THE build-up of water in Georgetown during the rainy season is a natural feature of the city, along with other coastal areas which lie below or just about the sea level.Someone explained to me a couple of months ago that the Dutch had addressed this issue by building reservoirs within the city to accommodate the build-up of water when the sluices/kokers are closed. Those reservoirs were subsequently filled up, and now host the avenues which run through Thomas, East, Camp, Waterloo, and Carmichael Streets.

To the extent that these avenues have now become aesthetic features of Georgetown, the solution to the resultant flooding very probably lies in increasing the depth of the drainage systems throughout the city. This idea could also probably be applied where possible across those regions affected by flooding.

Civil engineers should, however, definitely be consulted for their opinion.

Further, flooding in North Georgetown to Lamaha Street has been exacerbated by the inoperable sluice which empties the waterway along Lamaha Street. It serves the area bounded by Water Street, Church Street, Vlissengen Road and Lamaha Street.

Currently, the Lamaha waterway empties itself, through a system of pipes, into the larger waterway which runs parallel to it, so that the areas which should be independently served by the inoperable sluice are now dependent on the drainage of the larger parallel waterway, which itself serves areas north, north-east of the area earlier described, and east of Vlissengen Road.

Rehabilitating the sluice that empties the waterway on Lamaha Street should go a far way in relieving flooding in the areas served by the Lamaha Street waterway, sooner than later.

Additionally, the use of pumps may go a far way in assisting with extreme flood conditions during periods in which the sluices are closed.

As Guyana pushes forward with its agenda for economic and social progress, transforming Georgetown into an attractive, welcoming site should be integral to the strategy of marketing Guyana as a destination for global corporations looking to establish sustainable, long-term investments in South America’s only English-speaking state.

This is not to mention the large revenues that can be generated by raising Georgetown to the level of a viable tourist destination that can strongly compete against the capital cities of our sister CARICOM states.

Such an endeavour must, however, necessarily be accomplished through financing and sound management, the authority for which rests in Georgetown’s Mayor and City Council. Financing of the Council’s activities needs to be addressed within a long-term sustainable framework, meaning that funds for the institution’s activities should fall within a structured framework; where its daily, weekly and monthly expenditure programme must be accommodated by specified, controlled revenue systems.

An immediate quick response to this latter issue would probably be the return of revenues from the management of the lottery system to the revenue stream of the M&CC.

As already pointed out, the idea of the lottery system was that of the Council’s, as an alternative to raising revenues without altering its tax mechanism, and it is probably definitely preferable to source revenues for Council’s activities from such a system.

A major issue within the Council, as with the wider public sector, is the inadequacy of remuneration of workers. Management of the other major towns and communities across Guyana could benefit from closer attention to their funding requirements, and the development of revenue structures to deliver on the necessary financing.

The state of the sugar industry will probably remain a thorny issue for some time to come, but the solution lies in the stakeholders in the labour sector considering not only the profitability and competitiveness of Guyana’s sugar on the world market, but, more importantly, in considering how have sugar workers themselves benefited from working in the sugar industry, especially considering the state of viability of the Skeldon estate.

In respect of profitability and competitiveness, the numbers are not favourable, with Guyana producing sugar at a cost of approximately US$0.35/lb., while sugar is available at around US$0.12/lb. on the world market.

What this means is that Guyana is producing sugar at a loss, estimated at around US$500/ton, based on information released earlier this year.

One of the larger issues to consider is that, maintenance issues notwithstanding, the Skeldon sugar factory will remain a drag on the profitability of GuySuCo, since — as was already highlighted in the press — the size of the factory installed was much too large, given the available supply of cane.

The other more pivotal issue which needs to be addressed by the sugar workers is the benefit that has accrued to them working in the sugar industry. What have sugar workers really gained from working over the years in the sugar industry? Have their lives and welfare improved over the decades? Can they expect to retire comfortably? Are their children benefiting from a better education and improved job opportunities as a result of sugar workers being able to provide a better life and greater educational opportunities?

Further, within the context of the sugar industry aiming to lower production costs, can sugar workers reasonably expect higher wages to support an improved standard of living for their families? Where do sugar workers see themselves in the next 20 years?

These are serious questions which should shift the focus to one in which the welfare of sugar workers and that of their families become central. They should lead to answers which would help sugar workers to consider the net benefit of working in the local sugar industry, given the global competitive forces at play going into the future, to which GuySuCo will probably be unable to respond in the near to medium-term.

The answers to these questions should ultimately lead to a wrapping of the issues in the sugar industry sooner than later.

CRAIG SYLVESTER