The GAWU’s attention was drawn to Ms Akola Thompson’s Minority Report column titled “Sugar” which appeared in the August 14, 2020 Stabroek News. Having considered the column, the GAWU believes it should offer a response to bring clarity to several of Ms Thompson’s suppositions.
The columnist begins by recognizing that the industry for many years played an important role in our nation, describing it as “…the crown jewel of Guyana’s industries.” While it is obvious to recognise the economic impact, the GAWU has consistently demonstrated that the industry has a much wider social impact in rural Guyana. This while not easily seen is probably the most tangible contribution of the industry. Moreover, as Guyana’s economic “crown jewel”, sugar economic legacy is impressive, the sugar levy alone carried Guyana during the turbulent past of our nation. So while Ms Thompson contends that it’s an “…ambitious task…” to restore the industry to viability, we cannot share that view. We are not going to be like ostriches with our heads in the sand and say it will be an easy feat, but we hold that it’s certainly not an impossible task as the columnist seemingly makes it out to be. It is a goal that is attainable with proper and creative management, motivated workers, and sufficent support.
Ms Thompson goes on advancing her proposition arguing that the industry has not been unable to justify its past investments. That sentiment, in our view, has to be considered alongside a clear policy position by the former Coalition Government to downplay the industry with a seeming intention to get rid of it. Undoubtedly, the lack of effective leadership and a Government-supervised tug-of-war between NICIL and GuySuCo also served to bring more harm than good. Apart from that we saw the placement of many square pegs in round holes. The columnist may be surprised to learn of the number of high-paid consultants, many past the age of retirement, the industry engaged at reportedly high pay over the last five (5) years. To give an instance, the Corporation’s factory operations department of its Head Office has more staffers now than when the industry had seven (7) factories. Notwithstanding that development, factory efficiency is at an all-time low. The industry is largely agriculture but we continue to see a lack of creativity in addressing the maladies at that level though the Company is currently led by a long-standing agriculturalist who possess a PhD.
The industry is labelled a ‘black hole’ by the columnist. It’s an interesting phrase and one which was used by the APNU, in the form of Dr Carl Greenidge, to describe the industry similarly in 2013. Maybe it is coincidental choice but it also exposes Ms Thompson’s naivety as it regards sugar. The reality is that the industry must be re-oriented to producing several products such as electricity, refined sugar, packaged sugar, among other things. There must be improved efficiencies in the fields as well through mechanization and harnessing advances in technology. For the columnist’s information, steps were taken in this direction and the fruits of those efforts were borne. Rather than continuing along that path, we saw the former Coalition Government throwing the baby out with the bathwater. To share an example, the Enmore Packaging Plant yielded GuySuCo the best prices for its sugar and in spite of such positive attributes it was closed without a second thought. Over the last few years, GuySuCo has been forced to rent the plant from NICIL, to whom it was surreptitiously handed, and transport sugar from Blairmont to be packaged at Enmore in order to meet market demand. One need not be a rocket scientist to imagine what it did to the margins.
Guyana’s sugar sector vis-à-vis our Caribbean contemporaries cannot be considered in abstract. We have to wonder whether Ms Thompson is au fait with those industries. In those island states, there are massive costs to irrigate fields. Sugar cane is a heavy consumer of water. In Guyana, on the other hand, we don’t have to face those difficulties. From a natural stand point we have several endowments that lend to sugar cultivation such as flat arable land, an abundant access to fresh water, waterway transport of harvested canes, among other things. We don’t face the difficulties of sugar displacing other economic pursuits as some of our Caribbean friends faced. It’s against that background that we see it as comparing apples with oranges.
Ms Thompson shared her agreement with the past Administration decision to close estates. It says a lot about where she stands in our view but again that’s her right. We, of course, expressed a very critical view for so many reasons. The columnist nevertheless accepted that the closure process was haphazard and callous. Yet, in spite of that admission, it appears that there was no recognition of the reality that the former Government could have cared less about what were the fate of those who were affected. As is rightly admitted that apparent lack of empathy that arose from the closure remains “…a sore point.”
We could not agree more with Ms Thompson in assessing the refusal of the Coalition to the cries of the workers and their communities of the closed estates. We are unsure whether the columnist knows or not but the former Government bluntly rejected a call for a properly considered study to have a better understanding of the consequences of the decisions which at that time were being contemplated. Indeed, the economic and social impact was “…swift and brutal…” and as the Stabroek News and several other media houses have pointed out is an impact which many have yet to recover from, if they will recover at all.
Ms Thompson in spite of her admissions urges that the industry should be “…allowed to die its natural death”. As an organisation which has struggled with the workers and their families we know all too well what that would mean for the tens of thousands in the sugar belt. Certainly, the economic dislocation would be enormous and the social fallout with be even more detrimental. It would push back the steady climb out of poverty for a great lot of Guyanese. We, in those circumstances, find the suggestion, if it can be considered that, as most irresponsible. What for us is most disturbing is that Ms Thomspon is regarded as a social activist and, therefore, we are at a lost to see how she can fathom making such a statement. But that is another story.
For Ms Thompson, we hasten to remind that sugar industry remains a significant industry in our country from so many points of view. Contrary to her view, the industry has many potentials for success. Several other industries offer sterling and living examples in this regard. We consider such feats within our grasp and once pursued properly success can redound to the industry and all Guyana. The vacuum created by estate closure has been heart-rending and the pains suffered have been intense. It’s not something we would wish on our worse of enemies and it’s not something we see responsible persons should advocate, but then again we live in the real world.
