Dear Editor,
I was contacted by more than one hasty, if not anxious colleague about a letter addressed to your column (‘What about indifference to CoI GuySuCo recommendations?’ SN, February 2), allegedly critiquing, as they put it, a “typically exhaustive” one of my own, published the day before.
Somehow, they seemed concerned about the fact that my submission was under-interpreted by a competitive intellect which bemoaned the fact that colleague Commissioners of the CoI into the sugar industry were given preference to ensconcement in GuySuCo over him.
In their own wisdom these callers asserted that the perceived preferential treatment may have been the result of the evaluation of the respective contributions to the very CoI Report.
Yours faithfully,
EB John
