Dear Editor,
The report in SN captioned ‘Agri Ministry challenges severance projection for Wales workers’ that was published on February 16 reflects a clear unwillingness to consider any alternative to the GuySuCo management’s position to close Wales estate.
During my period as Chairman of GuySuCo, we used to emphasize in our Annual Reports that “our people are our most valuable asset.” How things have changed! We now have an arrogant management team that hides its inefficiency at Wales Estate by deciding to close it.
The facts are clear. An estate that has the potential and infrastructure to produce 30,000+ tons per year, as it did in 2002-04, is being closed, because it only produces 9,000+ tons, owing to poor management. The indices of profitability (loss making) and cost of production (high) are being computed based on the 9,000+ tons. An inquiry into operations at the estate would have been a useful exercise, and would have exposed the gross mismanagement of agriculture operations on the estate for the past 6 years. The closure of the estate is to conceal that mismanagement.
Board member, Mr Tony Vieira’s statement, in his letter of 7 February 2016 surely reflects one of the worst acts of corporate governance in GuySuCo’s history. He stated: “…in fact the CEO of GuySuCo reported to his board that he had already met with and sought permission from the MOA about the closure, and he obtained agreement to do so, before he brought it to the board to be ratified, which was required under our laws.” This statement reflects total disrespect for the board, whose members seem content to function as a rubber stamp and to abandon their fiduciary responsibility.
The $70 million CoI report has been rejected and discarded and seems destined to be filed away as another useless report, to gather dust.
I have suggested ideas for a way forward for Wales, as have the TUC and the cane farmers. Don’t any of these warrant a discussion, or is management the absolute guru as far as Wales is concerned? It seems obvious that they do not want any alternative management arrangements, since their inefficiencies will be exposed.
Cogeneration is a proven technology in sugar factories in Florida, Mauritius and India. Grants and soft loans are available for this alternative energy project. We all know that we need a sugar refinery and affordable mini refineries that produce liquefied white sugar and invert sugar which are being installed in Trinidad and Jamaica. Packaged sugar is now the preferred product in the retail market.
I have also made the point that GuySuCo only occupies about 10% of the coastal arable land. The feasibility of any diversification crops/activities should be initially demonstrated on other lands prior to converting cane lands, which have unique layouts.
Please be assured that any new investor/management team would not be bound by GuySuCo’s inefficient management protocols or unfavourable union agreements. A new company would rehire employees on new and fair terms. Production and productivity of value added products would be incentivized, as elements of participatory privatization. It is envisaged that Wales would break even in the second year and return to profitability in the third year of its privatization. Skilled senior staff who were forced out of the system in the past through political interference are anxious to join a new, focused enterprise.
I am in agreement that GuySuCo in its present form and structure cannot survive without annual subsidies. We need to think outside the box to save it. The Wales proposals, in which all Guyanese can own shares in the estate, are an initial step that can be a template for the entire industry.
There is general agreement that the process of closure could have been handled better. Please let there be discussions on a way forward within the next few weeks.
Yours faithfully,
V Oditt
Former Chairman
