I NOTED the contents in Stabroek News 2011-01-18, ‘Budget fails to deliver to poor, jobless – Greenidge’. 
In the article Mr. Greenidge speaks of:- 1.    Widespread poverty and unemployment. That the budget does not address poverty and unemployment
2.    A number of political statements many of which have no connection with reality.
3.    Last ten (10) years have been the worse for security and public accountability.
4.    He accuses the staff of Parliament of destroying or removing Parliamentary records with Public Accounts Committee (PAC) and parliamentary sittings.
5.    He criticizes the use of supplementary, saying it abuses the total picture and can be inflationary.

Mr. Greenidge seems very far removed from the realities in our country.  These statements tell us that we must now question how sincere and effective were his representations at the Office of Trade Negotiation.  He certainly could not have been able to be objective while harbouring such dislike and envy for the PPP/C administration.

I would like to now deal with some comments. 
Budget does address Employment and Poverty
Mr. Greenidge criticizes budget 2011 as not addressing employment and poverty.  He is the last person who should speak on this issue as he has no credibility or track record on this subject.

When he was voted out of government in 1992, over 70% of the people lived below poverty line and more than half of them were living in dire poverty.  This has been halved under this PPP/C government.

Mr. Greenidge has the distinction of being Finance Minister for nine years. By the end of his seventh year this was the state of Guyana.  I am using the excerpt from page 2 of his 1992 budget speech.

    High and rising inflation
    Extreme and damaging exchange rate volatility
    The loss of foreign reserves
    A growing gap between the official and parallel market rates of foreign exchange
    Declining investment, production and job opportunities
    A fractured relationship with external creditors.

I repeat….this was by the end of his seventh year as Finance Minister.

It took the late Sir John Compton, the late Mary Eugenia Charles and James Mitchell, a special effort to get the PNC regime to change.  Mr. John Compton, then Prime Minister of St. Lucia, was instrumental in getting the International Financial Institutions to make some US$372M available to Guyana so we could pay some of our international debt obligations.

The record under him was one of :
    interest rates being over 30%
    double digit inflation
    over 70% poverty
    over 20% unemployment
    Little to no foreign reserves
    Little foreign investments

Today almost all these indices have been halved and the prospects are extremely good.
    Interest rates at their lowest levels for 20 years hovering around 11%
    Inflation contained to under 4.5%
    Poverty rate at under 33%
    Unemployment – using U.S Bulletin just over 10%
    Foreign resources that can pay for seven months of imports
    Over US$692m in Direct Foreign Investment
    A stable exchange rate – Finance Minister Singh said the depreciation in 2010 was an unnoticeable 0.12%.  Repeat…an unnoticeable 0.12%

Greenidge has no grounds or moral authority on which to criticize this government and the 2011 budget. 

How did Carl Greenidge’s budget deal with job creation? 

There were few jobs created.  In order to give people something to do he had over 55,000 persons in the public sector and state enterprises – most of them did nothing productive – all of the House of Israel people were on some state agency payroll while selling  plantain chips  – The Guyana Pharmaceutical Corporation alone had 300 of them lead by Michael Dorne.  To pay them we had to print money driving inflation to hyper-inflation levels.  Jobs could not be created as Direct Foreign Investments were scorned.  The new entrepreneurs brought bread in suitcases to Guyana.  Unemployment was at its peak during the Greenidge years.

This Government knows that our Guyanese people are proud and want to earn their own money to upkeep themselves and their families.  That is why there is a strong commitment to provide the enabling environment for the private sector to grow and create good paying jobs.  The almost US$700 in direct foreign investment has been attracted in doing just that. 
Workers shortages are hitting the Labour Market and wage rates have been rising.  Our Central Recruitment and Manpower Agency last year had 400 vacancies which were unfilled.  We have revamped and modernized it and 2270 persons found jobs through it in 2010.  Today, labourers and cane cutters demand 2500 GY dollars a day.  That was what Carl Greenidge’s budget paid a police person a month. 

Our world class sporting facilities, improved road network, ICT backbones, tangible commitment to hydro and reduction of business red-tape has attracted unprecedented levels of investment creating jobs and a growing economy.

How did the Carl Greenidge budget deal with poverty alleviation?

He could not deal with that. So he had a means test for old age pensioners introduced.  Today 43,000 benefit from a tidy sum each month.  Many of these are pensioners impoverished by the PNC. Over seven thousand poor people received Public Assistance.  These monthly payments have been increased annually by the PPP/C Government.  The increases that are provided in the 2011 budget is not a buy the old people vote strategy; it is an annual increase which they can look forward to.  It has been raised year after year.

How did Greeenidge help the vulnerable? 
Towards the end of the PNC term the SIMAP programme was introduced but most of those resources were dedicated to building physical infrastructure.  Little went directly to the vulnerable.  They gave the vulnerable words and more promises.  And what they gave, they had to borrow to do.
This PPP/C government today spends over 45 billion dollars of our own money to offer services in health, education & training and protecting the vulnerable. 
In fact, the amount in the budget to directly protect, assist and empower the vulnerable is in excess of 5 billion dollars.
THIS IS HOW WE CARE BY PUTTING OUR MONEY EFFECTIVELY BEHIND THE VULNERABLE.
Old age pensions will be provided to the tune of 4.5 billion of which 1 billion will be Public Assistance benefitting 43000 pensioners and 8000 public assistance persons.  Youth empowerment for school drop outs will see over 300 million to benefit 3000 youth.  Women’s empowerment will see over 40 million expended,  over 500 million to assist 400 feeding and school uniform programmes , and legal aid $35M.  Not forgetting health and education are improved and free.
In effect almost 4.7 billion will be spent in helping the vulnerable and yet the opposition members say there is nothing in this budget for the poor people.
The government programmes have possibly impacted on the poor.  Our housing programme last year helped 15,000 families.  23,000 giving electricity, 20,000 eye care, 93,000 kids getting a meal every day, low inflation rate, increase in the income tax threshold – all impacted to help the poor and vulnerable.

