THE debate on the national budget in the National Assembly concluded on an interesting note, with Opposition Leader, David Granger admitting the difficulties that Finance Minister, Dr. Ashni Singh has had in putting together the 2012, national budget, noting that it is a complex one.
He said the opposition has recognised the challenges in putting together the important document, hence their insistence in working together on the matter.

He spoke of plans to have a Parliamentary Budget Committee set up, possibly in the coming year. This, he said, will allow and enable greater collaboration and inputs from a wider cross section of the House.

With this in mind, Granger believes that consultation can still take place, noting that A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) does not want a collision but only wants to get the budget right.

While this stance could signal a change from the traditional ‘oppose for opposing sake’, which has characterised the opposition in more recent years, we will have to wait and see how sincere and committed to this seemingly new position,
because in the just recent past we have heard them talking about working with the government to move the country forward but on two issues crucial to moving the country forward they back pedalled.

On the election of Speaker of the National Assembly and the Committee of Selection, the opposition parties voted as one instead of seeking consensus. This has resulted in the unprecedented situation of the opposition holding both the Speaker and Deputy Speaker positions.

So taking Mr. Granger’s words for granted may not be the wisest thing to do.

While Granger sounds a bit more conciliatory, his colleague Khemraj Ramjattan has sent an eyebrow-raising and contradictory signal with a shocking statement that the AFC wants a huge chop in the estimates for the Ministry of Tourism and if this proposal becomes a reality, will see large numbers of public sector employees losing their jobs.

Minister Irfaan Ali recalled that the AFC spoke a lot in the budget debate about tourism development and how government should have put more money into tourism development, recalling, “Cathy Hughes (AFC MP) said that we have budgeted too small an amount for tourism development and here is it that Mr. Ramjattan is proposing that we cut the allocation for tourism development by almost 49 percent.”
He said he knows that this will be very disappointing news for the Tourism and Hospitality Association of Guyana (THAG), but “we will have to ensure that we rally together to disallow Mr. Ramjattan and the AFC from putting stumbling blocks in this sector.
So it seems that members of the AFC have different positions with respect to tourism because a leading member, Ms. Hughes, wants more to be spent on tourism, but her party’s leader is vociferously advocating a cut on expenditure for tourism”.
Ramjattan said that the AFC will support any budget or economic programme that offers opportunities for all Guyanese.
The question which he needs to answer is whether slashing the tourism budget would create or deprive Guyanese of opportunities.
Those who voted for the opposition, in particular the AFC should make a careful note of this and reconsider whether they made the right choice on the ballot.
Ramjattan’s position is bewildering in light of the fact that Guyana is now emerging as a booming tourist destination and when nearly every country is pushing tourism because it is probably the largest industry in the world.

Tourism has become a popular global leisure activity. In 2010, there were over 940 million international tourist arrivals worldwide, representing a growth of 6.6% when compared to 2009. International tourism receipts grew to US$919 billion (€693 billion) in 2010, corresponding to an increase in real terms of 4.7%.

Is Mr. Ramjattan suggesting that we should not capitalise on a growing and lucrative tourism market, which will bring huge dividends to our national economy and therefore contribute to improving the standard of living of our people?
If his answer is yes, then that is surely a most unfortunate and cockeyed position.