Zed posted:

I would think that there are many versions of exactly what happened with bauxite and what the government response was, what steps they took -if any -to address the needs of workers. I later today, I will try to find the Sam Hinds version from the newspapers and post it so you can give counterpoints for what he is arguing.

 

The PPP took NO steps to manage a transition for bauxite workers.  Yet today they make big mischief even though APNU AFC has NOT to this date displaced any sugar workers.

Sam Hinds asserts that Lincoln Lewis was/is wrong

JANUARY 30, 2016 | BY KNEWS| FILED UNDER LETTERS 

Dear Editor,
Mr Lincoln Lewis in a letter to the editor carried in KN and SN of Sunday 24th, January 2016, in referring to the announced intended closure of Wales sugar estate presented again his views that our PPP/C administration of 1992 to 2015, in our reworking of our bauxite sector, was inhumane and violated workers’ rights enshrined in various laws including the Guyana Constitution. The facts tell a different story. I have challenged Lincoln’s views before: please allow me some space to do so again, to refresh the memories of some and to inform others for the first time.

We were humane; we respected the rights of workers and were concerned about the future prospects for the workers and the communities, Guyanese all. President Jagdeo and members of the Government met with the officers of the unions and workers from time to time, in Georgetown, in Linden and in Everton and Kwakwani. I attended and spoke at a number of annual seminars held by Messrs Lewis and Kim Kissoon (Chairman of Linmine Board) with the theme, “Where to, Bauxite?”. Everyone was aware that there were changes coming.

Lincoln writes in paragraph 7 of 8, “The arbitrary decision of the Government to shut down Linmine and Bermine …” The decision was not arbitrary and there was no break in bauxite operations. Specifically, in the case of Linmine the PPP/C met an agreement between the outgoing PNC administration and the group of supporting countries and institutions which required that the international manager, MINPROC, funded by the supporting group, be allowed two years to manage Linmine  in their best judgment, then they would pronounce whether LINMINE could be made profitable or not. If so Linmine was to be sold and if not it was to be shut down forthwith.

In 1994 MINPROC proclaimed the latter, it could not see profitability for LINMINE – but we(PPP/C) did not proceed to shut down Linmine. We could not be and were not inhumane to fellow Guyanese working in bauxite. We had to reconfigure the operations whilst arranging to satisfy all the benefits of the workers. The companies had to be reorganized to match the new (reduced) prospects for sales, taking all opportunities for improving productivity and hence for lowering costs. Over the many preceding years of insufficient money in LINMINE, the payments to the workers saving scheme, GRA personal income tax, NIS,  company pension scheme were in arrears and needed to be reconciled with the various agencies. It required more than Guyana 2. 5 billion dollars and two years to satisfy all of these.
In the case of BERMINE, it was completely run down. As things turned out, ALCOA bought out Reynolds inheriting the joint GOG/Reynolds operation at Aroaima. ALCOA informed the Government that it had no need for the Aroaima operation, but they were willing to hand ABC/AMC to the Government for US $1, along with conditions which essentially implied that GOG would keep the operations going for another two years. Again we reorganized to minimize costs and losses/subsidies and meeting all that was required for workers. BERMINE was merged into ABC/AMC which was in better condition with better prospects.
In time, as we hoped, the two reorganized operations attracted credible interests and were privatized. In such circumstances the better approach is to end the existing company and start a new company in a new book. Termination benefits had to be and were paid to everyone and a good number of the 3000 so terminated were rehired the following day. Our PPP/C administration was as humane and as generous as it could be. Mr. Lewis criticizes again a number of our decisions/judgments at the time:

(i) Breaking up the savings scheme and pension plan. We decided to end the savings scheme and the pension scheme – many workers wanted their monies for various reasons. Also, the cost of maintaining the pension scheme to the passing of the last member would eat up a great part of the scheme particularly when account is taken that there was an average inflation of about 100 between when money was put into the scheme and when administration costs had to be paid.

