Dear Editor,
In a SN letter dated October 12, 2021 and captioned, `As sugar estate leaders we have a turnaround strategy, massive flood has set us back by 18 months’ the Managers of the Albion, Blairmont and Utivlugt estates responded to me. They said, “As Managers directly responsible for the three (3) sugar-producing Estates of the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo) we wish to clarify several grave inaccuracies about the operations at Albion/Port Mourant, Blairmont and Uitvlugt, that were put forward in a letter dated October 11, 2021 (published in the Stabroek News) and penned by one Rajendra Bisessar.
First of all I did not identify any estate. I spoke generally, “We are getting mixed signals re the sugar estates”. Secondly I never said there was no strategy. I simply said, “I am not sure of the direction and if there is any strategy”. They said there was so the simple response would be Mr. Bisessar we do have a five year plan. How can what I wrote by any stretch of the imagination be regarded as an inaccuracy. I read the article but could not see mention of other inaccuracies. So, their initial statement of several grave inaccuracies is the major inaccuracy.
As I continue, I would say that the response suggests an over sensitivity to anything perceived as criticism and this is not good at all. I severely criticized the last CEO in letters to the press. I criticized the last Minister of Agriculture and explained certain things to him. I slammed him for the closure of the estates. He did not respond. I asked, why did the Minister bring back Mr. Bhim and Mr. Hanoman? Mr. Hanoman did not bash me in the press. He invited me to a meeting and I was able to put over my views to him.
So what do I tell these three managers who wrote an opening paragraph talking about grave inaccuracies but could not support their claims? Frankly I am not impressed. And like I said about the last two persons in charge it is possible that these three persons who are proud to say they have a collective 87 years in sugar were there when many of the sugar industry problems emerged.
So do not blame me for wanting to have a look at the strategic plan that they helped to prepare. At least they could highlight the basic strategy. This should not be a state secret and they claim they know the answer. I do hope they respond with the same alacrity in answer to this and other points I would make below.
All I asked was. “Why did the production fall from 3.4 tons to below 2.4 TSA”. Understanding why to my mind, is the basis for corrective actions. These gentlemen who were there when the decline took place could at least have explained in their letter why and what was proposed to correct same rather than referring to non-existent inaccuracies in my letter. They could have written to continue a discussion that could very well allowed others with knowledge to interact and bring ideas to the fore. These are the last persons who should be writing letters in the press attempting to bash someone who has some genuine concerns. I grew up in an estate. My father and all my family are from Rose Hall Estate. I was involved in assisting workers during the 6 weeks strike, going out at 4 every morning with the field secretary of GAWU to organize the workers and going to teach at 8 am.
I was victimized and transferred from a secondary school, BEI to teach Prep A. I resigned.
I did request the TC/TS and the TSA for the various estates. I think my letter was a reasonably friendly non-confrontational one.
In previous letters on sugar during the last government I wrote that I was flabbergasted that the Commission of Inquiry only mentioned two varieties of sugar when there was another variety introduced with the blessings of the Indian Government. A variety that has a sucrose content of 25% compared to 18% contained in the two species mentioned? One that ripens in eight months compared to the 12 months for the other species? That this variety can be planted five feet apart because the clumps are huge and so saves man hours and cane in the planting resulting in savings? That because of the available space it was proposed to plant legumes between the plants as this would in addition to bringing in income also enrich the soil and so reduce the need for fertilizers?
This variety with correct agronomic strategies can give over fifty tons an acre and because of the higher sucrose content it can permit over four tonnes of sugar an acre (TSA) compared to less than 2.5 TSA at the present time? In the past we obtained around 3.4 TSA. Even today big private cane farmers actually get 3.3 TSA. If my information is correct a few private farmers have planted the new variety. The new variety, if my information is correct, would allow us to produce a ton of sugar using less than 9 tons of cane per ton of sugar (TC/TS).
What about flood fallowing? The estate was designed for 1/5 to be under water. We should know where not to spray fertilizer by plane, only where there is heavy dew. The filter press mud could be thrown back into the fields and maybe the estate could collect the vinasse from the distilleries, both have about one % phosphate.
Maybe I am making sense. Maybe I am not but nothing is wrong with a public debate that could introduce new ideas. We must never think we know everything and what we do cannot be improved upon.
I met His Excellency the President and mentioned some things to him. He did not go on the defensive. He listened.
Yours faithfully,
Rajendra Bisessar
BSc Sociology
LLB
