Fundamentals First.
A Fiscal National Budget that excludes Opposition input and participation in its structure is not the national instrument of a democracy, as delineated in its Constitution.
Despite the ineloquent reduction of it’s once formal preamble
-composed in the traditions of the heritage of the nation from which we claim our first language-
to a comparative colloquial squash of whom the original penmen intended to portray us as, there remains reference to the nation being a Democratic Sovereign State, even in its watered down composition of what was originally heralded as collective bold stature with collaborative intent, cooperatively pursuing social and economic justice for our six peoples.
It is this definition of the nation that stipulates it as not being a dictatorship; thereby instructing that everything done in the political interest of all of the nation’s peoples has to be executed by the elected political bodies ….Leading and Opposing Arms of Government.
Politics and ideology under-gird the positions of political Parties, so working together is critical to ensure that the electorate that chose both arms of government gets, at least, some of what it voted for and not all of what is forced upon them.
The practice of excluding the Opposition from fiscal negotiations has long been a matter of course for the PPP which has ruled the nation for most of its post Independence.
That this remains the complaint of the current Opposition, which now has more duty for oversight in the oil- awash economy, is beyond dereliction of duty but speaks to the sociology of voting and the psychology of the voter who definitely knows what is expected of his preferred politician as the vote is cast.
For us, it’s the painful observation of the annual remonstration billed as Budget Debate that lures our attention, curious to see if anything changes for the better.
As anticipated, the Opposition complained of not being invited – as the democratically elected Opposition- to participate in the Budget’s structure.
And as expected, there was no linear analysis of the PPP produced budget by the veteran Opposition for informed linear rebuttal to financial proposals.
And if there was, it was incumbent upon the Opposition to have those experts counteract with the Opposition’s analysis of what was unworkable and why.
Figures are intended to be calculative so that when the Opposition says that the PPP could have assisted more by reducing vat to 10% or 12% to put put $ 4- 17 billion in the pockets of Guyanese, we’re wondering about the calculative base.
These are huge numbers with huge and curiously wide spread between values which poses some reliability questions in the data offered.
10% of 4 bn is 400million- 17% is 480million.
10% of 17bn is 1bn 700m – 17% of 17 bn is 2b 890m.
For a 2% (12% -10% ) decrease in VAT to yield a 13billion boon for Guyanese pockets, we need to know exactly what is being taxed and how.
We’ll confess that we’re not experts here, though we may have encountered some readings on Revenue and Distribution of Value Added Tax along the way, which would have informed our perception of the proposal of the VAT reduction.
And this is why it’s important to not just throw numbers around without the duty of explaining what they mean to the people who elected you to translate this for them.
This is why, too, because you’re not invited to participate, you have your analysts listen to what is presented and prepare a response for you to stitch in the next time you get the mic…instead of serving up non budgetary STUFF.
And calling on the Minister to affirm the creation of 60,000 jobs should have been the Opposition’s duty to produce documents to the contrary, or dates and times efforts were made to confirm the job data. Budget debate is a forum for the electorate more than it is for partisan bluster and entertainment by invective.
As we said, with the glancing exposure we may have had to any Finance and Accounting, we combed through the budget to look for fundamentals like the budget for Education which came in at 175 billion.
We’ve long been skeptical of numbers reported for economic data to recording sites, largely because they are self reported and incentivized by the prospect of loan and grant qualifications for future needs.
Adequate spending on education is demonstrative of the government’s priority for education, which we agree should be high because education prepares human capital- the most important natural resource of any country.
And this is why effective budget debate is a duty.
The 175 billion allocated to education includes 36.2 billion for ‘construction and rehabilitation of schools and dorms’.
An essential detail would have been to estimate the number of students the renovations are intended to impact and their regions of residence, at the bare minimum.
Academic levels and types of rooms – laboratories and libraries- should be particularized since rooms must be constructed to function and not simply house.
All this would lend a sense of amount to the billions proposed.
And who are the engineers tapped for construction of this $36.2 billion project? How fairly are the tenders offered, reflecting the fair inclusion of all? How can the public confirm – outside of the posting of alleged degrees possibly from Diploma Mills– their qualifications as engineers capable of constructing safe buildings for occupants?
Missed opportunities abound because politics is a game, not a duty to govern and lead, but an opportunity for polemic attacks to demonstrate some false strength and superficial win that provides more of a disservice than opportunity to inform the constituents dependent upon their elected official for accurate information of decisions that will impact their lives.
Headlines like Finance Minister Successfully Pilots Budget through National Assembly is no feat when Opposition was unconstitutionally excluded from participation, thereby clearing the flight path for a budget that’s woefully short of specifics.
Then there’s unemployment.
Statistia records an unemployment rate of 12.43% in 2023 up .01% from 2022 which is not good since revenues grew by 62.3% per Caribbean Development Bank2024 when unemployment jumped to 13.5% …a whole 1.07%
There’s no direct nexus between increased revenue growth and reduced unemployment but proposing to use increased revenue growth to grow job opportunities by implementing a multiplicity of economic activity, specifically to improve hiring opportunities for the population, are goals that increased national revenue should be directed to.
That’s why there’s debate…to analyse proposals and submit alternates where applicable, all in the name of OPTIMIMUM SERVICE TO CONSTITUENTS.
As of 2023, Guyana had the highest unemployment rate in the continent.
This makes demographic composition of the labor force very pertinent…to track the communities that are excluded from national benefit.
The UN’s declaration in 2015, of focusing on descendants of Africans around the world, was an international charge for countries with descendants of Africans to curate societal factors pertinent to the mission- “full enjoyment of economic, social, cultural, civil and political rights by people of African descent, and their full and equal participation in all aspects of society”.
Guyana’s high African -descendant population should have mandated the organized collection of labor statistics and broad economic data relating to Guyanese Africans.
Politicians, particularly those of African descent, should have led the charge.
Information gathered would only enhance the Guyana Labour Force Statistics Survey which reports by gender and geography and remains perpetually stale dated….as of now, still in 2021.
So when boasts of increased taxing thresholds are made by the PPP, there should be corresponding data with gross earning levels to confirm whether those most maligned by the economic system are benefiting, at all.
If you’re not making the money, lowering taxes doesn’t offer you any more spending room if your income was too low to tax in the first place.
And if your income is low then your disposable income is less which means you are contributing more to the spending economy and national GDP …more than the folks who could afford to save. But that’s a whole other lesson.
Look.
The Budget Debate was not.
It was an official roll out of financial expenditure that will improve the lot of the historical beneficiaries, without improving the day to day well being of those who remain at or below the poverty line.
And the composition of that unemployed demographic we do not know.
Critical statistics like the nation’s poverty level are discretionary reporting. And discretion is a fleeting, if not biased, visitor to those who report.
The Caribbean Council’s colorful presentation of Guyana’s USD 6.6 billion budget is just as meaningful as the presentation by Ernst and Young …another big name with full color presentations …whose price tag should be shared with the tax payers.
Bottom line is that it’s only as accurate as the honesty of the figures that are input and as prosperous as the political spirit with which it is executed.
That’s why the debate for the Opposition has to be a studied approach, an analysis of previous input to measure outcomes to recommend replacement or removal and with data.