Last week article’s generated quite a discussion in the media and elsewhere. We did indicate that several key items in the plan will have to await the approval by the National Assembly of the 2015 Budget. These include: the reduction in the Berbice Bridge Toll; salary increases for government employees; increases in Old Age Pensions; phased reduction of VAT and the removal of VAT from food and other essential items; and waiving of duties on fuel, tools and small scale mining equipment.
Constitutional provisions relating to the National Budget
Article 218 of the Constitution requires the Minister of Finance to prepare and lay before the Assembly before or within 90 days after the commencement of each financial year estimates of revenue and expenditure of Guyana for that year. It should be emphasized that it is not the Minister’s budget but that of the State. We raise this because there had been some confusion as to whose budget it is, following the Court ruling on the 2012 “budget cuts” case. Since the Estimates are in relation to public finance, it has been an established practice for the Minister to introduce them in the Assembly. But this action does not confer ownership, as the Court ruling suggested. The ruling went on to state that the Assembly could not amend the Estimates without the Minister’s approval. What if the Minister refuses to do so? Any reasonable person with knowledge and experience in public management would consider the ruling quite bizarre.
An interpretation by the Courts on constitutional matters relating to public finance cannot be done in isolation of knowledge and understanding of the thought process that underpin such matters. Indeed, without such knowledge and understanding, the Courts run the
