital stock), $17.5 billion was spent on employment cost, while another $6.5 billion was spent on food and beverages, rental of buildings, transportation, celebrations, and security for government officials. A huge chunk of the remaining balance was used to subsidize the slew of failed governmental enterprises (More on this later section).
Mohamed Irfaan Ali MP

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News