Dear Editor,
I wish to express my utter dismay and disapproval at recent developments in relation to Simon & Shock Inc. I am very much aware of financing difficulties but I cannot accept this new deal that SSI is striking with this Indian company as feasible for Guyana. Why? It is no different to what currently exists with the Asian companies, i.e. basically the exportation of our lumber for “down streaming” and value addition elsewhere.
This entire deal, as was expressed in your recent news item is an indication that these so called lumber companies have no intension of creating massive employment and possibly have no confidence in the abilities and the trustworthiness of Guyanese workers. Well, from where I stand, so be it.
In this stage of our development, Guyana needs the transfer of technology. I know the value of our exceptionally better lumber. My point of view is that who ever wants it must be prepared to take the proper processing equipment to Guyana and be prepared to transfer the technological knowledge to our workers.
In fairness to SSI and as was stated in the news item “Under its previous
management, SSI had proposed to invest US$26M in three years. It had said it would build a brand new, modern sawmill, which, with the aid of computer imagery, will be able to scan a log and calculate the number of boards that it would yield.
“It had hoped to achieve recovery rates upwards of 70 per cent, twice as much as is being achieved in Guyana. As a direct result of the talks with the government, the company had offered three written guarantees. Firstly, that it would not export logs from Guyana, since it was a lumber company and not a logging company.”
SSI and the proposed project that was approved by Go-Invest should remain in its original composition if it is to get my approval. If these Indian investors are unwilling to go by the SSI original proposal then the new arrangement should not be approved. Let’s not forget that the concession was approved based on SSI undertaking that logs or rough lumber would not be exported. That is what I loved about the SSI original proposal. I can very well understand SSI frustration in getting the project off the ground, but their initial principles should not be compromised.
In any case, this should be an eye opener for our Government, labour organizations and Guyanese on the whole. Why is it that investors tend to show a distinct tendency of wanting to have a very limited contact with our work force? There is something in our approach that scares the daylight out of investors.
Again I say, let’s put a hold on this investment until we find investors who are willing to invest in Guyanese workers. If “down streaming” could be done by the Chinese or Indians, it could also be done by Guyanese in Guyana. Give our workers a chance to learn and we can do miracles.
Yours faithfully,
F Skinner
