Empty, disappointing, and a joke were some of the words used by the lead opposition spokespersons to describe the $208.8 billion budget blueprint unveiled by Finance Minister Dr Ashni Singh yesterday as they lamented that the poor will continue to suffer.
“…You had a budget which touches on a variety of little issues here and there but the key issues that have to do with unemployment, growing inequalities in this country and the need to stimulate and properly manage the key sectors around which diversification could be framed, nothing of consequences happening there…,” APNU MP and Shadow Finance Minister Carl Greenidge told reporters minutes after Singh concluded his presentation in the National Assembly.
Greenidge described the overall thrust of the budget as a “Jagdeo programme,”—a reference to the former president—saying Minister Singh continues to behave as if the 2011 elections did not take place and failed to mention the public’s concerns about measures put in to address discrimination and corruption.
He argued that the budget is focused primarily on the capital programme because it provides the scope for the government to “give monies and perks to its cronies, associates and PPP members,” in the same manner in which licences for TV and radio were awarded.
Addressing the issue of the reduction of the income tax by 3 per cent to 30 per cent, Greenidge, a former finance minister, said both APNU and the AFC during initial discussions pointed out to the government the need for more careful and systematic attention to be paid to the issue of the poor and the vulnerable.
“There is no reference in the budget to these groups, and when you talking about 486 people, and 4,000 persons here, it is actually a joke because the numbers that are unemployed that are earning low income far exceed those numbers…,” he said.
According to Greenidge, the proposals for the social sector are more vacuous and empty and that there are whole passages of last year’s budget copied into this year’s presentation. “Which means that an important part of the inadequacy of the government… is implementation,” he said.
Further, Greenidge pointed out that President Donald Ramotar announced a committee to address tax reform and VAT over a year ago in order to keep the opposition quiet but the minister did not have the “decency” to mention what has become of the committee’s work.
He also said there was a missed opportunity which would have enabled the opposition and the government to find consensus on a number of areas, including the National Insurance Scheme (NIS), which was one of the issues they started discussing.
“But what I heard from him in terms of the NIS proposal [a 1% increase in payments] I think is less than satisfactory. You were looking for a longer-term solution to the problem of NIS. The problem of the loss of investment income, very, very important, not mentioned at all,” Greenidge said.
Opposition leader David Granger told reporters that the budget will not bring about the kind of transformation to the economy that is needed.
“It is almost an electioneering budget, there is a little bit for everyone, but it is not going to bring about the change that we are looking for. We are looking for significant change in terms of poverty, poverty reduction, we are looking for changes in the education system, we are looking for job creation and we didn’t hear anything about that,” Granger said.
He added that the budget is void and empty of the major factors that will transform the economy and that “it was very disappointing” and “bland and vacant.”
Granger said much more needed to be done and pointed out that the government could have benefited from meaningful consultation with the opposition, which is concerned about poverty reduction and job creation, two issues about which there is very little in the budget.
He said the lowering of the income tax to 30 per cent will not see any significant saving in terms of what households need to move their families out of poverty.
‘A joke’
AFC’s Leader Khemraj Ramjattan described the budget proposal as “a joke,” while noting that it lacked what his party was looking for
“It is rather frustrating that we are not going to get anything to do with bringing down the cost of the Berbice bridge [toll]… we are [not] going to deal with issues about sugar workers and public servants wages…, knowing how difficult times are. None of these things were dealt with,” he told reporters.
He felt the same about the trimming of the income tax.
“It’s a joke. It is a real joke, with the hard times that people in Guyana are feeling… with all the big boys getting all the contracts and the kickbacks worth millions and millions of dollars,” Ramjattan added, while stressing that it is the “huge corruption of public finances” that is causing all of the problems in Guyana.
“They have not in any way addressed that in this budget. It is all a sham and a façade…,” he noted.
He said that even what was allocated to the elderly—an increase of $2,500 in old age pensions—is “a joke.”
“From ten to twelve-and-a-half. We were pleading with them for fifteen. Raise it to two and a half more! Why not? Why are they so uncaring?” Ramjattan said, while adding that all of the prices on the market will soon rise and that increase would mean nothing.
His colleague Moses Nagamootoo described the proposed budget as “run of the mill,” saying that like its predecessors it would not bring any fundamental changes to the country.
“I think it is a bleak budget that has been spliced up a little bit like a kite with some frills for Easter and Phagwah,” Nagamootoo said, pointing out the minister did address the fundamental issue of wage increases for public servants, which they expected to be 10% across-the-board.
He said it is not a people’s budget but rather a pauper’s one, while noting that the AFC will deal with the budget on its merits.
“Bigger does not mean better. We have to look at what the budget seeks to do to change the lives of people,” the AFC parliamentarian said.
