Let’s debate the economics; not distort the President’s argument

Dear Editor,
From where I sit, the President did not say that Guyanese people eating out is the cause of the cost-of-living problem. What he was doing was pointing to several factors behind the pressure on food prices, including international input costs, domestic production costs, retailer margins, changing shopping patterns, and changing eating patterns.
There is a difference between saying that eating out causes inflation and saying that changes in household consumption patterns can affect household expenditure and the demand for prepared food. And honestly, who would argue with that?
Editor, let’s be honest. When a household buys a cooked meal instead of raw ingredients, they’re not just paying for the food. They’re also paying for labour, rent, utilities, transport, packaging, and the owner’s profit margin; sometimes all at once. Obvious, right? And no, this isn’t a lecture against eating out. It simply means that we pay for what we buy, where we buy it, and the costs involved in getting it to us.
No one is doubting that Guyana’s food-price problem is real. The real question, though, is how do we actually bring food costs down? On that front, the government’s farmers’ market proposal is worth a serious look. A well-designed farmers’ market can shorten the distance, literally and economically, between the producer and the consumer.
Instead of produce passing through several layers of the supply chain, farmers can have a more direct route to the consumer. That can reduce some transaction and intermediary costs, put more money in the farmer’s pocket, and, potentially, result in better prices for shoppers.
This isn’t a new argument at all. The government has already acknowledged that farm-gate prices can remain low even as market prices rise and has promoted farmers’ markets as a way of bringing consumers closer to farmers. The President’s proposal therefore deserves to be judged on its design and results rather than on political rhetoric.
In fact, his statement that “We may need to look at the creation of farmers’ markets across the country as a prominent part of our buying ecosystem, so that farmers have direct access to the market” makes a lot of sense, especially if it is supported by reliable cold storage, digital payments, convenient hours, and, above all, a steady supply of produce.
Editor, there’s a broader benefit too. If farmers know they have a reliable direct market, they have a stronger incentive to increase production and, importantly, to do so consistently. More locally produced vegetables, fruits, roots, and tubers can mean greater food security, and if the supply response is strong enough, more affordable and healthier meals for consumers.
But let’s not ignore the elephant in the room. We are still exposed to global price movements. When international food and input prices rise, there is only so much we can do about the underlying global price. What we can do is reduce the extent to which those external pressures are transmitted to Guyanese consumers. That means boosting local production, reducing unnecessary dependence on imports, and creating stronger domestic markets for what our farmers produce.
Editor, I hope this clarifies the issue. Maybe now we can resist turning a complex economic question into a culture-war squabble over who eats out and who doesn’t. Guyanese will continue to eat out. They’ll continue shopping at supermarkets and at markets too. These are household choices shaped by income, lifestyle, and circumstance.
At the heart of the President’s message was the need to identify the challenges within our food system and find practical ways to make it more efficient and competitive, regardless of where people choose to shop. So, let’s judge the farmers’ market proposal on whether it can reduce margins and retail spreads, improve market access for farmers, and deliver better prices to consumers rather than on rhetoric about eating out.
With that in mind, Editor, let’s raise the level of this conversation and make it one that actually gets us somewhere.
Yours truly,
Richard Blair