Budgets do not decide elections

Dear Editor,

The voices of the critics, inclusive of the opposition political parties, have labelled the recently read 2011 budget an election budget. This term of description as applied is about a financial package that contains dollar and other incentives specifically tailored for vote catching. This accusation commenced soon after the date for the budget presentation had been announced. But first, let’s view some previous budgets.

Budgets are outlays, and in themselves do not decide elections. Instead, it is the capacity to deliver on what they promise that determines their success and, in turn, influences such constitutional outcomes. It is the end product of a budget – what it will eventually deliver — that is the test. In this milieu, the essential of governance is central to the eventual outcome and delivery. How does this opinion relate to Guyana?

The nation’s budgetary allocations for the preceding four years have seen well-planned national, social, development programmes being delivered by adequate funding, which has been available thanks to the prudent management of the nation’s fiscal affairs and regulatory and institutional safeguards that have protected the nation’s financial system from the international economic storm, for example. The peach/net result of the local management process is that there have been no cuts in social development programmes due to finance cutbacks. It is such an economic management process and success that has ensured the yearly budget delivery on promises made to the Guyanese people.

Of course, the able Minister of Finance, Dr Ashni Singh, as expected, reported very favourably on a successful economic performance for 2010. The economy has been resilient. It has expanded in all its reported sectors. Not even sugar, because of its current challenges, has been a deterrent on economic growth, for the past year, which is projected at 4.6% for 2011. The above result could have only come about because the preceding years’ budgets have been achieving their outcomes.

One would have noted the menu of tax adjustments and increases in social assistance payments. Maybe, the critics will seize on these as vindication for their contention that this is an “election budget.” The truth is that the economy has robustly expanded, enough to facilitate such relief measures. Certainly, these are expected in such circumstances, whether or not elections are due.

This year’s budget is a manifest continuation of the transformation already underway because of results-oriented budgetary outcomes over the preceding years. The PPP/C administration has every Godgiven reason to be proud of its achievements

Sincerely,

Dean Clement