Tobacco tax-Insecticides and the Peeper’s opinion

Dec 16, 2018 Letters

Dear Editor,

I take umbrage to a missive by Peeping Tom, “Pesticides, tobacco and social cohesion” in KN, Nov 30th. The peeper sought to criticize the Government’s approach on relinquishing the VAT on pesticides and increasing the tax on cigarettes by asserting that pesticides have a more devastating effect on the population, than tobacco. The Peeper failed to give consideration to the fact that cigarette smoking is an act of choice, leading to probably addiction, while the use of pesticides by farmer is an act of necessity.
While I disagree with the Government’s approach to Tobacco, I do not support the Peeper’s concept that Insecticides should be taxed because they are being used as a mode for suicide, resulting in more fatalities than tobacco. The irony of the Government’s approach to Tobacco, is that while they would have people believe that they want smokers to stop smoking, they still expect to collect massive revenues on tobacco. This is akin to throwing your cake away while you still need it! What’s the point of stopping the sale of loose cigarettes and small packs? A smoker who can’t afford a large pack, costing $400, may gravitate to a bag of cannabis at $200. How does the government collect a tax on that? Their (Govt’s deranged logic keeps showing up in everything they do!
In our seemingly biblical last days scenario, the attack on crops by insects has increased. All Guyanese farmers will attest to this. Given the high price of insecticide, no farmer would use pesticide on their crop unless they are certain that their crop is threatened by insects. The objective is to save their crop and like in any other business, to reduce the cost of production. Alternatively, herbicides are used by farmers to reduce cost too.
It is clear the Peeper has little or no knowledge of farming. While chemicals may have damaging effects on farmers and the environment due to contact and residual effects respectively. Where is the scientific cost effective alternative to replace them? Should a farmer stand and watch his crop being decimated by insects and not use insecticides to save it? The Peeper wrote. “Pesticides are no friend of farmers.” If a product can save your crops from decimation by a swarm of rampaging insects, I think it would be ungrateful not to acknowledge that product as a friend. History is laden with examples where insects had destroyed crops, causing starvation of large populations before the advent of insecticide.
The present budgetary move by the government to remove the vat on pesticide and herbicide would be viewed by farmers as a positive help to reduce their cost of production.
The Peeper wrote, “More people die each year in Guyana from pesticide and weedicide poisoning each year than from the effects of cigarette smoking.” While that is the truth from a statistical point of view- the peeper’s comparative analysis to smoking is flawed and misleading in context. Is the Peeper suggesting that the prevalence of pesticides and weedicides in our domain, the reason for our high suicide rate? Surely! The Peeper should know that the prevalence of suicide in our society has a deeper socio-economic rooting.
Moreover! Pesticides/weedicides, are the means, not the cause of suicide. Take the chemicals away and hanging becomes the next means. Do we then ask the Govt to place a high tax on ropes to reduce suicides?

Rudolph Singh

Discover more from Kaieteur News

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

Latest News