The week that was!
alt
Outgoing Chairman of the Board of Directors of GNNL, Mr. Keith Burrowes

BESIDES my disappointment at what transpired during the recent budget cuts voted by the opposition, let me say that when the situation occurred, I did recall writing several articles that this is a new dispensation; one which has never been tested.
At the time of writing these articles, I strongly believed that they should have been specific protocols established to deal with the particular architecture and operation of the new dispensation. This situation being without precedent in Guyana – and arguably as far as I know the CARICOM Caribbean – I cited relevant scenarios from other countries such as Canada, the U.S. and other democracies operating with a minority government.
Elections was held in November, 2011 and for me the government and particularly the Ministry of Finance did a tremendous job in putting together the 2012 budget in the aftermath of an election year. The mere fact we have a minority government indicates that there will be “closed door” discussions among the parliamentary representatives from the different parties. Mind you these are persons elected by their constituents to represent their needs and best interest. As such, in these “back door” meetings I would assume it would take time and a considerable amount of effort to negotiate with the opposition members a budget which would be truly beneficial to the citizenry and accepted by all. However, due to the drastic cutting of some of the provisions made in the budget one can only assume this was an act of “grand- standing” more than financial prudence or public interest or the inability of the two sides to come to a timely agreement on the contentious issues to meet the budget deadline.
If one were to analyze the programmes which were cut by the opposition, the cuts equate to about 5% of the total budget, so we need to ask, what is the reason for the cuts? Usually when you have cuts being made to a budget its more or less because the country can’t afford to spend that kind of money or you tend to shift monies from one area to another, clearly though it seems so logical this was not the case. When there was retrenchment during the Burnham era this was done in a general manner and not sector driven.
I strongly believe that since the government reached out to the opposition that perhaps they could have come to an agreement to have the budget passed and deal with the areas the opposition was not enthusiastic or concerned about a supplementary budget. This process could have seen further negotiations and “inter party” meetings with clear guidelines for outputs, the end result of which could be addressed in a supplementary budget.
They are a number of things which the opposition took action against that could have been dealt with outside of the budget by utilizing other forums and means – any reasonable opposition could have done that- instead of strong arming the government. If one were to do a check on the elections Manifesto published by the three parties being represented in Parliament you would find there was a lot of commonality among these documents. So you’re left mind boggled by some of the actions taken by the opposition. Again I ask the question, what is the basis for these cuts? So far I believe the public’s perception is that the opposition is being collectively vindictive rather than representing their supporters’ best interests and the interest of the country. In other words, instead of having representatives of the different parties in Parliament fighting for the betterment of all Guyanese, you have a situation where the government and a large percentage of the people are being held hostage to the narrow minded views of a few and I’m almost certain I don’t have to conduct a survey to tell you this is how the people feel.
Of recent, Guyana has begun to be recognized internationality for good, positive changes and even being helmed as a model for all to follow. As a result of this we have been receiving international funding. If we cut the funding received, what mixed signals are we sending to our donors. There is an expectation as promised by the Government of Guyana – minority or otherwise – committing to the distribution of laptops to families via the One Laptop Per Family initiative, what happens now?
It is my opinion that the public should be previewed to these issues along with being educated on the legislative responsibilities of the government which can allow for these programmes to be executed by other means applicable. People also need to know and understand the role of the different branches of Government and how their operations affect us. Having mentioned this, I would be really surprised if these matters are not dealt with outside of parliament.
I must also mention that I admired the high ground which the Minister of Finance took when he was asked if the recent actions taken by the opposition to cut funding in the 2012 budget would affect his willingness or hamper his spirits in having future cross party meetings. Even more so, the President himself said that this would not affect his stance to continue working with the opposition and to reach out to them for consensus on dealing with matters of national progression.
In concluding, I believe that a broad protocol should be established and agreed to by the Government and the opposition parties in dealing with national issues in a logical and productive manner within the new dispensation and further, this should be monitored by NGOs.

SHARE THIS ARTICLE :
Facebook
Twitter
WhatsApp

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

All our printed editions are available online
emblem3
Subscribe to the Guyana Chronicle.
Sign up to receive news and updates.
We respect your privacy.