…PM raps opposition for dilatory tactics

OVER $8B was approved in the National Assembly for 16 constitutional bodies but not before a heated debate from both sides of the House at the level of the Committee of Supply, over the government’s decision to adjust some of the proposals put forward by agencies such as the Parliament Office and the Office of the Auditor General.

Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo in a passionate presentation said the opposition PPP who had prorogued Parliament- describing the act as them cutting the throat and stabbing democracy in the back – should be ashamed to now come to the House and “pretend” as if they care.

Lack of proper procurement planning was among the reasons cited for the cuts. Collectively, the constitutional bodies had requested a total of $10.293B but only $8.057B was approved, with Finance Minister, Winston Jordan explaining that the recommended allocations took into account the economic outlook for 2018 for revenue, expenditure and growth in the economy.

The government, he said, also took into consideration the challenges faced in implementing programmes and projects in 2017, and even 2016. For the Parliament Office, the Finance Minister’s proposal of $1.578B was approved after a heated debate over the decision to cut the $1.739B which was originally requested by that constitutional agency.

In defence of his decision, Minister Jordan told the Committee of Supply that all of the budgetary agencies and ministries failed to take into account the challenges facing the country. “Given our macro-economic outlook for 2018, given our projections for revenue, given our projections for borrowing, and given the sustainability for all those and the fact that in all the cases, not only for constitutional agencies, but in all cases there was an abject failure to recognise these constraints and submit budgets in line with the budget circular of July,” Minister Jordan explained.

But Opposition Chief Whip, Gail Teixeira said while an explanation was given, they do not know what the macro-economic outlook for 2018 is and would not be able to vote effectively on the matter. “We must have a framework, a fiscal framework within which the minister is deciding who gets what, otherwise it becomes capricious,” the Opposition Chief Whip told the Committee of Supply.

It was on that note that Teixeira recommended that in future, the presentation of the annual budget must precede the consideration of budgetary proposals, including those from the Constitutional bodies. The opposition parliamentarian argued too, that since the Finance Minister has opted not to disclose the projections for 2018, then consideration of the budget estimates for the constitutional agencies should be postponed until the annual budget is read on November 27.

When her attempts to put a pause on the consideration failed, Teixeira then moved a motion for the sum requested by the Parliament Office be approved in full, but she fell short in securing the support of the majority at the level of the committee.

A similar argument erupted when the recommended budgetary allocation for the Office of the Auditor General was being considered. That constitutional body had requested $844.4M but a reduced sum of $783.8 was put forward by the Finance Ministry. Holding fast to his position, the Finance Minister went one step further in justifying his ministry’s decision to reduce the budgetary requests made by 13 of the 16 constitutional agencies.

Alluding to the circular which was issued to the various ministries, agencies and constitutional bodies, Minister Jordan said it spoke to the lack of proper procurement planning, especially with respect to the Public Sector Investment Programme (PSIP) in almost all of the requesting entities.

“The realities of 2017 and in many respects even 2016 suggested that the budgets were given to several agencies….would not have been able to utilise the budget because of a range of issues, problems to do with human resources in some of the agencies, problems to do with capacities within the private sector to execute, and problems to do with understanding of the procurement process,” Minister Jordan explained.

He was the first to admit that the inherited problems will take some time before the implementing agencies reach the desired level, but emphasised that government is working with several of the agencies to “iron out some of the problems.” “So this particular budget we emphasised the need for agencies to show us their ability to spend sums of money that would have been allocated to them,” Minister Jordan said. Hinting at the 2018 Annual Budget, Minister Jordan said the Finance Ministry received a collective request of over $600B for 2018, when the 2017 Budget totalled $250B.

According to him, the 2018 Budget will not be significantly higher than the 2017 budget. So, you can see our difficulties in trying to look at a 600-plus billion-dollar request when resources are not even at $300B,” Minister Jordan pointed out.

ATTEMPT TO FRUSTRATE
Weighing in on the issue, Prime Minister Moses Nagamootoo in a very passionate presentation, told the Committee that there continue to be attempts by the opposition to frustrate the work of the National Assembly. “Sir, earlier today we approved a resolution setting out the time frame within which each of the constitutional agencies will be considered. It was the Business Sub-Committee of the National Assembly that brought the resolution with the concurrence of both sides of this honourable House.

What we have here in all are five hours, but what we have here, if you permit me, Sir, is an attempt at procrastination to defeat the resolution of the National Assembly, which the Rules and the Standing Orders of the House do not entertain in terms of any dilatory motion or attempt at such motions. But we have seen motions from the floor as another mechanism, another ruse to frustrate the work of this National Assembly,” Nagamootoo said.

He said the Standing Orders, first of all, Standing Order 76, says that if you were to move an amendment when a matter is before the Committee of Supply, (and we are in the Committee of Supply), it needs a notice to be given of the motion of amendment. “We have heard from the honourable Opposition on that side –the noisy opposition that is boisterous and destabilising that they can move the motion to put the submission by the constitutional agency to a vote.

What is the practice here, Sir? And, if you allow me, I want to say that it was this side of the House, the APNU/AFC coalition government that moved these agencies from Statutory Agencies to Constitutional Agencies against the opposition of that side of the House — persistent opposition. Why? Because we wanted to honour the provision of the constitution, Article 222 of the constitution, that is an overarching protection for Constitutional Agencies and to protect their independence.”

The prime minister said when they (opposition) were in the government, “these honourable members refused to guarantee the independence of this National Assembly. They refused to guarantee the independence of the judiciary, they refused to guarantee the independence of the Elections Commission, so that they can manipulate them, using finance as a weapon of control and manipulation. And I must speak the truth to these honourable members; because they are speaking with forked tongues here today in this honourable House, when they come here to defend the constitutional agencies.”

“What a day of shame!! That those people who stabbed the constitutional agencies in the back and cut the throats of the constitutional agencies can set themselves up here today as defenders of these agencies. Sir, I speak passionately on this issue, Your Honour, because I am seeing the various attempts by members of this House to frustrate the consideration of these estimates.

The Constitution Sir, the law – the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act and its Amendment- provides for the Minister of Finance to issue a Budget Circular. Within the Budget Circular, under Section 7 of the Act, it says that the minister shall give the guidance as to the state of finances for their considerations of what have to be taken by agencies in submitting their proposals.”

Nagamootoo said it cannot be an open-ended proposal, it cannot be fiscal irresponsibility in making these proposals, it must be within the framework of national affordability and that was what was guiding the other side when they were over here. “(But they prorogued the National Assembly to destroy parliamentary democracy).

That was what they were talking about, that we could not afford and the nation’s workers had to be contending with five percent wage increases and no more in one year. So, I say this today that this Parliament, this National Assembly, should move on with the recommendations made by the Minister of Finance and that the question be put because you cannot interrogate the constitutional agencies. They are a lumpsum presented here. And so today, I want this dilatory tactics to be put to an end, because it violates the Standing Orders of this House.”

Notwithstanding the opposition tactics, when it came down to the decision, the budgetary estimates as recommended by the Finance Ministry were approved. The Office of the Ombudsman in 2018 will receive $57.8M, the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) $86M, the Judicial Service Commission $10.02M, the Indigenous People’s Commission $25.6M, Human Rights Commission $31.1M, the Rights of the Child Commission $42.6M, Women and Gender Equality Commission $43.1M, the Public Service Appellate Tribunal $51.8M, the Supreme Court $1.874B,The Director of Public Prosecutions $174.2M, Public Procurement Commission $177.6M, Public and Police Service Commission $95.1M, Teaching Service Commission $125.1M, and the Guyana Elections Commission $2.9B.