G-O-G had no rights to hand over the workers’ monies to others. We said, “Go to the workers. We will hand the money to the workers, and then they would invest themselves directly in any way/fund as they may be persuaded”. (ii) Concerning the eventual privatization of the bauxite operations, we maintained/subsidised them through a number of invitations to privatize, until there was in our judgment, credible offers. Thus, recall the cooperation in the Linden area were privatized firstly to OGML/CAMBIOR and when they collapsed we accepted the only offer OGML / CAMBIOR were willing to accept, that of BOSAI (the operations would have been abruptly closed otherwise). In the Berbice River we accepted the offer of RUSAL. Today in a very difficult world trade situation, BOSAI and RUSAL are continuing core operations.  (iii)With respect to the alternative offer for BERMINE we could have been wrong, but taking account of the condition of the plant, the bauxite/alumina/aluminium as well as the non-metallurgical businesses, we did not think that, that proposal was credible. As I recall Mr Lewis’ proposals were not well received by a number of workers at a meeting he held in Everton.

It is certainly not true that we (PPP/C) did not look to develop alternatives for bauxite communities. We worked with EU/SYSMINS for a third multilateral intervention, LEAP, proposing and progressing initially a programme of some EURO25 million which  included much needed physical infrastructure (upgraded Linden-Ituni-Kwakwani road and Millie’s Hideout to Wiruni  on the Berbice river). In later reviews within the EU, LEAP was downsized to keep focus on a people changing programme. Separate funding would have to be sought later for infrastructure and other projects as they became evident. Mr. Winston Brassington and Mr. Horace James worked assiduously to put and make non-core assets available and attractive for new profitable ventures.
The PPP/C administration completed the Government take-up and provisioning for all non-core social services which the bauxite operations were no longer carrying. We of the PPP/C maintain in all clear conscience that we have been taking equitable and appropriate(not identical) positions on bauxite and sugar, and we  have endured criticisms from both sides. For example, there is the criticism that when OGML/CAMBIOR had suspended the operations in Linden for two months, we provided basic pay to every employee requiring only that they, from Sweeper to Manager, spend a certain number of hours each week at computer classes aimed at their level, we were pointing African bauxite workers to the digital future but in our plans for sugar were seeking to consign Indian Guyanese to cutting cane. We of the PPP/C expect no less care and concern of the present Government as they address the difficulties of sugar.

Samuel A A Hinds
Former Prime Minister and President

Sam Hinds wrote a lot about nothing.

The PPP ignored Linden and didn't take advantage of the many assets of that town to attract manufacturing. The 2002 census showed that Linden had the densest concentration of skilled workers in Guyana, and yet the PPP didn't seek to convert it into a zone to attract manufacturing.

So let APNU AFC send cane cutters to computer classes, and then leave them to their own devices.

Django posted:

Sam Hinds asserts that Lincoln Lewis was/is wrong

JANUARY 30, 2016 | BY KNEWS| FILED UNDER LETTERS 

Dear Editor,
Mr Lincoln Lewis in a letter to the editor carried in KN and SN of Sunday 24th, January 2016, in referring to the announced intended closure of Wales sugar estate presented again his views that our PPP/C administration of 1992 to 2015, in our reworking of our bauxite sector, was inhumane and violated workers’ rights enshrined in various laws including the Guyana Constitution. The facts tell a different story. I have challenged Lincoln’s views before: please allow me some space to do so again, to refresh the memories of some and to inform others for the first time.

We were humane; we respected the rights of workers and were concerned about the future prospects for the workers and the communities, Guyanese all. President Jagdeo and members of the Government met with the officers of the unions and workers from time to time, in Georgetown, in Linden and in Everton and Kwakwani. I attended and spoke at a number of annual seminars held by Messrs Lewis and Kim Kissoon (Chairman of Linmine Board) with the theme, “Where to, Bauxite?”. Everyone was aware that there were changes coming.

Lincoln writes in paragraph 7 of 8, “The arbitrary decision of the Government to shut down Linmine and Bermine …” The decision was not arbitrary and there was no break in bauxite operations. Specifically, in the case of Linmine the PPP/C met an agreement between the outgoing PNC administration and the group of supporting countries and institutions which required that the international manager, MINPROC, funded by the supporting group, be allowed two years to manage Linmine  in their best judgment, then they would pronounce whether LINMINE could be made profitable or not. If so Linmine was to be sold and if not it was to be shut down forthwith.

