FSC refuses to answer shareholder concerns

[posted 27 Oct 2009, 1530]

Fiji Sugar Corporation says as shareholder NFU is not entitled to information regarding salaries and perks of its Australian consultants/employees or to details of mill performance for the 2009 season.

The National Farmers Union will, however, attend tomorrow’s (28 October 2009) AGM to be held at the YP Reddy owned Waterfront Hotel in Lautoka, and demand answers to these questions.

NFU as shareholder did not receive a copy of FSC’s 2009 annual report or notice of the AGM. On inquiry, we were told that the report and notice had been mailed to us but we still have not received the ‘mailed’ copy three weeks later.

Nevertheless, the NFU wrote to FSC last week giving notice that it intended to ask questions at the AGM regarding the

 • highly precarious state of the Corporation’s finances
 • the salaries, perks and travel expenses of its ‘expatriate’ Australian consultants/employees and Board members
 • its dismal mill performance for the 2009 season and failure to meet shipment commitments to Tate & Lyle in UK.

NFU asked for written answers to these questions but was advised that it was not entitled to information sought regarding salaries, perks and travel expenses of its Australian employees/consultants/Board members or in regard to the performance of the mill.

NFU called for the resignation of all present Board members and the CEO as well as the expatriates recruited as consultants/employees from Australia in view of FSC’s current critical situation.

The questions sent to FSC chief executive Deo Saran are as follows:

1. Please provide full details of remuneration (salary, allowances, cost of accommodation/travel benefits, phone facilities provided and any other payments (in cash or kind) of the following expatriate employees/board members:

•  Gautam Ram Swarup

•  Rasheed A. Ali

•  Ram Karan

•  Annamale Naicker

2. Please provide full details of expenditure incurred on overseas trips made by the above-named employees/board members at FSC’s cost, including countries and organisations visited, the purpose of the visits, the duration of the visits in each country, class of air travel, including amounts paid on airfares, accommodation and any other expenses. 

3. Why are weekly mill performance reports now not made available to the representatives of the cane growers, namely, the Sugar Cane Growers Council?

4. Why is the FSC colluding with Army personnel to harass, intimidate and assault cane growers on the issue of burnt cane? There is ample evidence of such collusion.

5. From all accounts FSC is (technically) insolvent and is unable to pay its debts on time. For example, loan repayments to the Exim Bank of India due in 2009 have not been met and an extension of the original moratorium has been requested.

In the event what steps are being taken to ensure that:

  (i) the Corporation does not continue to trade in breach of the Companies Act?

  (ii) the Corporation will be in a position to meet its liabilities to its lenders, creditors, employees and the cane growers?

  (iii) the Board of Directors of the Corporation notifies the South Pacific Stock Exchange of its precarious financial position in order to seek appropriate directions?

6. What is the likely sugar make for the 2009 season and what will be the shortfall in terms of meeting FSC’s commitments to Tate & Lyle – buyers of our sugar

7. Please provide season to date information as of 19 October 2009 on the following:

• total hours of stoppages/breakdown for each mill

• total tonnes of cane crushed at each mill

• total tonnes of sugar made at each mill

• average TCTS for each mill

8. All three sugar shipments so far in the 2009 season were delayed by several days. Please provide details of penalties and additional charges levied by the shipping company and any other related organisations as a consequence of the delays.

9. (i) Please provide tonnes of sugar which should have been manufactured from the tonnes of cane crushed to 10 October 2009 using a TCTS ratio of 9:1

(ii) How many tonnes of sugar were actually produced to 19 October 2009 and explain the reasons for the discrepancy between (i) and (ii)