Ramu Sugar has gained from tariff

I understand that Papua New Guineans have been paying more for sugar than the rest of the world due to sugar tariff, which is there to support the corporation.
That means we, the consumers, are paying to enable Ramu Sugar to exist and make a profit.
From the press statement placed by Ramu Agri Industries in The National (page 15, March 28) and the other daily, one is led to believe that Ramu Sugar is hindered by the import duty that exists for impor­ting sugar.
I am of the opinion that Ramu Su­gar has been enjoying the benefits of a 70% import tariff since it started operations in 1981 and, only this year, the duty has been reduced to 40%.
From my understan­ding, that means Ramu Sugar has actually been able to sell its product at an increased price due to the tariff for 30 years.
I urge Ramu Sugar to make a detailed public explanation of the pricing structure and rebut my understanding as outlined here.
I note the wording of the press statement that Ramu published which said that Ramu Agri Industries would like the government to “reduce the tariff on the sugar imported by Ramu Agri Industries so the full cost is not passed onto the consumer”.
Does that mean that Ramu Agri Industries would like the government to reduce the tariff on impor-
ted sugar?
I think that they do not want that but actually only want the tariff reduced for Ramu Agri Industries to import sugar so that they can conti­nue to make as large a profit on the imported sugar as they do on the sugar that they produce.
I would like Ramu Agri Industries to explain the pricing clearly so we can all be clear about what we have been paying for sugar in PNG in the past and in the next few months.
Failure by Ramu to produce evidence to the contrary means my conclusion is accurate.
I want a fair deal for consumers, not misinformation and distortion of the facts.

John Ramu
Lae