In 1994 MINPROC proclaimed the latter, it could not see profitability for LINMINE – but we(PPP/C) did not proceed to shut down Linmine. We could not be and were not inhumane to fellow Guyanese working in bauxite. We had to reconfigure the operations whilst arranging to satisfy all the benefits of the workers. The companies had to be reorganized to match the new (reduced) prospects for sales, taking all opportunities for improving productivity and hence for lowering costs. Over the many preceding years of insufficient money in LINMINE, the payments to the workers saving scheme, GRA personal income tax, NIS,  company pension scheme were in arrears and needed to be reconciled with the various agencies. It required more than Guyana 2. 5 billion dollars and two years to satisfy all of these.
In the case of BERMINE, it was completely run down. As things turned out, ALCOA bought out Reynolds inheriting the joint GOG/Reynolds operation at Aroaima. ALCOA informed the Government that it had no need for the Aroaima operation, but they were willing to hand ABC/AMC to the Government for US $1, along with conditions which essentially implied that GOG would keep the operations going for another two years. Again we reorganized to minimize costs and losses/subsidies and meeting all that was required for workers. BERMINE was merged into ABC/AMC which was in better condition with better prospects.
In time, as we hoped, the two reorganized operations attracted credible interests and were privatized. In such circumstances the better approach is to end the existing company and start a new company in a new book. Termination benefits had to be and were paid to everyone and a good number of the 3000 so terminated were rehired the following day. Our PPP/C administration was as humane and as generous as it could be. Mr. Lewis criticizes again a number of our decisions/judgments at the time:

(i) Breaking up the savings scheme and pension plan. We decided to end the savings scheme and the pension scheme – many workers wanted their monies for various reasons. Also, the cost of maintaining the pension scheme to the passing of the last member would eat up a great part of the scheme particularly when account is taken that there was an average inflation of about 100 between when money was put into the scheme and when administration costs had to be paid.

G-O-G had no rights to hand over the workers’ monies to others. We said, “Go to the workers. We will hand the money to the workers, and then they would invest themselves directly in any way/fund as they may be persuaded”. (ii) Concerning the eventual privatization of the bauxite operations, we maintained/subsidised them through a number of invitations to privatize, until there was in our judgment, credible offers. Thus, recall the cooperation in the Linden area were privatized firstly to OGML/CAMBIOR and when they collapsed we accepted the only offer OGML / CAMBIOR were willing to accept, that of BOSAI (the operations would have been abruptly closed otherwise). In the Berbice River we accepted the offer of RUSAL. Today in a very difficult world trade situation, BOSAI and RUSAL are continuing core operations.  (iii)With respect to the alternative offer for BERMINE we could have been wrong, but taking account of the condition of the plant, the bauxite/alumina/aluminium as well as the non-metallurgical businesses, we did not think that, that proposal was credible. As I recall Mr Lewis’ proposals were not well received by a number of workers at a meeting he held in Everton.

It is certainly not true that we (PPP/C) did not look to develop alternatives for bauxite communities. We worked with EU/SYSMINS for a third multilateral intervention, LEAP, proposing and progressing initially a programme of some EURO25 million which  included much needed physical infrastructure (upgraded Linden-Ituni-Kwakwani road and Millie’s Hideout to Wiruni  on the Berbice river). In later reviews within the EU, LEAP was downsized to keep focus on a people changing programme. Separate funding would have to be sought later for infrastructure and other projects as they became evident. Mr. Winston Brassington and Mr. Horace James worked assiduously to put and make non-core assets available and attractive for new profitable ventures.
The PPP/C administration completed the Government take-up and provisioning for all non-core social services which the bauxite operations were no longer carrying. We of the PPP/C maintain in all clear conscience that we have been taking equitable and appropriate(not identical) positions on bauxite and sugar, and we  have endured criticisms from both sides. For example, there is the criticism that when OGML/CAMBIOR had suspended the operations in Linden for two months, we provided basic pay to every employee requiring only that they, from Sweeper to Manager, spend a certain number of hours each week at computer classes aimed at their level, we were pointing African bauxite workers to the digital future but in our plans for sugar were seeking to consign Indian Guyanese to cutting cane. We of the PPP/C expect no less care and concern of the present Government as they address the difficulties of sugar.

