THE revelation by Minister of Finance Winston Jordan last week at the opening of the Budget 2018 Preparation and Sensitisation Training Workshop that there is tardiness in spending budgetary allocations is disturbing and has to be corrected as a matter of national priority. According to the minister, at the end of June, less than 30 percent of the public sector investment programme was expended, prompting him to  question “what is the reason for this continued sloth in the implementation of the PSIP, at a time when it was touted as a boost to spending in the economy?”

Undoubtedly, this is not healthy for governance or the economy, given that government is the nation’s single largest spender. Business, the workforce, all and sundry rely on such spending to ensure employment, economic opportunities, and cash flow to purchase goods and services. As the minister appropriately noted, “Where is the benefit from early budget presentation when, for example, we still have budget agencies, in June, figuring out specifications of items to be purchased; we have awarded only 53 percent of the PSIP and expended a mere 28 percent on maintenance of infrastructure within the recurrent budget.”

The inter-relationship among government, business/organisation and citizens in stimulating the economy when interrupted is not only a drag on the department not spending the money, the mood of the people, but also government’s return on its investment via developmental projects and increase in revenue flow through business and consumer spending. The average Guyanese, before any release of statistical data, could tell when money is not circulating.

The private sector for some time has also been saying that business is bad. To the extent where such may be the result of government’s efforts to curb the underground economy, estimated to be approximately  40-60 percent of the economy, the risk-averse nature of the private sector, or allegations of spending or withholding under which government, any withholding of state spending will have some impact on this sector.  It was the minister’s recall that government’s policies, programmes, reforms and measures envisaged in the 2016 budget were designed to stimulate the economy to achieve higher growth rates.

But in August 2016, Minister Jordan had cause to express similar concern of slothful budgetary spending. In a report carried by this newspaper, he noted the “unfavourable” scenario, given that nine months into the 2016 budget less than 50 percent was spent. And whereas in 2016 the minister explained that such spending, among other things, had to do with surprise by agencies of an early budget, in the said year it was made known that the 2017 budget would have been prepared early. This would draw attention as to what could be responsible for the slothfulness in 2017. Since the productive days of the Economic Recovery Programme/Structural Adjustment Programme, launched in mid-1988, which delivered consecutive growth into the mid-1990s, society has come to accept tepid growth, even when better could have been done, and the so-called negative growth and underground economy projecting falsified growth.

Government has given expressions to various new areas of economic opportunities it is placing interest on. The sense that new avenues are being explored concomitantly will carry spending.
Sitting on money budgeted for projects does not help the nation and society and the department that are engaging in such acts should recognise the impact indecision and deleterious decision-making can have on the society. During the PPP/C administration, regional and local democratic councils and some state-funded agencies concern was the late release of money by central government that prevented them from spending within the stipulated time, which had to be returned.

The scenario as obtained now is different and the minister’s perplexity should not be ignored. And while it is important not to waste money, in order to address the stated concern, the tardy agencies cannot ignore the importance of having competent personnel in place to conceptualise, develop and execute projects in a timely manner. It may also be worthy of consideration on the government’s part to see if slothful spending is the result of manpower deficiency and move with deliberative judgment to address it, if such be the case.