Recent claims by the Guyana Sugar Corporation (GuySuCo) that its estates achieved a production milestone have drawn sharp criticism from letter writers, including former GuySuCo director Tony Vieira, who argue that the figures instead illustrate the decline of Guyana’s once-dominant sugar industry.
In a recent announcement, GuySuCo said the Rose Hall and Albion estates exceeded their weekly production target during the second week of the 2026 first crop. The corporation reported that the estates produced 2,457 tonnes of sugar for the week ending March 7, surpassing the target of 1,989 tonnes by 468 tonnes.
The company said the factories recorded a Tonnes Cane to Tonnes Sugar (TCTS) ratio of 12.53, which it described as reflecting improving operational efficiency in converting cane into sugar. GuySuCo also stated that Rose Hall recorded its highest production levels since reopening in 2023, while daily output during the period reached 156 tonnes of sugar, the highest daily production recorded since the estates resumed operations. The corporation said the first crop of 2026 is expected to continue until early May.
However, Vieira argued that the announcement reflects how far the industry has fallen.
“I have been asked by a few colleagues to respond to the release of the claims made by GuySuCo, about it attaining a milestone in production by producing 2,457 tonnes in the week, ending March 7th 2026. It was a milestone alright, but not of progress, but of decline!!” he wrote.
A separate letter from commentator Hemdutt Kumar echoed that skepticism, though through a more analytical lens. Kumar described the announcement as “a crass exercise in duplicity,” arguing that the corporation was celebrating modest gains without providing meaningful context.
“In the sugar-coated corridors of Guyana’s state-run industry, where chronic failures have long outproduced actual sugar, the latest press release from GuySuCo… arrives like a carnival barker hawking a three-legged horse as a thoroughbred,” Kumar wrote.
Both writers pointed to the industry’s historical capacity to argue that the weekly output is far below what the estates were designed to produce.
Vieira noted that the factories at Blairmont, Rose Hall and Albion were built to grind large volumes of cane per hour.
“Blairmont has a factory which is built to grind around 100 tonnes of cane per hour (TCH), Rose Hall 140 TCH and Albion around 180 TCH,” he wrote, adding that factories must operate roughly 160 hours per week to remain competitive.
“Theoretically therefore those three estates working 160 hours per week should grind 67,200 tonnes per week; assuming 12 tons of cane to make a ton of sugar, the true potential of these three estates is 5600 tonnes of sugar per week!! To be celebrating a production of 2457 tonnes per week by Rose Hall and Albion is ludicrous!” Vieira said.
Kumar arrived at a similar conclusion using the corporation’s own published efficiency figure — the TCTS ratio of 12.53.
“The release coyly omits total cane crushed, but the TCTS ratio hands us the key,” Kumar wrote, calculating that the reported sugar production implies about 30,800 tonnes of cane were processed during the week.
“This beats the implied target… by about 5,870 tonnes — a 23.5% overrun, to be sure. But pause here: in an industry where estates like these once dreamed of 5,000+ tonnes of sugar weekly at peak, this is not a surge; it is a sputter.”
Both writers also contrasted the present figures with the industry’s past performance.
Vieira recalled that decades ago such production levels would have been unacceptable.
“Forty years ago no factory dared report to head office on Saturday that they only ground 120 hours in any week due to being out of canes — ‘heads would absolutely roll,’” he wrote.
“As a GuySuCo manager at Versailles, I sat in my office on numerous Saturdays when we gave Neil Isaacs at head office in Water Street Georgetown our production, and in those days Albion was consistently reporting 2000 tons of sugar for the week.”
Kumar, meanwhile, questioned the efficiency implied by the TCTS ratio itself, noting that globally competitive sugar operations typically perform far better.
“In the global sugar game, efficient mills boast 9–11 TCTS… At 12.53, Rose Hall and Albion are extracting perhaps 8–9%—mediocre at best, a limp handshake from adequacy,” he wrote.
While Vieira focused on operational shortcomings, he also criticised reports that Blairmont estate has been facing mechanical issues that forced cane to be transported across the Berbice River to Albion for processing.
“To add insult to injury Blairmont factory is quote ‘experiencing ongoing mechanical problems’… forcing them to take its cane across the Berbice river bridge, to Albion?? I can’t even imagine what that is costing us!!” he wrote.
Kumar framed the broader issue as one of transparency and political messaging, arguing that the announcement reflects a pattern of highlighting isolated gains while omitting deeper industry problems.
“The rhythm of this release pulses with political opportunism,” Kumar wrote. “Why expend scarce funds… to trumpet an infinitesimal gain? Because optics trump outputs in the game of governance narrative.”
Despite their different styles — Vieira drawing on decades of industry experience and Kumar on economic analysis — both writers concluded that the celebrated production figures illustrate the weakened state of Guyana’s sugar sector.
“To see the big hoopla about two estates producing 2457 in a week,” Vieira wrote, “is to me a very important symptom of how low we have sunk to celebrate such inefficiency and disastrous operations.”
Kumar struck a similar note in closing, urging the corporation to provide fuller disclosure of its performance.
“Guyana’s sugar sector deserves candor, not confection”
