Dear Editor,
Reference is made to letter captioned “The PPP/C kept their promise to reopen sugar estates” by Parshotam Ramnauth that was carried in SN on April 5. First thing first, the writer cited that the PPP/C government fulfilled the promise to reopen the closed sugar estates (pun on the word estates). It would be edifying for Ramnauth to inform which closed estate other than Rose Hall was reopened. It is obvious that Ramnauth is privy to the inner workings of GuySuCo since he has quoted sugar production figures to the tonne, employment, and land mechanisation data. He referred to the improved production from 47,049 in 2022 to 60,204 tonnes in 2023 and attributed this growth in production “to improved yields and favourable weather condition”. The “favourable weather” condition is right due to the existing El Nino phenomenon.
Editor, what was saliently omitted from Ramnauth’s elucidation is the fact that in 2023, GuySuCo processed almost 5,000 hectares of brought forward canes, 3,000 of which were immature canes taken out of the current first crop of 2024 (this was highlighted by Tony Vieira in a previous letter and was not refuted by GuySuCo) and processed in the second crop of 2023. Without this massive amount of brought forward canes, GuySuCo production in 2023 would have been worse than 2022. The improved production was therefore not attributed to “improved yields”. GuySuCo is in the process struggling to produce 7,000 tonnes sugar in the current crop, undisputedly caused by the immature brought forward canes, which will be 60% less than last year first crop, and the lowest for a first crop in the history of the sugar industry.
Ramnauth needs to be reminded that for the period 2021 to the current crop, the Government of Guyana has provided to GuySuCo G$24 billion, and inclusive of this crop, the aggregate production is 174,000 tonnes sugar. Editor, if the company sold all its sugar to local and CARICOM markets, which has the highest market price of US$700, it would generate a revenue of US$122 million or G$26 billion, which it would have expended on its operations. Add this to the G$24 billion budgetary provisions, and the total expenditure is G$50 billion. Over these years the company never experienced a surplus of income over expenditure. The cost to produce this 174,000 is a whopping G$287,000 per tonne or US$1,355; thereby losing US$655 (1,355 less 700) for each tonne sugar sold. The total loss to date (2021 to this first crop) is US$114M or G$24 billion (total cost $50B less total revenue $26B).
Is the sort of “upward trajectory” and benefit to “the overall economy” that Ramnauth boasts about, and in the process ask us to “celebrate the success of the sugar industry”? Editor, rather than being a benefit to the overall economy, it is an overall drain on the taxpayers of this country.
Sincerely,
Raj Parmanand
