Economic commentary by Christopher Ram
Introduction
The announcement of an immediate $200,000 per household among a Santa’s list of gifts, was met one day later by the removal of the word “immediate” followed by announcements, revisions, and clarifications regarding the cash grant initiative which had received widespread acclaim. Perhaps the most full-throated accolade came from prominent attorney and columnist Ralph Ramkarran who effusively described the announcement and address as a”masterstroke” that has “transformed the political discourse leading up to Christmas and the elections next year.”
Yet, what began as a bold proclamation by President Irfaan Ali has evolved into a case study of policy implementation challenges the country is facing under a Party that has governed Guyana for 28 of the last 32 years.
The revision and lingering questions
The latest position is that instead of $200,000 per household, the government would now provide $100,000 to every resident adult citizen 18 years and older. While this change addresses some implementation concerns, it has also given rise to a host of new questions and uncertainties.
“Resident” usually and in tax laws, is defined by physical presence in the country for more than 183 days. It would be interesting to learn whether the Government would apply this stringent measure in a circumstance that could operate in a manner that is adverse to its political interests.
Despite the government’s stated intention to begin distribution “as soon as possible,” no specific start date has been announced, . This lack of clarity leaves citizens in limbo and raises questions about the government’s readiness to implement the programme.
The Vice President announced some five months’ timeline but gave no indication of the order in which payouts will be made. Will it be based on geographic location, ease of accessibility, possession of qualifying papers, or whatever other criteria? So from total but unrealistic uncertainty of immediately, to some vague within five months. This also will reduce the political goodwill and support engendered by the original announcement.
Just as misleading, if not unacceptable, is the cost of the measure. Originally it was announced as $60 Bn, suggesting 300,000 households at $200,000 each. With the new proposal of $100,000 per adult, we are told that the revised grant would “substantially increase the $60 billion previously allocated for this measure.” However, this figure seems inflated given that Guyana’s adult population (18 years and older) is significantly less than 600,000. All the financial wizards have to do is look at the voting of the last elections and adjust for persons who would have become 18 on the arbitrary cut-off date of 1st. January 2024, deaths and migration. That number is certainly less than 500,000 so on the outside the amount to be paid out is $50 Bn. While it is frightening to think that the government could not do that simple exercise, it is even more troubling to think otherwise.
One of the concerns raised about the proposal was that since there was no parliamentary approval for the payout, the Government was banking on the popularity of the measure as justification for violating the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act and indeed the Constitution. It is now left to be seen whether it will seek Parliamentary approval, as it should have from the outset.
Another tweaking was by the Vice President who suggested, without details, that there might be more such handouts. If this is now policy, it raises concerns whether the Government has reduced economic, social and financial management to receiving profit oil and royalties and paying these out as cash handouts to citizens, a clear abdication of the duties and functions of government. In narrowly defined circumstances, universal cash grants have their value but it is dangerous to think that they are a substitute for proper management.
NIS update
Commentary last week called for the official release of the outstanding reports of the National Insurance Scheme. The 2022 Report has now been published on the website of the NIS and confirms that the Scheme has turned a substantial surplus in 2022 which is more than likely to be repeated in 2023. Since the stated purpose of the injection was to assist contributors who are just short of the 750 contributions to qualify for a pension, it might just be a case of too much too late.
But that is only one of the multitude of problems facing the NIS, some of which are rooted in the past, and some due to past and present administrations.
Let us stop playing slow walk. The Government must be proactive in solving the myriad of problems which go well beyond just money – even $10 Bn.
