THE OBSERVER
THAT Guyana is well on its way to a comprehensive, modern, social and economic overhaul is indisputable. The transformative evidence is indeed visible all around, and therefore needs no repeating in this column; except that, successive National Budgets have been supporting programmes that are directly  aimed at delivering qualitative changes in peoples lives, allowing for an improved life and  positive role and contribution in the nation’s development. The 2011 Budget, ably and triumphantly presented by the erudite Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh, is a vindication of the competent fiscal management of the nation’s economic processes that now enables this grand design of modernisation to continue unimpeded. In fact, the estimates with its well crafted plans for continuous social and economic development has caught the entire parliamentary Opposition flatfooted. Their debate response has been lacklustre, uninspiring, unintelligent and a desperate attempt to impress upon the House that the Budgetary allocations are out of touch with the needs of the ordinary people.

It has been the same old, worn-out tactic of resorting to accusations of corruption and mismanagement. Nothing new or refreshing has emanated from any Opposition Member of Parliament, thus far.

Sheila Holder’s claim of “phantom pensioners” on the Ministry of Human Services’ Old Age Pension data base, and the accusation that that sector has been diverting funds as a result of a padded pension roll, represents a most desperate situation on their part to look good, particularly the AFC that is frantically trying to stay politically alive.

It was a most puerile and, in fact, very dishonest attempt at “ability”, premised on what has been proven to be an unscientific methodology, by Minister Priya Manickchand’s withering response during the current debate.

An undignified and discourteous aspect of this scenario, is that the AFC member was reported to be absent from the House for the initial stage of the subject minister’s reply. This is not a politician, who is aspiring to be Prime Minister of the nation. This is gross disrespect and irresponsibility from a member, representing a Party that believes it can direct the affairs of this nation’s politics in an entirely new direction.

Further, such a claim does cast serious aspersions, as the minister quite correctly alluded, on the ministry’s staff, and by extension, old age pensioners. Holder’s claims have been proven to be unsubstantiated and un-researched, shot to ribbons by a minister who is extremely passionate about bringing  improved comforts to the nation’s seniors.
Any credible evidence coming to Parliament’s attention on such a serious matter ought to have been best supported by hard evidence, inclusive of names, etc. But the fact of such an absence, quite early, signalled the dubiousness of Holder’s accusations.

The 2011 Budget, and its  deliberations, has exposed an Opposition that is totally bereft of ideas, and oblivious  as to  what constitutes development. They have missed, among other sign posts, the bigger picture as to the future destiny of this nation.

It has been a resort to the traditional, time-honoured tactic, so well known of Opposition Parties – oppose for the sake of opposing. This debate does indeed give the nation a very good reality of the choices that lay ahead for governance of this advancing nation.
As for the AFC, particularly, they have again, stuck their feet in their mouth.