Dear Editor,

I READ with concern a recent commentary attributed to a former minister, published on September 23, 2025, in the newspapers, in which he described subsidies to rice farmers as a “misuse of taxpayers’ money.” This perspective not only diminishes the realities faced by rice farmers, but also overlooks the broader economic and food-security implications of state support to the sector.

President Irfaan Ali has been unequivocal in his government’s policy stance: Guyana is committed to the continued growth and development of its rice industry. At a recent meeting held at Skeldon, the President reaffirmed his administration’s pledge to support farmers through a comprehensive, multi-pronged strategy. This is the mark of a caring and responsible government—one that supports, rather than abandons, its farmers.

To dismiss subsidies as wasteful is to misunderstand their purpose. Rice farmers are among the hardest-working citizens in our country. They rise before dawn, toil in mud and flood (Monday to Sunday), face pests, unpredictable weather, and now must contend with global price shocks completely outside their control. These families do not ask for handouts. They ask for fairness and a fighting chance to remain competitive, regionally. In such a context, state support is not reckless—it is prudent and necessary.

Subsidies in the rice sector are not giveaways. They are targeted interventions—fertiliser support, technical assistance, concessions, and other mechanisms—that keep production viable. Without them, thousands of farmers would collapse under the weight of global oversupply and falling prices, in the short term. The consequences would not only devastate rural families, but also threaten national food security, rural employment and the wider economy. Failing to act on the part of the government of the day, in such circumstances, would be the true misuse of public resources.

The administration’s approach is not about writing blank cheques; it is about cushioning farmers against global shocks, stabilising the rice industry over the short term, and preserving Guyana’s competitive edge at a time when major producers such as India, Thailand and Vietnam are flooding the global rice market.

Strengthening local production also protects consumers, preventing food inflation and the importation of higher-priced rice (with the associated added shipping costs). It is worth noting that close to 7,000 families are directly involved in rice farming, and over 55,000 citizens benefit directly and indirectly financially from the sector.

Furthermore, the government has already committed to expanding storage capacity nationwide and exploring investments in facilities, including state-led initiatives, to help stabilise prices and protect both farmers and consumers from volatility. These are forward-looking measures designed to secure the industry’s resilience for the future.

It is important to situate this debate in the reality of 2025 and beyond. The rice industry is facing global pressures, and without government intervention, Guyana risks losing not only its competitive advantage, but also the livelihoods of thousands of families. President Ali’s policies represent a responsible, people-centred developmental approach aimed at preventing market failure while laying the groundwork for long-term competitiveness and profitability.

In conclusion, these interventions are not a misuse of taxpayers’ money. They are strategic investments in food security, rural livelihoods, and national economic stability. The rice industry is too important to be left exposed to the full force of international market shocks. Supporting farmers today ensures that Guyana remains a reliable producer and bigger exporter tomorrow.  This secures the well-being of thousands of citizens whose lives depend on this critical industry.

Sincerely,

Sasenarine Singh