Tag: Budget

Posted on

Spending those billions (conclusion)

Introduction

Last week I began looking at the capital expenditure of the central government comparing it with the rate of growth over a five year period. The conclusion was that despite the government having spent over US$800 million dollars over that period and more than US$1 billion over the last seven years, this expenditure has not been reflected in matching growth in the economy. One person commenting on that conclusion considered that I was ignoring the extent of the underground economy which is estimated to range between 30% and 60%. While there is merit in that criticism it is hard to fault anyone for using official statistics but more important is whether the substantial sums spent on capital expenditure by the government are for the benefit of those who under-declare their businesses’ performance and engage in tax evasion and money laundering or for those who struggle to survive in very challenging circumstances and yet try to abide by the laws and the rules.

I concluded last week with a commitment to look this week at the significant items in the capital expenditure budget for 2008 of G$40 billion dollars. Of that amount, four ministries account for $26.6 billion or 66% (See following table). Compared with the preceding year however this was approximately 0.16% over 2007 during which the official rate of inflation was close to 15%.

Table 1 – ($million)

Agency/Ministry 2007
Revised		 2008
Budget
Office of the Prime Minister 3,003 5,053
Ministry of Finance 8,419 8,767
Ministry of Public Works and Communications 9,562 8,049
Ministry of Housing and Water 5,160 4,696
Total 26,144 26,565

Source: Estimates of the Public Sector, 2008

The Ministry of Finance itself does not within its own portfolio expend the capital expenditure it allocates itself but spends this in a number of areas. A more direct breakdown of the $8.8 billion it will spend in 2008 is as follows:

  1. $4 billion to the Guyana Sugar Corporation;
  2. $575 million providing for institutional strengthening and purchase of equipment under the IDB funded Fiscal and Financial Management Programme;
  3. $998 million for support to community roads, drainage and irrigation projects; and
  4. $674 million providing for poverty alleviation and community development projects.

Of the $8,049 million to be spent by the Ministry of Public Works and Communications:

  1. A total of $6.2 billion has been budgeted for roads ($5 billion) and bridges ($1.2 billion) of which a substantial portion ($1.8 billion) is for ongoing expenditure on the New Amsterdam to Moleson Creek Road and $980 million budgeted to complete the access roads to the Berbice River Bridge and the rehabilitation of 54 bridges along the Timehri-Rosignol corridor;
  2. $2.2 billion to continue construction, rehabilitation and maintenance of sea defence structures;
  3. $395 million for the docking of ferry vessels and dredges, acquisition of spares, and rehabilitation of stellings and navigational aids;
  4. $108 million is budgeted for the construction of two new airstrips at Wakenaam and Leguan and the rehabilitation of the Baramita Airstrip.

Operators in the domestic airline sector to whom I spoke claim not to have been consulted on this extravagantly unaffordable proposal for the two airstrips. Access to many of the established airstrips is only available at prohibitively expensive charter service affordable to only a few. Not only will these new airstrips be badly under-utilised but operating and maintenance will run into millions each year. This is what I have referred to as cost-added rather than value-added expenditure from which only government ministers are likely to benefit.

Security

Mainly security expenditure in the Central Government Budget falls under the Ministry of Home Affairs which includes the Police and the Guyana Defence Force. These are the capital expenditure allocated in the 2008 Budget:

Table 2 – ($million)

Agency/Ministry 2007
Revised		 2008
Budget
Ministry of Home Affairs 1,048 1,334
Guyana Defence Force 153 699
Total 1,201 2,033

Source: Estimates of the Public Sector, 2008

Included in the capital expenditure budget for the Ministry of Home Affairs is an allocation of $660 million for the Citizens Security Programme and $430 million for the Guyana Police Force.

Despite having announced that the government would be spending some $900 million on acquiring equipment including two helicopters for the Army in 2008 the allocation is considerably less which can only mean that the government was planning to have Supplementary appropriation even as the Minister of Finance was delivering the 2008 Budget!

