Dear Editor,
At a recent seminar about the sugar industry at Moray House Trust (MHT), four quite different perspectives were presented by a historian, an economist, an industry expert and a former chairman of GuySuCo. Footage of each presentation can be viewed on the MHT You Tube Channel.
As a novice, it surprised me to note that four centuries after sugar was first cultivated on these shores, we continue to sell it in much the same state (unrefined) and to much the same markets (UK/Europe). In other words, a generation after the nationalisation of the sugar industry, we are still in thrall to the same client relationships that characterised our existence as a colony. As an observer, this makes little sense. Successive administrations, from both ends of the political spectrum, have had ample opportunity in the intervening years to chart alternative courses for sugar.
What happened? Did they operate in the long-term interests of the nation or for short-term partisan political gain? Since nationalisation, there has been ample time for those in at the helm to discern, articulate and implement a broader vision for our sugar industry. In a shorter time frame, Brazil has invested in ethanol production and transformed a substantial portion of their output into fuel for a fleet of specially adapted cars. India has invested heavily in cogeneration from bagasse ‒ so much so that they can now boast that their sugar factories are power factories where sugar is a by-product. A glance at the local private sector is equally instructive: DDL and Banks have used the time to establish a firm market presence for a high-end sugar derivative (rum) and the Beharry group has developed a range of confectionary.
It’s clear that recently, while production costs in the sugar industry have spiralled, yields have declined, the so-called ‘perfect storm.’ It appears to be a foregone conclusion that the industry is in its death throes. Indeed, if, as would seem to be the case, those now in charge still envisage a future for Guyana sugar where we, as a marginal player, continue to sell a basic commodity in an increasingly competitive market place, then our sugar industry probably is doomed. Of course, it could be argued that the state of the industry offers a template for much of what is lacking in Guyana, namely the absence of a durable, shared, coherent vision and a systemic failure to plan and invest beyond the next elections cycle. Similar crises are evident in every other sphere of the society (for example, infrastructure, urban planning and education) where a measure of consensus, central long-term planning and investment are required.
What was the long-term vision for the sugar industry? We knew a decade ago that the cosy relationship ensuring preferential access to our main (EU) market was likely to end. What steps were taken to plan for an after-life for sugar? Was there not a keen awareness of the need to upgrade and/or diversify the product? It’s been suggested that a (much-needed) refinery was originally planned for Skeldon but that it was substituted at the eleventh hour with the existing factory.
At the seminar, it became apparent that research, a vital part of any industry, has fallen away (eg the cane-breeding programme has been abandoned), and that valuable sugar lands have been disposed of with little or no gain for the ailing and heavily indebted GuySuCo. The scenario is akin to one in which a supertanker (the industry that is still our largest employer) is allowed to drift up the Demerara at low tide and yet everyone seems surprised when it becomes marooned on the mudflats.
It appears that the Commission of Inquiry has made a concerted attempt to assess the industry in Guyana. One hopes that equal attention has been paid to the potential for new markets (not least within Caricom), new products and even new configurations for the industry by studying the experiences of others. A recent editorial in Sugar Online.com cites a conglomerate in Jamaica which has outsourced sugarcane production, harvesting and transportation. It also mentions two instances where established rum producers, Bacardi and Mount Gay, have each taken steps to produce a luxury line of “terroir” single-estate rum which will retail at US$25 a litre. Guyana has some experience in this quarter. Could we not amalgamate some of the Berbice estates, invest in a small distillery there, perhaps brand the rum “1763” in homage to its origins and strike a deal with Massy to distribute it across the Caribbean?
As Dr Yesu Persaud noted in the press some months ago, “sugar is what brought us all here.” As Dr Stoll emphasised at the seminar, sugar cultivation in Guyana has faced many, many crises in its history and those involved have responded with due diligence, creative approaches and clear strategies. Another speaker at the seminar issued a plea for those planning a future for Guyana sugar to heed Abraham Lincoln’s advice: “The dogmas of a quiet past are inadequate to the stormy present. The occasion is piled high with difficulty and we must rise to the occasion. As our case is new, so we must seek anew. We must disenthral ourselves.”
Yours faithfully,
Isabelle de Caires