Samuel A A Hinds
Former Prime Minister and President

 

Thanks for finding the article. I was looking for it. Now maybe, Caribny can take apart Hinds points (if he can) and counterpoint.

also, Caribny, yes, Linden had the densest pool of skilled labour. It is clear that the government did not leave workers to starve as you often assert.Why did the private sector not jump in and use this skilled labour pool to set up profitable businesses. Business people are always looking for enterprises that will earn them profits. What about small business, the money spent on LEAP (Please do not give me this garbage refrain about people being lazy) Also, if I remember correctly, there was a government committment to the IMF. Also, remember that at that time, the country was still struggling to come thru from the economic effects effects of the PNC dictatorship.

The main point I want to make here is that there are many different interpretations of the same events and how do we determine whether mine, or anyone else is the correct one. Repeating something ad nauseam does not make it correct. Instead, it seeks to obfuscate and deceive.

Zed posted:

---

Django posted:

 

Thanks for finding the article. I was looking for it. Now maybe, Caribny can take apart Hinds points (if he can) and counterpoint.

 

also, Caribny, yes, Linden had the densest pool of skilled labour. It is clear that the government did not leave workers to starve as you often assert.Why did the private sector not jump in and use this skilled labour pool to set up profitable businesses. Business people are always looking for enterprises that will earn them profits. What about small business, the money spent on LEAP (Please do not give me this garbage refrain about people being lazy) Also, if I remember correctly, there was a government committment to the IMF. Also, remember that at that time, the country was still struggling to come thru from the economic effects effects of the PNC dictatorship.

The main point I want to make here is that there are many different interpretations of the same events and how do we determine whether mine, or anyone else is the correct one. Repeating something ad nauseam does not make it correct. Instead, it seeks to obfuscate and deceive.

Already did. 

The PPP claimed that they made available computer classes.  Aside from that I see no evidence of any arrangements made for the thousands who lost their jobs from bauxite.

And what will folks do with those computer classes if there were no jobs available to use those skills?

LEAP funded a FEW MICRO enterprises.  And it failed.  

In fact Sam Hinds doesn't even make reference to that, as obviously it embarrasses him, so he focuses on roads.  And yet Kwakwani complained about the atrocious conditions of the roads!  More PPP waste I bet!

Now how did the PPP help the 3,000 workers who lost their jobs?  Any tax or other incentives to encourage investors (domestic or foreign).  Maybe capitalizing on lower energy costs, instead of lambasting Lindeners for this, when BOSAI was the biggest beneficiary!

Nowhere in this lengthy piece of excuses written by the Chief Uncle Tom Sam Hinds, does he outline how a bauxite worker who LOST his job would have immediately would have been able to generate earnings to feed his family.

Workers in Wales and LBI have YET to lose their jobs and already there is the chorus about how "blackman a starve ahbe".

In fact Sam Hinds was a popular man in Linden during the anti Burnham struggle. This being why Cheddi selected him.

Sam Hinds' colossal failure to protect the interests of Linden and Kwakwani is why the PPP was roundly rejected in every election since he was made PM.

Note that Linden was such an anti Burnham location that Burnham sent the GDF to tear gas them, and attempted to block food from being sent to that town. So this was a place where the PPP could have won, had they been fair to its residents.

Instead Lindeners were left to complain that projects undertaken by the PPP in that town were awarded to PPP contractors, who promptly hired people from outside of Linden.

I would have expected you to respond to what Sam Hinds was writing in a reasoned way instead of the political stuff you presented. 

At least, the other interpretation is out there.

Zed posted:

---

Django posted:

Sam Hinds asserts that Lincoln Lewis was/is wrong

JANUARY 30, 2016 | BY KNEWS| FILED UNDER LETTERS 

Dear Editor,
Mr Lincoln Lewis in a letter to the editor carried in KN and SN of Sunday 24th, January 2016, in referring to the announced intended closure of Wales sugar estate presented again his views that our PPP/C administration of 1992 to 2015, in our reworking of our bauxite sector, was inhumane and violated workers’ rights enshrined in various laws including the Guyana Constitution. The facts tell a different story. I have challenged Lincoln’s views before: please allow me some space to do so again, to refresh the memories of some and to inform others for the first time.

