Reckless Opposition slashes Gy$18.5B from budget
– CANU, ERC, State Planning Secretariat get $1 each
THE combined opposition last evening continued to slash the 2012 Budget, crushing the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) by cutting its allocation, and subjecting the Customs Anti-Narcotics Unit (CANU) and State Planning Secretariat to the same fate when they made a total cut of $224.419M from the Finance Ministry’s estimates for subsidies and contributions to local organizations. In three critical areas, CANU was cut from $20M to $1; ERC from $99.419M to $1, and the State Planning Secretariat from $105M to $1, putting once again scores of persons on the breadline without jobs.
In moving the motion for amendment, Mr. Carl Greenidge from A Partnership for National Unity’s (APNU), said the intention was to encourage the Finance Ministry – except in the case of the ERC — to adhere to the Auditor General’s recommendations.
Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh said CANU’s work can only be described as indispensable to the security of the state, the integrity of its borders, and the deterrence of the particular kinds of crimes covered by this entity’s mandate. Dr. Singh noted that the proposed appropriation was included in the National Budget for the specific and precise objective of addressing the matter raised by the Auditor General, with CANU now receiving an allocation of $71M under the Ministry of Home Affairs for the first time, “as the first step of our migration of this entity to the Ministry of Home Affairs”.
He described the opposition parties’ action as most regrettable, and called on them to reconsider their decision on the matter.
Dr. Singh said the budget allocation for this entity was similarly reduced as a specific and direct result of action taken by this administration to migrate the staff working in the State Planning Secretariat into the structure of particularly the Ministry of Finance, with the exception of one or two persons who are assigned performing functions in other entities.
Dr. Ashni again appealed for good reason to be shown and exercised, “so that this matter doesn’t reach the stage of a dilapidation of these agencies’ ability to function”.
On the ERC, the Finance Minister said it was an entity whose constitutional mandate was very important, even as he condemned the action by the Opposition.
Minister within the Ministry of Finance, Bishop Juan Edghill, speaking on the motion to cut the budgetary allocation to the ERC, which he once headed, said this was an action that would affect the people working there, and the programmes that the Guyana Constitution mandated the ERC to discharge.
“What this is attempting to do is to collapse the ERC,” he insisted, noting that the ERC comprised seven commissioners from seven constituencies, including the three major religions, the private sector, the labour movement, women, and youth.
The ERC has established a reputation and a standard, Bishop Edghill maintained, stating that “this action must be considered and seen clearly for what it is”.
“We cannot use a majority of one for spite, settling personal scores, and for being vindictive,” Bishop Edghill implored.
Home Affairs Minister Clement Rohee, in making an appeal, also said the move to cut the budget of CANU was “coming at a time when CANU has reached a point that it is increasingly interdicting more and more persons involved in drug trafficking”.
“I think that this move will send a wrong signal to the international community,” Rohee noted, stating that, for the first time after many years, the law enforcement agencies such as CANU, which were engaged in an aggressive fight against drugs, were developing very important and active relations with the drug enforcement agencies around the world.
Alluding to the fact that those agencies have been seeing progress in the fight against drugs, Rohee said: “It is unacceptable” and the cut is coming at a time when CANU is intensifying its bilateral relations with Brazil, Suriname and Venezuela.
Meanwhile, still on the line item ‘Ministry Administration’, the opposition parties had proposed a cut totalling some $18.395B, despite numerous pleas by members of the government side of the House for them to rethink the proposal.
Prime Minister Samuel Hinds, who rose to attempt convincing the opposition that their proposed amendments would have dire consequences on the people of Guyana and on government’s bid to improve electricity supply through the Amaila Falls hydro power project,
said, “The development of hydro electric potential in Guyana has been a dream of those before you.” He recalled that even in the 60s, the period of early government of the PPP/C, there had been the desire to develop such a project.
He also recollected that studies done by Canada and the United Nations in the 70s and 80s had identified a number of sites, and Amaila was one of the six that was most interesting to provide electricity for the Guyanese people.
“It was since about 1996-1997 that work was focused and pursued in developing Amaila… Large projects like these go through many years and a number of stages,” he added.
Prime Minister Hinds emphasised that a lot had been put into the development of the Amaila Falls project in the context of the prices for fossil fuel. He told the National Assembly that, bearing the high price in mind, one would do all that one can to make the project a success, and seek to remove every hindrance.
“Instead of this, sir, I’m extremely disappointed that the honourable friends of the other side seek to put a big stumbling block in the way… We would try our best, sir, we would not give up,” he assured.
The Prime Minister also questioned the opposition parties’ motive behind their actions, since hydro had captured the imagination of the Guyanese people for some time now.
“For us, the realization of the Amaila Falls is something to capture the imagination of our young people; maybe it would be much to us in saving the cost of generation…,” he lamented.
The Prime Minister said he could not imagine the opposition parties persisting in the motion they had laid some days ago for the amendment to the government’s proposal. He said the government does not think of hydro for its own use, but for its potential as a natural resource that provides employment and generates income.
He reiterated his disappointment in the move of the opposition, noting that he would like the young people to know that more hurdles are being put in the way of development by persons who were misguided.
Meanwhile, Minister of Natural Resources and the Environment, Robert Persaud, failed in his bid to further convince the opposition parties of the long-term implications of the amendments.  He boasted of Guyana’s recognition on the international stage with regard to its eco-services, and reminded that the position taken by the government with regard to preserving and managing the environment was nothing new, but had been started since in the days of the late President Hugh Desmond Hoyte.
He made reference to the sacrifices and commitment that the people of Guyana had made in managing to preserve the forest, and said that had all now gone in vain with the proposed budget cuts.
“And I think, Mr. Chairman, if this amendment goes through, it would be a very sad day in the history of this country…and we will tell the people of this country and future generations that they are irresponsible and  are reckless in this course of action,” he declared.
Minister Persaud said the opposition was squandering the future wellbeing of the Guyanese people.
Foreign Affairs Minister Carolyn Rodrigues-Birkett, who also rose to plead with the opposition parties to withdraw the motion, noted that statistics had shown that attention needed to be paid to the country’s indigenous people, who would be significantly disadvantaged by the cuts from the LCDS.  She hailed Guyana as a star in terms of dealing with its first people, and pointed out to the House that government had made significant strides with regard to land titling in Amerindian areas, a project which she said had been started under the Peoples National Congress (PNC) administration.
Amerindian Affairs Minister Pauline Sukhai echoed her colleague’s sentiments while indicating government’s intention to complete the titling of lands in Amerindian communities.
She also noted that it was indeed a sad day for Guyana, and pleaded with the two parties to rethink their proposal.
Agriculture Minister Dr. Leslie Ramsammy also failed in his bid to seek a withdrawal of the cuts, despite a passionate presentation on the government’s LCDS programme that saw continuous laughter emanating from the opposite side of the House, and many attempts by AFC leader Khemraj Ramjattan to disrupt his presentation.
Dr. Ramsammy deemed the two parliamentary parties’ move as “political grandstanding”.
However, Mr. Greenidge, in whose name the motion was tabled, rose to ask the Speaker to put forward the question for the cuts to the National Assembly.
A division was called, which saw 33 opposition members voting in favour of the cuts, and 32 government members voting against them, after which the amendment was carried for capital expenditure of the Ministry of Finance to be slashed from $18.395B to $1.
Meanwhile, no question was asked for the line item ‘Government accounting administration’, and it was subsequently passed without any cuts.