The People’s Progressive Party (PPP) has reiterated its call for the APNU+AFC coalition government to conduct a social impact assessment (SIA) of the shuttering of sugar estates, warning that any closure could cause displaced workers to organise major protest actions.
At a press conference on Monday, PPP Executive Member, Dr. Roger Luncheon said that if the PPP does not succeed in getting the government to rescind its decision to close estates “unquestionably, this would cause a confrontation.”
In January last year, Government announced that it would close sugar cultivation at the Wales estate. Since then the workers have staged many protests and candlelight vigils in an effort to get the government to keep the estate in operation. It ceased sugar operations on December 31st last year.
The workers have also called repeatedly for President David Granger and Minister of Agriculture, Noel Holder to visit the area and listen to their concerns.
Using the parking meter contract where there was no consultation as an example, Luncheon said they do not know “how the parking meter fiasco will end but they have seen more and more mobilization of anti-parking meter sentiments.”
He pointed out: “Now if you transpose that type of evolution to a sugar industry; this isn’t paying money for parking, this is people’s livelihoods. This is the economy, rural development, rural level organization and their survival.”
He said too that there is no doubt that even if the PPP is not in the “forefront of leading the protests against this arbitrary course that the government is taking, we can assume that the same sentiment that put the protesters in the streets in Georgetown will have protesters all over the sugar belt.”
He said while they are anticipating that action, they are hoping that wise heads would prevail and that someone from cabinet “or even God from above, would have to talk to these people…” as it would “lead to confrontation.”
Asked if the fear of confrontation kept the PPP/C Government from moving in the direction of closures, Executive Member, Irfaan Ali responded that the PPP “believed in the sugar industry” and saw it as viable and sustainable and as one that can survive and withstand the internal and external pressures.
He pointed out too that what the PPP Government “embarked on was a process of modernization and a process of improving and expanding the revenue stream of the industry. That is why we did a co-gen plant, which had a $9.8B of additional revenue. We did the packaging plant at Enmore to go into packaging sugar. They were looking at the molasses and raw alcohol…”
He said too that the government knew about the industry before the last elections but committed in their manifesto that they would not only keep the industry, but would expand it to include a sugar refinery.
He said too that Prime Minister, Moses Nagamootoo spoke on the platform about increasing workers’ salary and that “not one single worker would be sent home.”
Luncheon, a former long-serving Head of the Presidential Secretariat, said: “We came from a tradition of salvaging those industries that had been wrecked; sugar, rice, bauxite. From 1992 there was a massive salvage operation in Guyana.”
He said they were supporting the economic studies that the Granger government has rejected.
At the second consultation with stakeholders on February 3 to discuss the future of the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo), the PPP inquired of the government whether the SIA and an economic study were conducted.
Ali, along with officials from the Guyana Agricultural & General Workers’ Union (GAWU) who attended, said they were shocked to learn that they were not.
Ali subsequently wrote a letter to the Minister of Public Security, Khemraj Ramjattan, who chaired the stakeholders consultation, requesting that the studies be conducted. When asked if there was a response, he said the minister acknowledged receipt of the letter, but it was only on Friday when the final stakeholders meeting was held that they were told that the SIA would not be conducted.
The minister said at the last meeting that there would be no further consultation and that cabinet would make a decision on the industry based on the information they have received from GAWU.
Ali said: “This begs the question on what basis was the decision made to close the Wales estate. It became abundantly clear that this government’s only interest was to exit this industry without any care or concern for the communities, workers, country or economy.”
He lamented too that the response from the chairman of the meeting that: “If the Opposition wants these studies they can do it themselves, was much more frightening…”
Ali told the media too: “It is our contention that no decision on this industry can sensibly, technically or factually be arrived at without these studies.”
According to Ali, they “participated in the process with faith, however, the Government seemed more interested in creating a veneer of consultation. We will continue to speak out and oppose any attempt to close or privatize any estate or cultivation.”
He lamented that it was “now clear that this Government has already decided on a course in relation to GuySuCo and the exercise [consultation] is a farcical sham…”
Ali said it was interesting to note that the AFC is requesting a SIA and economic study on the parking meter project but does not see the necessity of these very studies on the key and critical issues of the sugar industry that would affect thousands of workers and families.
There was no basis on which the PPP could have made an informed proposal without these studies.
According to him, in the last set of recommendations, the Government was seeking to close the Enmore and Rose Hall estates as well as many cultivations across the country.
He said the PPP has asked the “workers to be vigilant as we work on the next step in securing the lives of these people.”
At the meeting on Friday, GAWU addressed the planned closure of the Rose Hall and East Demerara Estates, saying that it remains “strongly opposed to the closure of any estate especially in the absence of any considered study to address the ramifications of such a decision.”
It quoted the report of the government’s Commission of Inquiry (CoI) into GuySuCo, which also said that closure without a plan and adequate notice “has serious consequences, not only for the employees and private farmers but for the communities as well”.
The union stated that these justifications are further heightened as the alternative ventures recommended for the already closed Wales Estate remain at a standstill and thousands are affected… We are still awaiting a holistic position on production, markets and sales, costs, distribution and other important factors related to Wales currently,” GAWU said.
