Dear Editor,
Guyana’s 2026 National Budget stands at $1.558 trillion, the largest in our nation’s history. We are building hospitals, expanding emergency response systems and positioning ourselves as a global climate leader. And yet, in the South Rupununi villages women and children referred to Lethem Hospital face hours of travel on rough, often impassable roads; a desperate race against time that many lose before they receive medical attention. In the village of Parabara, samples of hair were taken for mercury testing, and were found to have elevated levels in the body of those who were tested. Some of the highest concentrations were recorded among women of childbearing age, way over the safe levels of the World Health Organization. This is not a distant or abstract concern. It is happening now, in communities that are part of this nation, while revenues from the very industries driving that contamination are fuelling our record budget.
I noted the release of Tamùkke’s Feminist Budget Analysis of Guyana’s 2026 National Budget that found that gold mining in regions 1, 7, 8 and 9 – where many Indigenous communities reside; continues to rely on mercury, which contaminates rivers and accumulates in fish. This is more than concerning, for riverine communities, fish is not a luxury; it is a primary source of protein. Women, who are disproportionately responsible for food preparation and caregiving, face compounded exposure risks. And yet environmental health monitoring and preventive intervention in these communities remain limited relative to the scale of extraction taking place.
What is perhaps most troubling is not only the contamination itself, but the institutional silence that followed. Reports indicate that after elevated mercury levels were identified in Parabara, communities were left uncertain about whether follow-up health interventions would come. This gap between environmental monitoring and public health response is not a technical failure. It is a governance failure. Gravely concerning and troubling.
This analysis found that environmental management allocations declined from $4.83 billion in 2025 to $2.91 billion in 2026 – even as petroleum production and mining expansion continue to grow. This is not the profile of a country treating environmental protection as a developmental priority. Spending on disaster response and sea defence increased by over 92% in the same period, reflecting a state that is reactive rather than preventive when it comes to environmental harm.
We are not against economic growth. But growth cannot be equitable if its costs are borne by the most marginalized. I would call for the establishment of a national air and water quality monitoring network, the implementation of routine mercury testing programmes in mining communities, and the integration of Environmental Protection Agency data into Ministry of Health surveillance systems. These are not expensive or radical asks -they are the minimum that a country of Guyana’s current fiscal capacity owes to communities living alongside its extractive industries.
The question before us is simple: if we can afford the largest budget in our history, can we afford not to protect the people who live in the shadow of the industries making it possible?
Yours faithfully,
Immaculata Casimero
Wapichan Woman
Discussion