Social Sector

Table 3 – ($Million)

Agency/Ministry 2007
Revised		 2008
Budget
Georgetown Public Hospital Corporation 35 137
Ministry of Health 2,486 2,765
Ministry of Labour, Human Services and Social Security 1,297 372
Ministry of Education 2,799 2,280
Total 6,617 5,584

Source: Estimates of the Public Sector, 2008

The Ministry of Labour, Human Services and Social Security has the largest reduction from 2007 in the capital expenditure budget of all the ministries, departments, agencies or regions while education has also dropped by about 20% which may be due to a levelling off of programmes – the allocation to UG-Turkeyen fell by $360 million while the IDB-Funded BEAMS programme fell by $220M, primarily the School Performance Component (provision for numeracy and literacy programmes).

House lots instead of housing

Although substantial sums are to be spent via the Ministry of Housing and Water the allocation for housing ($1.5 billion) is mainly $850 million to provide infrastructure in low income settlement schemes and $420 million to complete roads, drains and structures in various areas. While the government has abandoned any attempt at providing any housing for the really vulnerable who cannot get a mortgage because for example they are either too old to work or simply cannot find jobs the number of new homes has risen substantially as a result of the house lots policy of the government since 1992.

Water gets $3.7 billion for projects which include the completion of two iron removal plants at Sophia and Central Ruimveldt ($500 million); upgrade of transmission and distribution lines ($331 million); completion of a treatment plant at No. 56 Village ($90 million); design and commencement of construction of three water treatment plants at Lima, Vergenoegen and Cotton Tree ($1 billion) and $58 million to improve water supply services to communities in the hinterland regions.

In agriculture an Agricultural Export Diversification Programme for US$20.9 million will be launched and for the privilege of hosting CARIFESTA for which Guyana was the only taker we will be forking out $300 million in the first instance while in electricity $220 million has been allocated for the purchase of a diesel electrification system for Port Kaituma, to construct distribution systems for Orealla and Siparuta and install solar panels in hinterland communities.

Depressed Communities

There is little in the 2008 Budget that can give any hope to some of our most depressed communities and even the billions that are being spent annually on roads and other infrastructure cannot be enjoyed by the large number of unemployed, pensioners and single parents – overwhelmingly women – who have no jobs to go to and who struggle daily to put some food on their children’s plates. In fact the lack of any attention in the Budget to women and the unemployed and depressed communities is particularly striking.

The major beneficiaries of the capital expenditure are a handful of contractors and suppliers many of whom provide extremely shoddy goods and services including construction of roads, bridges and the Conservancy and many of whom are themselves that group of self-employed that even the Guyana Revenue Authority complain so bitterly about. In fact by their performance and conduct they have raised the question whether the shift in the policy of contracting out ought not now to be revisited. With the margins by some contractors and suppliers being as high as 50%, the country will save tens of billions from having the work done by the government.

Many will consider this too radical but with the substantial savings it would be possible to employ better staff and pay better wages, reduce the level of corruption and still provide a better quality of work than is now obtained from some of our contractors.

Conclusion

When Dr. Ashni Singh was appointed as Minister of Finance there was hope that the quality of budgeting, accounting and financial controls in the government would be improved and that the country would start receiving value for money. That hope has receded and it is now questionable whether he has the courage or the scope to change significantly the system of weak controls and largely tax-and-spend policy he has inherited, even if he was so inclined.

The way a government seeks to tax its people and how it spends the billions so derived best reflect its values, interests and policies.

It is clear that what we have had for close to two decades is a mindset that embraces IMF-style traditional growth rather than pro-poor policies, and which in practice is compromised by poor economic management and equally poor governance.

What would be very useful is for the opposition political parties or economists to come up with a new set of policies and build an alternative budget to reflect those policies.

Posted on

Spending those billions

Introduction

In detailing the government’s capital expenditure budget of $43 billion in 2008 the Budget Speech gave a troubling indication of how vast sums are expended year after year with scarce regard for basic principles of economic and financial investment decisions. Capital expenditure is distinguished from recurrent expenditure which includes the normal operating annual expenses such as wages and salaries and maintenance of roads, bridges and buildings while capital expenditure would include the cost of constructing those roads, bridges and buildings. By principle, convention and practice, capital expenditure is expenditure the benefit of which accrues to one or more future periods while recurrent or operating expenditure is consumed in and benefits one period only.

Of the budgeted expenditure of $119 billion dollars announced by the Minister of Finance in his 2008 Budget Speech, capital expenditure accounts for $40.9 billion, roughly US$205 million dollars. This compares with a budget of $37 billion in 2007 which was overspent by some $6 billion, in commenting on which the Minister indicated that this was a 21% increase in the public sector investment programme.