We were humane; we respected the rights of workers and were concerned about the future prospects for the workers and the communities, Guyanese all. President Jagdeo and members of the Government met with the officers of the unions and workers from time to time, in Georgetown, in Linden and in Everton and Kwakwani. I attended and spoke at a number of annual seminars held by Messrs Lewis and Kim Kissoon (Chairman of Linmine Board) with the theme, “Where to, Bauxite?”. Everyone was aware that there were changes coming.

Lincoln writes in paragraph 7 of 8, “The arbitrary decision of the Government to shut down Linmine and Bermine …” The decision was not arbitrary and there was no break in bauxite operations. Specifically, in the case of Linmine the PPP/C met an agreement between the outgoing PNC administration and the group of supporting countries and institutions which required that the international manager, MINPROC, funded by the supporting group, be allowed two years to manage Linmine  in their best judgment, then they would pronounce whether LINMINE could be made profitable or not. If so Linmine was to be sold and if not it was to be shut down forthwith.

In 1994 MINPROC proclaimed the latter, it could not see profitability for LINMINE – but we(PPP/C) did not proceed to shut down Linmine. We could not be and were not inhumane to fellow Guyanese working in bauxite. We had to reconfigure the operations whilst arranging to satisfy all the benefits of the workers. The companies had to be reorganized to match the new (reduced) prospects for sales, taking all opportunities for improving productivity and hence for lowering costs. Over the many preceding years of insufficient money in LINMINE, the payments to the workers saving scheme, GRA personal income tax, NIS,  company pension scheme were in arrears and needed to be reconciled with the various agencies. It required more than Guyana 2. 5 billion dollars and two years to satisfy all of these.
In the case of BERMINE, it was completely run down. As things turned out, ALCOA bought out Reynolds inheriting the joint GOG/Reynolds operation at Aroaima. ALCOA informed the Government that it had no need for the Aroaima operation, but they were willing to hand ABC/AMC to the Government for US $1, along with conditions which essentially implied that GOG would keep the operations going for another two years. Again we reorganized to minimize costs and losses/subsidies and meeting all that was required for workers. BERMINE was merged into ABC/AMC which was in better condition with better prospects.
In time, as we hoped, the two reorganized operations attracted credible interests and were privatized. In such circumstances the better approach is to end the existing company and start a new company in a new book. Termination benefits had to be and were paid to everyone and a good number of the 3000 so terminated were rehired the following day. Our PPP/C administration was as humane and as generous as it could be. Mr. Lewis criticizes again a number of our decisions/judgments at the time:

(i) Breaking up the savings scheme and pension plan. We decided to end the savings scheme and the pension scheme – many workers wanted their monies for various reasons. Also, the cost of maintaining the pension scheme to the passing of the last member would eat up a great part of the scheme particularly when account is taken that there was an average inflation of about 100 between when money was put into the scheme and when administration costs had to be paid.

G-O-G had no rights to hand over the workers’ monies to others. We said, “Go to the workers. We will hand the money to the workers, and then they would invest themselves directly in any way/fund as they may be persuaded”. (ii) Concerning the eventual privatization of the bauxite operations, we maintained/subsidised them through a number of invitations to privatize, until there was in our judgment, credible offers. Thus, recall the cooperation in the Linden area were privatized firstly to OGML/CAMBIOR and when they collapsed we accepted the only offer OGML / CAMBIOR were willing to accept, that of BOSAI (the operations would have been abruptly closed otherwise). In the Berbice River we accepted the offer of RUSAL. Today in a very difficult world trade situation, BOSAI and RUSAL are continuing core operations.  (iii)With respect to the alternative offer for BERMINE we could have been wrong, but taking account of the condition of the plant, the bauxite/alumina/aluminium as well as the non-metallurgical businesses, we did not think that, that proposal was credible. As I recall Mr Lewis’ proposals were not well received by a number of workers at a meeting he held in Everton.

