Latest update January 1st, 2025 1:00 AM
Jun 30, 2022 News
…CEO says he does not act without Cabinet approval
By Zena Henry
Kaieteur News – The Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo) has received a proposal for the supply of four more GAME agriculture tractors to be used in soil preparation for the cultivation of sugarcane. However sources close to the company are concerned that the potential purchase will be yet another procurement of “unsuitable” equipment to be used by the corporation.
This newspaper understands that GuySuCo would have received a proposal from American company Game Equipment LLC earlier this month to purchase more tractors, “similar to the ones the Government purchased a few weeks ago. What’s strange is that Game Tractors are used as haulage tractors meaning to take canes from fields to factories but GuySuCo is buying them to till lands.” The source said that references for the use of the tractors point directly to haulage as its primary use while GuySuCo needs the items for tillage. “No one uses them (tractors) to till but GuySuCo is, (although) it appears the tractor is not capable of what GuySuCo wants it to do.”
In the Game proposal seen by the Kaieteur News, it highlights GuySuCo’s requirements as “mainly for tillage purposes in heavy clay soils.” The company said implements to be used with the tractors shall include disc ploughs, mounted harrows, trailing harrows and sub-soilers among others. However in Game’s Summary page, the document highlighted its product line, but spoke mainly about its haulage equipment. “As seen from Incauca’s and LaCabana’s letters many of their GAME tractors have over 40,000 hours of proven performance with the largest cane haulage trailers in the world…” The proposal went on to talk about locations such as the Cali valley of Colombia which grows some of the heaviest cane and how the GAME tractors perform there in relation to transporting the commodity. At least five other recommendation letters were provided from the American Sugarcane League, Central Romana Company Ltd. from the Dominican Republic, the Dangote Sugar Refinery out of Nigeria and the United States Sugar Company and San Diego, all of whom offered high praises toward the equipments haulage performance expressly.
GAME highlighted however that it receives bid inquiries direct from GuySuCo and is a registered supplier, although some believe the act seems “contradictory to open public tendering as suppliers should not be wooed since it could create an expectation.” Outside of this, Kaieteur News was pointed to the fact that in the last three years, the GAME Company has been recording financial losses, “yet we are handing large contracts to the company.” The proposal pointed out for instance, that the company’s cash in 2019 moved from US$258,347 to US$81,331 in 2021 while it continued to experience income losses from operation to the tune of US$28,127 in 2019, US$422,755 in 2020 and US$21,607 in 2021.
The cost of the four tractors is pegged at US$159,155.00 with possible increases if the options such as air conditioning in the cab, electrical connectors and replays and radio among others are included. The contention some concerned persons have is that given the financial strain GuySuCo is under and its heavy dependence on government funds, excess prudence must be taken when investing sums into the company.
Just two weeks ago, questions were also raised over the purchase of six articulated agricultural tractors totaling more than $200M despite the company’s Board of Directors (BoDs) ordering a sub- committee to determine the efficiency of those machines against other brands. The subcommittee’s work was ordered after a follow up report to the BoDs from a senior GuySuCo management showed that John Deere tractors, for instance, are cheaper and more efficient than the tractors procured for preparing for the cultivation of sugar cane. The report said that the company should hold on procuring the items until John Deere was consulted.
Fixed Frame tractors was said to complete its tasks in less time than the articulated tractor using 20 percent less fuel. Importantly, it was claimed that while six of the articulated tractors were purchased for $200M, 12 John Deere tractors could have been purchased for the same cost. The report said that the John Deere is a better tractor than the articulated tractor when working under the same condition. “Therefore the recommendation is to use John Deere tractor rather than articulated tractor since it is capable of carrying out all the operations in the tillage/mechanization process. It is also cheaper and more versatile than the articulated tractor.” When Kaieteur sought clarity on this matter a senior GuySuCo source claimed that the company had not purchased the equipment, that it was a gift from the government provided by private business people.
When contact was made regarding the GAME proposal, GuySuCo’s Chief Executive Officer Sasenarine Singh said that the GAME tractors have been used for the last 15 years by the company and is currently being used at Albion for more than a year now. He said that from January to now, the company has spent some $58M in parts to maintain other equipment. The CEO nonetheless stated that he commits no act without Cabinet approval. He said he does not act without permission and that, “Whatever Cabinet says, I jump. I don’t do anything without written permission,” he told the newspaper.
Dec 31, 2024
By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports- In the rich tapestry of Guyanese sports, few names shine as brightly as Keevin Allicock. A prodigious talent with the rare blend of skill, charisma, and grit, Allicock...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Every New Year’s Eve, like clockwork, we engage in a ritual that is predictable as... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- The year 2024 has underscored a grim reality: poverty continues to be an unyielding... 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]