Individuals, companies and governments invest in capital expenditure for many reasons including enhancing their earning capacity by expanding the income potential or reducing expenditure.

Capital expenditure and growth

The table below shows the capital expenditure and growth in the economy for the past five years. During that period, the government spent close to G$160 billion or US$800M in capital expenditure while the economy has on a simple average grown by 1.54% per annum – a poor return on investment by any measure. Why with all the investment expenditure by government (and we must not ignore recurrent expenses like wages and salaries which by putting money into consumers’ hands should also stimulate economic growth) has growth been so anaemic? The explanation is not straightforward but with a rational approach by the decision-makers in selecting investments there would certainly be a better chance of higher economic growth.

Capital Expenditure for past five years and budget 2008:

Year 2008 2007 2006 2005 2004 2003
Capital expenditure ($Mn) 40,853.8 42,892.5 41,806.4 35,143.2 22,416.7 17,292.5
Real Growth in GDP 4.8% 5.4% 5.1% -3.0% 1.6% -0.6%

Source: Budget Speeches

The drivers of government capital expenditure may be obvious in certain cases such as the expenditure on sea-defences or to mitigate the consequences of natural disaster. In other cases the decision may be made entirely on social considerations such as whether an area should have a supply of electricity or water. These still, however, leave a considerable amount of capital expenditure which do not fall in such categories and should therefore be subject to more careful analysis. And even with respect to social expenditure not generally considered susceptible to the economist’s or accountant’s return on investment criteria, and using electricity to a hinterland community as an example, the issue is not whether the community should have electricity but what is best of a range of options to provide that service. The decision-maker would have to consider whether it is better to build a generating plant and transmission and distribution system requiring on-going fuel, maintenance and technical support which would be difficult to deliver to those communities or to encourage the use of solar power by fiscal initiatives and financial support to householders to enable them to make their own arrangements?

A dollar is a dollar

Of recent investments, only the Berbice Bridge and to a lesser extent the Guysuco Skeldon Modernisation Project were subject to any independent analysis. We all recall the process that preceded the final decision on the Berbice Bridge, the studies and analyses that were conducted and the debate generated for and against the investment. It may be argued that this was because that is largely privately funded which is not entirely correct since the government had to invest heavily in related infrastructure necessary to support the Bridge investment.

Now if such a process was necessary for the Bridge how come it does not apply to fully publicly-funded expenditure or the decision, literally out of the blue, to spend over one hundred million dollars mainly to build two airstrips on the islands of Essequibo and Wakenaam? A dollar is a dollar and public investment in the final analysis comes from the people of the country. Taxpayers’ money is no less important than shareholders’ money and therefore warrants the same level of care in how it is spent.

I do not recall any Minister of Finance of the PPP-C Finance Ministers, including the incumbent ever giving an indication of any criteria for investment decisions undertaken let alone any rigorous analysis of specific investment. Indeed so often the nation is treated to expenditure decisions being taken literally on the road. This is dangerously improper from a governance perspective and irresponsible and unprofessional from a capital investment decision perspective. Under the Constitution only Parliament has the authority to approve expenditure and a responsible Finance Minister would surely want to justify any request he takes to Parliament for money for capital expenditure. Just think of the crisis we would be in if after the unbudgeted expenditure of substantial sums by the executive, the Parliament voted against any request for supplementary funds.

Cost-added rather than value-added expenditure

The decision to host the World Cup brought with it a commitment to provide hotel rooms which in one particular case were partly financed by a loan to the investor, the payback of which is now being financed by using the very rooms which may not have been chosen had we not made an irrational decision in the first place. The 2008 Budget includes $300 million for CARIFESTA-related expenditure, a decision that was largely made without any regard for cost implications. Given the tendency and history of overspending there is no guarantee that we will not repeat our questionable experience of instead of having value-added expenditure having cost-added expenditure.

The other side of VAT

VAT has been more than a fortuitous break for the government in 2007, not only allowing it to spend far more than Parliament had approved in the 2007 Budget but to absorb significant declines in the performance of public enterprises. From a surplus of $3.4 billion in 2006, those enterprises declined to a deficit of $415 million, mainly from Guysuco which had a decline of $2.7 billion and GPL, $802 million. Interestingly while both corporations had the same chairman, he was removed from the corporation which performed relatively better and from all appearances for reasons unrelated to financial performance.

