Latest update March 28th, 2024 12:59 AM
Nov 07, 2017 Letters
Dear Editor,
Head of the Sugar Special Purpose Unit (SPU), hiding through a press statement, advised that the body was seeking to engage a reputable firm to value the sugar industry’s assets. That valuation, he went on to say, would form the basis of a prospectus that would allow investors to know what’s available and what it is valued at.
But what is amiss about this whole convolution is that expressions of interest have already been invited. In fact, the SPU head in the press statement said that the request for proposals has been extended by about three weeks.
So then how is it that a valuation is yet to be done but interested parties are asked to show their desire to acquire assets? From a layman’s perspective, the cart has clearly been put before the horse.
But the hiring of a reputable firm to value sugar assets is a faux pas. The GuySuCo top leadership, possibly with the acquiescence of those who really control and direct it, has irresponsibly allowed the running down of its assets. Thus, whenever the valuators are identified and would have completed their task, they will naturally come up with a value that is really not reflective of the realistic value of the asset.
We cannot fail to miss that these valuations will determine the final prices and strengthen suspicions that the people’s assets will be sold cheaply.
And, too, the SPU head made a telling admission. We are told that the sugar company has foregone its profits as it provides several services which benefit the country. The SPU may want to say how is it that these services will be provided in the circumstances of changed ownership? It seems to me that the Treasury will have to pick up the tab meaning further pressures will be placed on the backs of the working people.
The SPU’s mandate, in my view, is gravely misplaced. Rather than looking at the prospect of selling, quite possibly at dirt cheap prices, the sugar industry assets, GuySuCo should convince the Government to have the Unit adopt another course that is to package projects, to diversify, and sustain the sugar industry and to seek private capital to realise those initiatives.
Sugar, I believe like many other Guyanese, has a future but political spite, as many believe too, rather than economic prudence has been the sad approach adopted towards the industry.
Patricia Persaud
Comments are closed.
THIS IDIOT TELLING GUYANA WE HAVE NO SAY IN THE 50% PROFIT SHARING AGREEMENT WE HAVE WITH EXXON.
Mar 28, 2024
Minister Ramson challenge athletes to better last year’s performance By Rawle Toney Kaieteur Sports – Guyana’s 23-member contingent for the CARIFTA Games in Grenada is set to depart the...B.V. Police Station Kaieteur News – The Beterverwagting Police Station, East Coast Demerara (ECD) will be reconstructed... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News – In the face of escalating global environmental challenges, water scarcity and... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]
This letter represents a clear case of the writer’s ignorance of what an expression of interest is. Sometimes, if you have not experience or understanding, a simple search for information will go a long way in helping to bring education. There are many formats to meet specific criteria outlined in the terms of reference (TOR) available online. An expression of interest is just that: an expression of your interest in participation clearly stating your ‘bonafides’, your ability and resources to successfully undertake the activities to achieve the stated objective of the privatization project.. It is technically different from a proposal or bid document which comes after. For large projects, such as that at subject, EOIs acts as a selection process to weed out applicants with limited prospects. In other words, interested parties with the necessary ‘bonafides, experience and resources to achieve the objective are easily identified to move on to the next stage; i.e., they are then invited to submit bids outlining their technical proposals including the cost of acquisition. The bid document would have benefited fro a privatization prospectus which contains, among other technical information, the valuation of assets and liabilities. Importantly, the technical proposal to achieve the objective of an economically viable project and outcomes of continued employment of sugar workers, revenues and taxes are very important; not just how much the prospective ‘intrestees’ are willing to pay for the sugar estates’ assets. What is striking is the cakeshop mentality of state asset acquisition which seems to be foremost in the mind of the letter writer. It’s harrowing to read such nonsense, more so, with such passionate and self absorbing ignorance.