FRIDAY last, Minister of Finance, Dr. Ashni Singh, presented the nation’s largest budget to date, at $192.8B; and, since as is expected, that the critical test for the newly configured parliament , with a minority government, would be the year’s financial estimate, then the immediate response from the political opposition, particularly the AFC, that the budget is a “bailout budget”, ought not to come as a surprise.
Now for an understanding of the description” bailout’ as used in the context, by party leader, Khemraj Ramjattan.
This term, in accordance with its dictionary explanation, means to rescue someone or something from a difficulty. And made in relation to the newly read national budget, Ramjattan seems to be referring to the announced sums of $4B for cash strapped GUYSUCO and $6B for GPL.
The problems facing the nation’s sugar industry have been well documented, and need not be repeated in these lines; except, to say that the opposition leaders, both Granger and Ramjattan have had their say as to what ought to be the way forward. I am certain the readership may recall Granger’s now famous anti-working class suggestion that the entire industry should be nationalised, and Ramjattan’s daily bleating that sugar was in trouble, while as usual lambasting the government for its shortcomings, particularly the flagship Skeldon Factory.
With sugar being the single, largest employer in this country, with the thousands of livelihood that it affects, it was logical that government would have effected an intervention in an attempt to stabilise its operations, and in the process assuring security to the many who are its dependents. Hence, the injection of $4B is a most perfect platform of resuscitation undertaken by an administration that understands its national responsibilities, unlike Mr. Ramjattan, whose forays to the sugar belt not so long ago, appears to have been in the name of fomenting worker agitation.
I am certain that with this announcement by Dr. Singh, sugar workers are breathing a great sigh of relief.
Over the years GPL, too, has been having its share of troubles that mostly revolve around massive loss of revenue due to country–wide theft of its services, and high operating costs because of the unstable high price of fuel so critical to its daily operations. It was obvious that despite the efforts made by this utility to ensure a stable, daily supply of power to the nation, that theft of its services on a grand scale, would have hindered such an ideal. Thus, the intervention of $6B must be seen as critical to this entity being able to carry out its operations, but critically subsidizing the high import cost of fuel, rather than the need to increase tariffs, which the nation’s working class definitely cannot afford.
Therefore, the “bailout’ label, as sarcastically used, is one that will in reality ensure that the sugar industry survives its current challenges, giving its many workers and their dependent families, an assured economic future; and as with GPL, a better managed service to the nation, at no possible extra cost.