IF anyone had thought that restructuring of the sugar industry would pass without much political drama, they were certainly mistaken. Sugar has dominated the news cycle these past two weeks. This has occurred even as news about oil continues to make headlines.

The long shadow of sugar, which has dominated the political and economic landscape of Guyana and the rest of the Caribbean, continues to make its presence felt in very dramatic ways, including its ability to bring out the complexities and contradictions in the Guyanese body-politic.

The year 2017 ended with the news that 4,000 sugar workers were served with retrenchment notices over the Christmas holidays. The opposition PPP and the main sugar union immediately cried foul, accusing the government of insensitivity. The government has indeed consulted with the sugar unions and had put in place arrangements which, among other things, saved over 5,000 jobs. President David Granger then announced that government would readjust its budgetary allocations to guarantee the workers 50% of their severance payment by the end of January, with the other half coming before the end of the year.

While some sections of civil society welcomed this announcement, the PPP, the sugar unions and the Guyana Trades Union Congress were not happy. They claimed that it was a violation of labour practices. The PPP and GAWU vowed to take legal action, among other forms of protest. As if to demonstrate its resolve, there was an intensification of marches and public activity in the sugar belt. There is no doubt that the PPP is prepared to milk this issue for all its political worth to the party, although a dramatic development would have knocked the wind out of their sails.

Then, as if in direct response to a statement by three foundation members of the Working People’s Alliance, that party issued a statement on Friday in which it reaffirmed its commitment to the defence of workers’ interests, even as it supported the restructuring of the industry, noting that the administration has broken the cycle of political manipulation by the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) and its allies and in the process, joins other countries in the hemisphere in squarely facing the challenges of sustaining an industry based on government subsidies. “Poor economies such as ours cannot carry that burden forever,” the WPA said in its statement.

Finally, on Friday the Cabinet and the two sugar unions held a high-level meeting to discuss the way forward for the industry. Both sides came out of the meeting expressing optimism for an amicable outcome. The opposition leader and the PPP appeared to have toned down their rhetoric, while the President opined that the issue should not be dealt with in a partisan manner.

Undoubtedly, persons are now questioning why it took the two sides this long to sit down and begin to address this matter in a mature and constructive manner. The answer lies in the behaviour of the PPP, who has sought to manipulate the main sugar union GAWU. But as President Granger said during the meeting on Friday: “If workers have to go home then we all lose, as it will have an impact on the economic growth of the country. Government will not win, the unions will not win and the workers will not win if the industry is crippled.

We will all lose. Nobody is against the sugar industry. The government and the unions should engage until the issue is resolved. Let us use this opportunity to show flexibility and ensure that livelihoods are saved.”

The head-of-state acknowledged that while there are differences of opinion on the matter, he does not believe in walkouts or refusals to cooperate. He made it clear that government and the unions must work together to formalise a solution that would impact positively, the lives of the affected workers.

Everyone knows that sugar is too central to this country’s political economy to be dealt with in a less than serious and integrated manner. As the WPA pointed out in its statement, economies such as ours cannot continue to subsidise an industry at the level at which we have been susidising Guysuco without dire consequences for the larger economy.

Unlike the cases of some countries, government is not closing the industry—it is merely right-sizing it to the point of viability. This should alert those who are accusing the government of callousness to alter their misleading rhetoric.

It should be clear that Guysuco and the government have been trying to execute the restructuring in as humane a manner as possible. But, in the end the frenzy, hatred and fear that are whipped up by the misleading and ethnically tinged rhetoric would only serve to undermine the country. For the good of the sugar industry, the workers and the country, the place for all sides in this matter going forward is where they are now—at the table, trying to come up with the best possible solution to what is a most complex undertaking.

Our society is too politically fragile to have to endure this constant dereliction of duty by some of our political leaders. Let us hope that the initiative started on Friday will continue to bear good fruit.