In fact those very corporations received substantial capital injections in 2007 during which $3 billion dollars was put into GPL for improvement in the unserved and underserved areas while Guysuco received $863 million for its Skeldon Power Plant and $2.9 billion to accelerate completion of the factory, preparations of land to facilitate mechanical harvesting and infrastructure to support and promote private cane farming.

A new Justice Improvement Programme involving US$10.2 million began with the setting up of a Justice Sector Reform Steering Committee and the setting up of a Secretariat. But what about the truly fundamental changes that require not large sums but decisions such as the setting up of the Law Reform Commission to update the laws last done in 1973 or the introduction of new Rules of Court which have been in circulation for years now. New Rules were introduced for the Commercial Court with considerable success, and revised Rules for the other courts have been in circulation for several years. These new Rules embody what is called Case Management and introduce court-driven processes replacing the current system which in practice is largely directed by the lawyers, their time-wasting practices and endless demands for adjournments. As this column has pointed out before Guyana is the only CARICOM country not to have adopted the new Rules.

Next week we look at some of the other capital expenditure in 2007 and those proposed for 2008.

Posted on

The off-shore financial centre idea

Introduction

The announcement by the Minister of Finance in his 2008 Budget speech that the government was embarking on consultations on making the country into an off-shore financial centre must have taken those with whom he did not consult with considerable surprise. The Minister in his speech did recognise the country’s earlier experience with the concept, an experience that saw the advocate of the measure ending up in jail abroad. It is perhaps significant that at that time Guyana’s economy was in dire straits and the introduction of legislation to facilitate off-shore banking was at best no more than an experiment.

With debt write-offs and a change from a managed to a mainly market economy and the graduation from a Highly Indebted Poor Country (HIPC) to a lower-middle income country, much is new. But the announcement has been surprising nonetheless, being perhaps the only policy change in the entire budget speech. Although the Minister has announced consultations, Business Page today addresses the concept, the opportunities and the challenges, since from all accounts not many people have been consulted so far.

Origin

The ‘off-shore’ in the concept derives its name from the Channel Islands and the Isle of Man, just off the shores of England from which the wealthy sought to export their assets from the high-tax regime prevailing in the seventies on the mainland. While these islands continue to earn most of their income from the business, the major centre remains Switzerland, where bank secrecy was considered as sacred and impenetrable as the Da Vinci Code.

In the typical off-shore centre, operators with nothing but a member of staff or two and dealing mainly electronically, whether in opening accounts or in carrying out transactions all of which are designated in foreign currency, carry on the business often from a couple of rooms attached with modern telecommunication. The attraction of such centres, usually lies in:

1. low tax rates,

2. strict secrecy,

3. non-invasive legal, tax and oversight regulations,

4. protection of deposits and

5. insulation from the domestic political, social and economic conditions.

Those conditions by themselves in the post-9/11 world are hard to guarantee and the US in particular has been pressing with some success for a tightening of regulations and the relaxation of the secrecy rules. The result is that money of more dubious origin has been moving from the better regulated centres to the more questionable ones.

Caribbean centres

Despite the risks of being branded, many Caribbean countries have gone this route with varying degrees of success. Barbados and The Bahamas are perhaps the two most successful off-shore financial centres among Caricom countries, but competing with the US Virgin Islands and the Cayman Islands. At the lower level there are Antigua, Belize, Dominica, Montserrat, St Kitts-Nevis and St Vincent, all of which have off-shore banking legislation and which depend on the sector in varying degrees.

For Guyana to compete against its regional partners and the international giants of the industry however, it will have to overcome some uncomfortable truths at home and a negative image abroad. Some of the considerations associated with off-shore banking are embedded in the Guyana economic and social fabric. Off-shore banking is associated with tax evasion, the underground economy, money laundering, narco-trading and the Mafia.

With brutal frankness, the website of the US Embassy in Georgetown begins a 2007 report, “Guyana is a trans-shipment point for cocaine destined for North America, Europe, and the Caribbean,” pointing out that it has been ten years since there were any large domestic seizures, the last being in 1998 when a joint Guyanese/US operation confiscated 3,154 kilograms (kegs) of cocaine from a ship docked in Georgetown. The GOG announced no new drug policy initiatives in 2006. The 2008 International Narcotics Control Strategy Report was released yesterday, and its conclusions indicate that nothing much has changed.