Supplementaries masking the true picture and can drive inflation. 

Mr. Greenidge, like many of the other opposition personalities is making a mountain out of a mole hill.  Our supplementary provisions have not taken out budgets above the nominal totals as approved by Parliament. In budget after budget, since Carl’s time, in spite of supplementary provisions the total budgets have been contained as to that approved by Parliament. 

Supplementaries in the case of the PPP/C government does not mask the true picture of the government expenditure.  Much misconception is created by opposition and  it is made out as if in addition to what has been approved in the budget there are all these “wicked” other interventions – i.e. Supplementaries.

The evidence shows something different. In spite of several supplementary papers, overall expenditure has been lower than what was projected.  For example, look at the table below:

For fiscal prudence, we ensure that we do not balloon the budget. However, it makes for great sensationalism and political grandstanding.  As M. P. Nandalall would say, ‘all fluff!’
Every government will have supplementaries. Why? –
1. Some programmes where there is faster implementation will require more money than was approved in the budget. This addition, for it to be spent, has to be approved by Parliament.  Foreign inflows are a case posited.

2. There may be some projects that are delayed and we would not be able to expend the approved resources.  What do we do?  Keep the bank accounts growing when our people need housing, better roads and social amelioration.  This PPP/C government would wisely spend the available resources rather than save it.  What in fact happens is that some projects are brought forward to replace those that are delayed.
The point is that there is no wild expenditure.  If there are emergencies – eg. Blackouts to be fixed, we will fix it.  If workers are laid off and we can help, we do it, if there is mechanical breakdown in ferries, we fix it. But look at the record – overall the total accrued expenditure generally is in line with projections in the budget.
I can go on and on and compare the performances of the Greenidge years and the last five years of Ashni Singh, but it is comparing chalk to cheese.

On the issue of the alleged missing Parliamentary records
This clearly must be a figment of Carl’s imagination. He is accusing the Parliamentary staff of removing or destroying these records.  Those in charge were Frank Narine, Maurice Henry, Mr. Moore, Sherlock Issacs the senior members of the PNC would know of the credibility of these men.  As soon as the government changed Dr. Jagan gave orders that Public Buildings should be for Parliament alone.  The PNC had starved the Parliament for resources.  Accountant General Reports were not handed in. 

The PPP/C has done well.

Debt & Debt Management /The PPP/C Government has performed well
The PPP/C has done well in spite of what was left by the PNC in 1992.  Let’s look at the External National Debt.  In 1992, it was US$2.1B using a population of 750,000 that translate to US$2,800 per capita , that is for every woman, man and child in our country.

The G.D.P in 1992 was US$ 396 call it US$ 400 – I am using the figure in the 1992 Greenidge budget. What these two figures say is that it would take every man, woman and child over seven (7) years to pay off his or her portion of the National Debt.  Eighteen years after, with the PPC/C in government, per capita debt (external) is about US$1500.  per capita G.D.P, (our earnings) is US$2,500. Thus it would only require just about 7 months of national earnings to repay out external debt. 

What this really measures is the burden the PNC – Greenidge government left on the shoulders of our people, all our people.  The PPP/C government has eased this burden from a repayment period of seven years to seven months in less than two decades.  This is a remarkable feat!  Remarkable!

Also, what is different today is that, this PPP/C government is servicing our debt, paying some 4 billion Guyana dollars directly to principle in addition to the payments on the interest charges. 

Under the PNC and their Finance Minister Carl Greenidge, they borrowed many millions in US dollars just to meet current expenditure.  The figures below tell the story.
Current          Current            surplus/
Revenue        Expenditure            deficit
89)         $3.2B        $81.3B                  ($.86B)
90)        $8.3B          $93.8B                 ($3.0B)
91)        $11.8B        $99.3B                 ($7.5 B)
92)        $16.3B        $25.B                   ($8.6B)       

Look at the PPP/C budget of 2009, 2010 and projected 2011
Current          Current                surplus/
Revenue        Expenditure            deficit
09)         $94.9B        $81.3B                      $13.6B
10)        $104.3B        $93.8B                     $10.5B
11)        $126.3B        $99.3B                     $27 B .   
What this says is that we have enough of our money to invest and (to service borrowing) for capital projects.

You can liken that to an individual who has money remaining from his monthly earnings after expenses.   So he goes to the bank and based on the current account balance he would get a loan to build a home or invest in a business or buy a car or computer.

The PPP/C has restored credit worthiness, and established a solid foundation to borrow for investment in the capital stock of our country.

PPP/C ……..the Taxation burden
Another achievement of the PPP/C government is the reduction of the tax burden on the people.  If we look at the taxes as a % of G.D.P in 1990, this was 29%, in 1991, 25% and in Greenidge’s last budget 34%.  Last year that ratio was 22% and with the tax relief of 3.4B in this budget this will be reduced further in 2011.

There is no denying that the 4 Ashni Singh Budgets so far has performed well.  Containing inflation to single digit levels and keeping the economy on a sustained growth path.  I am confident that 2011 will reinforce this trend. 
Congratulations Ashni Singh!