Dear Editor,

I READ with concern the recent article by former Minister Winston Jordan, “Subsidies to rice farmers a misuse of taxpayers’ money.” While we can all agree governments must be prudent with public funds, the argument that supporting our agricultural producers is wasteful overlooks both what rice farming means for Guyana now and what it has meant historically under governments that neglected rural producers.

It is absolutely essential and critical that Guyana supports its farmers, rice growers, sugar workers, the entire farming community in a sustained and meaningful way.
Agriculture is not a luxury, it is a backbone of food security, employment, rural livelihoods and national stability. When farmers receive subsidies, whether in the form of free fertiliser, duty- free machinery, insurance premium support, or price supports for paddy, these are not handouts so much as investments in the food-supply chain, in rural communities, in poverty reduction, and in maintaining domestic production capacity. These are not costs to be lightly dismissed; they are foundational to a balanced, inclusive, and resilient economy.

To say that subsidies are a “misuse” of taxpayers’ money misses context. Under the APNU administration too many rice farmers and sugar workers were left without dependable support. Many communities felt ignored and underserved. The policies of the previous government often undercut rather than uplifted agricultural producers. If current subsidies are criticised now, I dare to ask where was the concern then, when those producers had little or nothing?

Furthermore, Winston Jordan’s critique must be measured against the reality that those who now voice concerns about what the PPP/C government is doing, had little to say or did little to act when farmers and sugar workers were suffering under neglect.
The newfound voices of concern are more than ironic, and, in many cases, they ring hollow. Those critics have been booted from legitimate representation or have been marginalised because their policies and values simply do not align with what a growing, flourishing agricultural economy demands.

We should not pit taxpayers’ interests against farmers’ well-being. A smart, forward-looking government and citizenry see that investing in agriculture returns dividends, allowing more stable food prices, reduced import dependency, better rural incomes, and social stability. If subsidies are mismanaged, yes, they ought to be monitored, audited, and optimised, but not thrown out as inherently wasteful.

I therefore urge the public, the media and policymakers to recognise that support for farmers is not a luxury, but rather is a necessity for economic diversity, food security, and social justice.
Historical neglect under the APNU administration cannot be used as cover for criticism when efforts are finally being made to do right by the agricultural sector. It should also be taken into account that subsidies must be transparent, well-targeted and efficient, but the alternative, the abandonment of our rural producers is far costlier in terms of social, economic, and political repercussions.

Sincerely,
Stephen Felix