Challenges

Very directly the 2007 report noted that Guyana had not yet implemented its ambitious 2005-2009 National Drug Strategy Master Plan (NDSMP) launched in June 2005; the Financial Investigations Unit (FIU) remained handicapped by the lack of effective legislation to deal with money laundering. In this regard the Money Laundering (Prevention) Act, 2000 was never brought into operation and the draft of a new act has been circulated for comments.

Lax laws – among which must be the non-bank cambios legislation – are an invitation to international crime rings which have been growing in numbers and national origins and destinations. Where at one time the Mafia was thought of as Italian -Al Capone, Antonio Calderon and Salvatore Conterno – the fall of communism has unleashed a new brand of Mafia in Poland and the countries of Eastern Europe which are themselves dwarfed by the Russian Mafia which according to an article on the BBC website controls 40% of private business and 60% of state-owned enterprises through thousands of organised gangs. They now play a big role in Colombia and Israel and are suspected of being involved in the casino business in the Caribbean.

Self-interest?

The moves to clamp down on poorly-regulated centres became pronounced in 2000 when in the space of two months a number of centres were labelled as “non-cooperative” by the Financial Stability Forum (FSF) in the context of global financial stability. Then on June 22, as “non-cooperative” by the Financial Action Task Force in the context of money laundering, and on June 26, as “Tax Havens” by the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) in the context of tax competition. Among nine that were named twice in two months were three Caribbean countries – The Bahamas, St Kitts-Nevis, and St Vincent.

These led to calls for stricter controls of off-shore centres, which became more pronounced after the attack on the US in 2001. Defenders of off-shore banking see these as the work of the countries of the OECD which are concerned about competition rather than security and financial considerations.

Off-shore centres do have a number of advantages associated with the industry, not least of which is that there may be little else to choose from in terms of economic strategies as no doubt is the case with Niue and Nauru with populations of under 25,000 people. Whether these advantages translate into success is doubtful, just looking at some of the countries with which we are familiar.

Lawyers and accountants

Off-shore banking is also very attractive to lawyers and accountants who practically manage and make tons of money from the sector. From an employment perspective, however, it is even less than insignificant with business being largely conducted electronically. On the other hand their attraction to depositors may lie in the model where withholding tax is not charged on interest earned from deposits which can result in deposits being shifted from the commercial banks to their off-shore counterparts.

Guyana has double taxation treaties with Canada, the Caricom states and the UK, and a tax exchange information agreement with the USA, which all provide for the disclosure and sharing of information, and all of which may need to be reviewed in the proposed scheme of things. Given the US’s views of Guyana in relation to crime, that country may almost certainly want to ensure that there are sufficient safeguards in the regulation of off-shore businesses that may take away many of the advantages usually associated with the industry.

Conclusion

At present there is nothing to suggest that the Bank of Guyana is incapable of regulating the existing financial sector, although it has hardly done its job in relation to the New Building Society, and one wonders whether it is really in control of the non-bank cambios. It is likely that the off-shore business will come under its supervision requiring several changes to the Bank of Guyana Act and regulations. Again that may be seen as intrusive by potential operators. And can we hope to do all of this essentially with a minuscule Financial Intelligence Unit?

That this is the only policy issue identified by the Minister in his budget presentation must cause concern whether the government has any fresh ideas to deal with the challenges facing the major sectors of the economy or the taxpayers in the PAYE system and on whom the Budget now reveals has been placed additional tax burden.

Posted on

Budget Focus 2008

2007 was the year of Cricket World Cup, the single largest sporting event ever held in Guyana. It was an event on which billions were spent by the Government of Guyana and the private sector, yet there has been no analysis of the returns and the extent to which expectations were met. Significantly, visitor arrival numbers were about 12% above the preceding year. With World Cup done, we do have tourism and infrastructure assets but the Stadium for example, which may have cost close to $10Bn to build, will have to be maintained at substantial annual cost.

Budget 2008 which had been planned for earlier in the year became a casualty of both the Lusignan (January 26) and Bartica (February 17) massacres. In the latter case the presentation was set for February 18th but the massacre on the evening before forced a cancellation. It was presented four days later on February 22.

