Dear Editor,
Mr Sohan’s letter in the October 12 edition of SN `GuySuCo missed the opportunity for its economic growth and profitability years ago’ is noted. Unfortunately, he seemed more focused in attacking the messenger, rather than dealing with many of the substantive issues in my letter.
Sadly, his letter is riddled with inaccuracies. British-owned Booker Tate was the management team in 1993, not “senior management staff, politically loyal were appointed to his team”. I was relieved of my position because of a political decision by the PPP Exco, not for poor performance. Additionally, Mr Sohan can check with GuySuCo’s management, unions and workers as to my stewardship during 1993-2003. He will be surprised to learn of the high level of respect I enjoyed.
Re his claim of “large annual losses during his tenure”, GuySuCo made profits every year under my tenure, except for one year for foreign exchange reasons, when the newly established Euro currency in which we were paid, depreciated to 1 Euro to $0.82 USD. In subsequent years the exchange rate has been in the USD1.14 to 1.47 range, to GuySuCo’s advantage.
The issue of political interference must be distinct from political support. The Government of Guyana is the sole shareholder of GuySuCo and as such, appoints a Board of Directors that it has confidence in to perform the mandate given to it. Those directors have a fiduciary responsibility to perform, or they should be replaced. The shareholder supports its company, whether financially, as in recent years or politically, as at Caricom COTED meetings. Political interference, however, such as the seizure of prime lands without compensation, the choice of a Chinese company to build the new Skeldon factory, despite my advice to the contrary and the appointment of an unsuitable person to be the CEO, as were done by the previous administration, was detrimental to the company and should not be condoned.
For the record, proposals were in train with the Government of India, for cogeneration units for the Demerara factories in 2003, but the then administration chose funding for the stadium instead. The much admired Demerara Gold was my “baby” as it was our first venture into the value added sugar field.
Another false statement in Mr Sohan’s letter is that Mauritius has given up on sugar production. Mauritius currently grows sugar cane on 72,000 hectares, which is 85% of its arable land, while producing 600,000 tons sugar annually.
For myself, I welcome the ongoing discussions on the future of the sugar industry, even by sugar neophytes like Mr Sohan. I do have a problem, however, when he chooses to engage in character assassination, rather than dealing with the issues to be debated, so necessary to arrive at the best way forward.
Yours faithfully,
V.Oditt