It is certainly not true that we (PPP/C) did not look to develop alternatives for bauxite communities. We worked with EU/SYSMINS for a third multilateral intervention, LEAP, proposing and progressing initially a programme of some EURO25 million which  included much needed physical infrastructure (upgraded Linden-Ituni-Kwakwani road and Millie’s Hideout to Wiruni  on the Berbice river). In later reviews within the EU, LEAP was downsized to keep focus on a people changing programme. Separate funding would have to be sought later for infrastructure and other projects as they became evident. Mr. Winston Brassington and Mr. Horace James worked assiduously to put and make non-core assets available and attractive for new profitable ventures.
The PPP/C administration completed the Government take-up and provisioning for all non-core social services which the bauxite operations were no longer carrying. We of the PPP/C maintain in all clear conscience that we have been taking equitable and appropriate(not identical) positions on bauxite and sugar, and we  have endured criticisms from both sides. For example, there is the criticism that when OGML/CAMBIOR had suspended the operations in Linden for two months, we provided basic pay to every employee requiring only that they, from Sweeper to Manager, spend a certain number of hours each week at computer classes aimed at their level, we were pointing African bauxite workers to the digital future but in our plans for sugar were seeking to consign Indian Guyanese to cutting cane. We of the PPP/C expect no less care and concern of the present Government as they address the difficulties of sugar.

Samuel A A Hinds
Former Prime Minister and President

 

Thanks for finding the article. I was looking for it. Now maybe, Caribny can take apart Hinds points (if he can) and counterpoint.

 

also, Caribny, yes, Linden had the densest pool of skilled labour. It is clear that the government did not leave workers to starve as you often assert.Why did the private sector not jump in and use this skilled labour pool to set up profitable businesses. Business people are always looking for enterprises that will earn them profits. What about small business, the money spent on LEAP (Please do not give me this garbage refrain about people being lazy) Also, if I remember correctly, there was a government committment to the IMF. Also, remember that at that time, the country was still struggling to come thru from the economic effects effects of the PNC dictatorship.

The main point I want to make here is that there are many different interpretations of the same events and how do we determine whether mine, or anyone else is the correct one. Repeating something ad nauseam does not make it correct. Instead, it seeks to obfuscate and deceive.

Zed, I think you should run for President.  I am a big fan!  

BH, you are too kind. I returned to Guyana to retire and help a little. It is so difficult to help because of so many factors. 

I was thinking that you might be a better candidate, better than  ms. Manikchand. 

Zed posted:

I would have expected you to respond to what Sam Hinds was writing in a reasoned way instead of the political stuff you presented. 

At least, the other interpretation is out there.

What is there to respond to?  Computer classes?  That is the only DIRECT benefit that laid off bauxite workers get.

Will you be happy if the 800 LBI workers get sent to computer classes, and then be abandoned?  Guyanese taxpayers have been spending tens of millions of dollars (US) annually to salvage these people's jobs. That cannot continue!

I think that I will research this subject a little more so I can have more numbers instead of just anecdotal data to convince you. I am satisfied that what you present us a narrative that I disagree with and that there is a different narrative available. You were unable to verify people from linden starving, that the government did nothing to help workers. you were unable to counter hinds account of what the government did to help, including the actions by Nicil to encourage investment. Nor have you been able to answer why businessmen in search of profits failed to invest in Linden(if you assertion of the poor economic circumstances in Linden are correct). You might want to visit Linden sometime to verify how depressed it is. I go there and am always pleasantly surprised at the level of economic activity and dynamism in the community. I wonder where that comes from?

Zed posted:

I think that I will research this subject a little more so I can have more numbers instead of just anecdotal data to convince you.

Thousands of people in Linden were immediately laid off when Guymine was sold to the Chinese.

Sam Hinds wrote a lengthy piece of nonsense, and all that he can report was that the workers were sent to computer classes. Surely if the PPP DIRECTLY helped these laid off employers he would have mentioned what he did.

The lengths that you go to defend the PPP, even as you hypocritically pretend that you don't, is very amusing!

Since then Lindeners have had to move to other parts of the interior into gold, timber and other industries to create THEIR OWN opportunities.

Even Sam Hinds couldn't outline what the PPP did to help Lindeners feed their families.

So let us agree on this.  Wales and LBI employees get free computer classes, and help with their light bill.   Because that is all the bauxite workers got from the PPP.

And I will add, why should the govt be concerned about Wales and LBI. "Surely the business sector will invest and employ these workers".   Because this is your excuse for Linden.