Dear Editor,
The recent letter in the press defending the WPA as not being responsible for the closure of the sugar estates during the last administration is ludicrous. The then Chairman of the Board of GuySuCo clearly stated that he made the decision to close Wales. Clearly, this is an attempt to rewrite history. However, it will not matter how consistent the lie is, a lie is a lie.
We have all lived through the reality of what happened during the last administration. Decades of misinformation will not change what we know happened. The Chairman of GuySuCo and the Minister of Agriculture at the time are clearly responsible for what took place. An announcement was also made by the Minister, and a white paper was presented to Parliament on the future of the industry during the first half of 2017, which speaks to the closure of Rose Hall, Enmore and the future of Skeldon.
The Chairman of GuySuCo had not changed at that time.
For a senior leader within the WPA to show such blatant disregard for the facts brings into question the credibility of the WPA, and once again raises questions as to the true circumstances surrounding the death of Walter Rodney. How are we to now continue believing what this party leadership says? Without integrity and honesty within the leadership of the WPA, no one will take that party seriously. Very disappointing indeed!
If the contention of the WPA is that it was a shared responsibility between them and other coalition members of the previous Administration, then that is a different discussion. But to say that their party leader was not Chairman of the Board of GuySuCo at the time the decision was made, and to insinuate that another party leader with responsibility over the sector was merely following directions, brings into question whether the WPA leaders view themselves as leaders who did add value in key positions during the last Administration, or as mere yes men under stronger coalition leadership. Clearly, the WPA held key roles during the last Administration, due to perceived intellectual capacity. This new position being taken by their leaders to skirt their responsibility in the closure of the sugar estates is nothing but a political ploy and an attempt to rewrite history.
If the party was willing to walk away from the coalition because of intentions to rig the elections, then the leadership should have been willing to clearly object to the closure of the sugar estates if they were not in agreement. Obviously, the WPA agreed with the decisions that made the lives of thousands of Indian families and communities extremely difficult. They forgot that the W in WPA stands for Workers, regardless of race.
Best regards,
Jamil Changlee
