Dear Editor,
It’s interesting to note Mr Komal Chand’ s statements in the SN of January 13 that a sugar industry turnaround was “far from reality.” How true; if anyone believes that the industry can be turned around with the prevailing mindset then they are living in a dream world.
In its present state, the sugar industry is dying a slow, painful death; production targets are not met, wages and salaries are not paid on time, and suppliers wait very long for their money, etc.
President Jagdeo took a bold decision in implementing the Skeldon Project. Unfortunately, the equipment in the factory seems to be of poor quality, although the same could be rectified at a cost. It was a bold decision, because the future of the ACP (African Caribbean and Pacific countries) sugar protocol seemed doomed. His gamble would pay off if the sugar industry was productive, as the price of sugar on the world market is at a reasonable level, and lots of value can be added by packaging, utilizing the recent expensively installed packaging facility.
Regardless of who sits on the Board or manages it in its present state, however, GuySuCo will fail, as the problems are more deep rooted.
GuySuCo is totally owned by the government. It em-ploys many workers and earns a fair amount of foreign exchange while utilizing a significant amount also. One can assume it’s utilizing more than it earns because of its inability to honour its present financial obligations. This by itself is justification for it to be shut down.
There has been a significant movement away by the workers from the industry for a variety of reasons, although mostly the wage packets received and working conditions. The cane cutters are leaving because they can earn more for less effort elsewhere, and because of the health risks involved.
The issue facing the industry is low production, which results in out-of-control cost of production. Low production is directly attributable to lack of skills at all levels, theft, shortage of a reliable labour force, impassable access roads, lack of R&D, etc.
Undoubtedly, there are good people in the industry trying to make it work, but the failure of the sugar industry will cause serious social problems. This is enough reason for the administration not wanting this industry to die. Unfortunately, they will not be successful if the present state of affairs continues.
We have to look at the industry in its entirety, and this involves R&D, operations in the fields, operations in the mills, marketing, etc. The two most critical operations are in the field and factory.
Where the first of these if concerned, at present GuySuCo is engaged in the laying out of fields for mechanical harvesting ‒ a good idea, but it is affected by the weather. The soil when soaked does not allow for mechanical operations, which would damage the soil and the ratoons. At present workers are used to harvesting the cane and loading it into punts, and then transporting the same to the factory pulled by a tractor. The practice of cut and drop is also utilized, where the cane is harvested by hand and a mechanical loader loads it into punts.
The operation of cutting and loading by hand is very strenuous, and not many people are attracted to this occupation. Low wages and the likelihood of injury do not help the situation.
Where the factories are concerned, the equipment there has deteriorated significantly as a result of a poor maintenance programme.
This is evident from the low sugar to cane ratio achieved presently and the number of days the factories are down.
GuySuCo should retain control of all the sugar factories, and make a serious effort to ensure that maximum efficiency is always achieved, which allows for maximum returns from cane harvested and zero or minimum down days.
With regard to the fields, the areas under consideration should be leased to private individuals, which will see productive areas split into smaller units. The lesson to be learnt is from Wales, where relatively small farmers outperform GuySuCo, which has more equipment and infrastructure. This is being practised at Skeldon, where virgin lands are developed by private farmers and at Uitvlugt, where GuySuCo land has been distributed to private farmers.
This will enable GuySuCo to get out of farming completely, resulting in them concentrating on the mills.
The process of laying out fields for mechanical harvesting should continue, until all areas are laid out and cane harvesters can be utilized in ideal conditions. Workers will be used to cut and drop, and the loaders presently utilized will load into the punts in the wet conditions.
Mules should be reintroduced to pull the punts from the fields. This will ensure that the access roads are not damaged, especially in the rainy season, and will be cheaper.
This can be a stop-gap measure while other methods are being looked at, such as building all-weather roads and utilising a system of water propulsion, although both of these will be unachievable in the short term by a cash-strapped GuySuCo.
With increased production and efficiency, GuySuCo will be able to offer better packages to its employees, resulting in less or zero migration from the industry.
The above stop-gap solution might seem very simplistic and backward, but could solve the problem in the short term.
Those of us who were around before the industry was privatized, will remember that Bookers and Sandbach Parker ran the industry very efficiently, with mules pulling the punts, and always achieved the quota set in Europe, at highly subsided prices, which is way above the quota set presently, and never achieved.
It’s interesting to note that the industry was very labour intensive then, with very little migration because of the packages offered at all levels, and there were very qualified and competent people in the system.
In closing, regardless of how much money is put into GuySuCo in its present state, it will be like throwing water on a duck’s back.
Yours faithfully,
Beni Sankar
