Joint Technical Committee — Report on Sugar : In

the name of Social Justice

30 Mai 17h01

Arvin Boolell, MP

The report is yet to be made public, but its ndings are all over the place. It has provoked the wrath of
workers and planters. The contents are yet to percolate through the wider public.

As a former Minister of Agriculture who had been in the vanguard of reform in the Sugar industry since
1996 I fully share the deep-seated concerns expressed by representatives of workers and planters of the
sugar sector. The country should stand united in the name of social justice.

Meetings
I had several meetings with representatives of planters and workers. I was appalled to learn that they were
not convened to depone or submit memoranda in writing. They were totally ignored and the composition
of the Joint Technical Committee was thoroughly corporate centric. The estimated bene ts to producers
with the implementation of a package of measures are largely detrimental to the small planters and with
the stroke of the pen the Joint Technical Committee recommends the elimination of acquired rights of
workers. Section 3.3 of Annex 2 of the report is adding insult to injury. If implemented, there will be
descent into social chaos. I hope that the inter-ministerial committee to be chaired by the PM will set aside
this report and recommend safeguarding the legitimate rights of workers.


Blueprint and VRS 2

Blueprint on Centralisation which was introduced in 1997 under Labour Government was the outcome of
protracted discussions with the stakeholders. There was equitable allocation of resources. The trade-off
was the result of better understanding of impending challenges and threats in the sugar industry. The
offer to the workers in the factory was generous and legitimate. In 2007 SIE Act was amended and cane
elds workers were given a better package than under VRS 1. Accompanying measures were disbursed
upfront to meet the legitimate demands of all stakeholders in the process of restructuring the sugar cane
industry. Even métayers were given security of Land tenure.

Bene ts since Imperial days

Our friends from the Corporate sector have bene tted enormously since Imperial trade. They have used
proceeds from sale of sugar and its by-products to diversify their portfolios and rightly so. Concessions
have always been accompanied with obligations and rights ever since independence— hence the
inevitable organic link between workers, planters and corporate partners. Under the present Government
these links have been severed and it’s a one-way ticket for the Corporate Sector. If we compute all the
scal incentives extended to the corporate sector they will laugh all the way to the bank. The facilities are
at the expense of taxpayers even if the risk of underfunding of social services is becoming real.

No one way ticket

The burden of sacri ces has to be shared, more so, since the days of free lunch are over. It is not because
sugar has slipped below the average cost of production that the Sugar Corporate has to depict an
apocalyptic scenario. This is a country where there is rule of Law and decency and the rights of rent
seekers or Landed Gentry have never been questioned. Thank God for it but it is not a passport to ask for
more and more. It is a quest to be more imaginative, innovative and as entrepreneurs be true to
themselves? You recall what Lady Thatcher told our friends from the private sector when one of them
expressed dissatisfaction despite massive support extended to them by the then Labour Government in
its endeavour to restructure the economy? I quote “Do you call yourself Private Sector?” Now I can
understand why the Lady was not a proponent of making a U-turn.

Asset stripping
As to whether we subscribe to what Sir Gaëtan Duval used to say of the Corporate Sector is a matter that
can be discussed. SGD, in a t of fury, reminded us that the corporate sector like to cry over spilled milk.
The lopsided JTC report highlights this “déjà vu, déjà entendu” phenomenon. There is no reason to
complain and Corporate Sector can in fact showcase their success to others. They have used the
proceeds of sale or the hiving off of assets to lower the company’s net debts. The sum total reveals net
pro ts. According to an article which appeared in one of the dailies the overall pro t of Alteo is sound.

No indifference
The Labour Party in Government or Opposition has never remained insensitive or indifferent to the interest
of all stakeholders in the sugar cane industry. Equity is the key word. That’s why we never succumbed to
those who impressed upon us to violently disrupt the system. We believe in wealth creation and social
justice.
I would invite the PM to protect the acquired rights of workers of the sugar industry. Medine Sugar
Estate will surely submit its application for closure of factory and laying off of a sizable number of eld
workers. Make sure that there is no going back on the undertakings given in the Blueprint for factory and
Garage workers. The VRS2 Agreement to eld workers is equally sacrosanct. As for the planters they don’t
want any equity participation. They are legitimately asking what was spelt out in the MAAS ACTION PLAN
(2006-2015) i.e. to be remunerated according to the value of their ‘STANDING CANE’ which they claim has
a reference price of Rs 2500/ ton of sugarcane.

The Rescue Package

The Rs 1.3 billion package is taxpayers’ money. The details of the package are at table 10 of the report.
Irrespective of the ultimate cost, let us use our judgement and, not our inclination. The history of sweat,
tears and blood can never be wiped off.
In the spirit of social justice let us share the burden equitably and
safeguard legitimate rights of all stakeholders. King Sugar is here to stay though it is no longer the
mainstay of our Economy. We call it Asset stripping.