Dear Editor,
In Guyana during the period of the ʼ60s and ʼ70s, budget day was a major event in the lives of the masses. Hundreds of citizens usually gathered around Parliament Building to hear the presentation and, as they waited on the Minister of Finance to deliver his speech, they would often
discuss possible measures to be included in the budget.
However, in the last four decades, people’s interest in budget day had waned considerably, the reason being that in their opinion the budget did not address measures which advanced their lives. The end result was that on budget days people would generally proceed with their lives and left the parliamentarians alone. It is clear that since the advent of the APNU+AFC coalition citizens of Guyana are paying greater attention to budget presentations. If I am asked to say why there has been such a profound negative development in the Guyanese political culture in response to budget presentations I would venture to say that the answer lies in the fact that over the last 40 years many of the budgetary measures have fallen short of the masses’ expectations, and in many cases have impacted them negatively. It is in this context that we have to understand the initial/reflex responses of many people to the 2017 Budget.
Given the destruction of the economy over the decades it is clear that the days when a finance minister in Guyana has many ‘goodies’ to offer the people in terms of financial relief, are long gone. The situation has been reduced to whether or not the minister is able to present a budget, given the available resources at the disposal of the government and in the present difficult circumstances both international and internal, that meets the concerns of all and sundry. Another relevant question for consideration is how the budget allocates resources, and which classes or groups are the major beneficiaries.
Added to the above we have the problems of a weak Guyana dollar, low wages/salaries, high cost of living, high unemployment and under employment. And to make matters worse we have to contend with the issue of dirty money from the underground economy, which under the PPP/C regime became injections of funds into the economy, and which inflated the economic growth rate. All these problems are not new; they were inherited from the PPP/C regime.
Since coming to office the present government’s budgetary measures have been directed to the realigning of the economy to have sound and sustainable development. This approach has resulted in the reduction of dirty money in the economy, which has impacted negatively on the economic growth rate ‒ a necessary price we have to pay, in the short term, for getting the economy on a sound economic base.
Over the last two decades, the criminal state with its underground economy has produced an elite with a lifestyle of wealth and prosperity. This small group has become very influential in the society, their way of life based on the get rich fast syndrome, has a pervasive impact on the consciousness of the masses. Thus they exercise influence far larger than their numbers. The get rich fast mentality has now become a way of life for many ordinary people, particularly among our youth population. This has created a volatile and dangerous political environment in the country.
Years of austerity have taken their toll on the masses and they are close to breaking point. Fortunately, for Guyana we are now poised to begin the exploitation of our oil reserves. This is the only real short and medium term solution that offers us a meaningful chance to reverse the decades of economic and social stagnation Guyana has experienced. Objectively, oil production will create some political space for the government, since it opens the door for real transformation of the economy and, if managed properly, will significantly improve the lives of the people. Mr Jagdeo and the PPP are well aware of the transformative effects of oil on the economic, social and political situation in the country. Mr Jagdeo and the other PPP leaders are aware that if this development occurs under the present coalition government it represents a political nightmare for them in the PPP.
The opposition strategy on the budget is aimed at creating hysteria ‒ shouting doomsday for the country, knowing fully well that this is far from the truth. What they are trying to do is to exploit the masses’ feeling of insecurity and at the same time fool the nation that when they left office the country and the economy were buoyant and that the APNU+AFC government is unable to govern and manage the economy. Mr Jagdeo’s pompous offer of cooperation on the budget if the President withdraws it, is nothing but political opportunism, showmanship and deception to win political points. The opposition party’s rhetoric on the economic, financial and social measures in the budget, when analyzed carefully, is in most cases devoid of sound economic reasoning but strong on propaganda.
However, it will not be easy sailing for the opposition, because during the budget debate the government side will strip the opposition naked and expose their anti-people anti-national intentions as they bring clarity on the budgetary measures. Now in opposition the PPP is offering the nation what it failed to deliver in 23 years in office. The opposition is behaving like the three cards man, who shows you the wining card, but once you put your money in you will never find the correct card. Mr Edghill and company are playing the role as accomplices in the con game.
In concluding I want to say that I expect the government side in parliament to fire on all cylinders. The government’s public relations departments have their work cut out, since the debate on this budget, as far as the PPP is concerned, is not about the soundness of the measures announced in the budget, but a propaganda war which they are convinced that they can win. It is now up to the regime’s arguments and its public relations professionals to ensure that this does not happen.
Yours faithfully,