Despite the extra days and the gravity of the situation only one paragraph on the Bartica massacre appears to have been added to the Budget Speech. The work of the Government and the nation must of course go on but the events of the weeks preceding the budget should have impressed on the Minister the pressing issues confronting the nation – crime, the increasing threat of flooding, inflation and the brain drain. To the extent that he dealt with any of these it was how many billions the Government was going to spend.

The ability of the economy to withstand the pressures of crime and spiralling prices will be tested in 2008 as Carifesta returns to Guyana. This and other significant events such as local government elections, the completion of the Berbice Bridge and the Skeldon Modernisation Project were the backdrop against which Minister of Finance Dr. Ashni Singh presented a G$119Bn budget – 8.5% higher that the latest estimates of 2007.

Please download the full publication at www.ramandmcrae.com

Posted on

A bridge over the river – a dream come true

Recently a Berbician friend in anticipating the opening of the Berbice Bridge within the next few months exuded that for her – she is about 50? – a Bridge has been a dream she entertained since she was a girl. It will be a major accomplishment in infrastructural development in this country and will probably mark the high point of the legacy of President Bharrat Jagdeo.

Compared with other capital projects undertaken in this country since Independence, it does not rank among the most expensive but the Government will rightly see it as one of the most significant capital projects undertaken during the PPP/C’s watch.

The opening of the Bridge will mark the end of a bad dream for Berbicians living in Region 6 especially those whose experiences and tales of being stranded on one side of the Berbice River waiting to cross to the other can easily fill volumes. There have been several criticisms of the Bridge including its financing, location and type. Financing will come from the private sector after some strong persuasion by the Government which itself will make no direct financial input; the location has been criticised on environmental and technical grounds; the nature of the Bridge which like the Demerara Harbour Bridge built by Forbes Burnham in 1978 is a floating bridge.

Welcome Relief

The Bridge will soon be a reality and the Government will deservedly take the credit for the achievement which coming so soon after the Lusignan Massacre will be a welcome relief. Despite the fact that the Bridge is touted as a private-sector project its chief spokesperson and key player has been Mr. Winston Brassington of NICIL, the holding company of Government entities, with the company itself being much less visible. The role of NICIL which should have come to an end after financing had been secured appears to have been extended though at some stage soon the Bridge Company would need to find its voice.

Expect therefore that the Bridge will feature prominently in the 2008 Budget Speech [see follow-up article below] and in public pronouncements. Still it would be un-Guyanese-like not to have critics waiting to see whether their fears will be vindicated while those private sector investors will no doubt be nervously looking to see how the numbers will turn out and whether their investment will produce the returns they expected. For Berbicians more concerned with living their dream, that would be the last thing on their minds.

The Louis Berger Group, the consulting firm out of the USA, contracted to undertake the feasibility study of the Bridge considered the Berbice River a major physical obstacle to communication between New Amsterdam and Georgetown and a key constraint on national economic development. With some of the most productive agricultural lands located in Region 6, the cost of moving goods and produce out of that region has been enormous with constraints and delays in vehicles being able to cross the River.

Optimism

The Study was optimistic about the Bridge’s potential for revitalising the region, making its produce more competitive, providing employment opportunities, attracting investors and just perhaps reversing the brain drain. Perhaps a bit over-optimistically it even contemplates a reduction of fares by the minibus operators since the Bridge will reduce the down time they now spend using the ferry.

Indeed Mr. Brassington has said the tolls for crossing the Bridge will not be higher than ferry fares “on average” and that fares will be paid on one side of the bridge while tolls will only be collected for vehicles and not passengers. Mr. Brassington in March 2006 projected a reduction in the fares in the latter half of the concession period with most of the initial financing being repaid for the project.

Over the decades, the region has witnessed significantly large population decreases but recognising it as its heartland, the PPP has since its return to power in 1992 committed itself to greater attention there whether in education, agriculture or infrastructure with significant investments in the Berbice Campus of the University of Guyana, the massive Skeldon Sugar Modernisation Project and rebuilding of the main roads leading from Mahaica to Rosignol and New Amsterdam to Crabwood Creek.

Sore need

Writing in Business Page of March 12, 2006, this columnist noted that a Bridge was sorely needed while a consultant who advised against investing in the Bridge conceded that as a project it was excellent, much needed and long overdue. The challenge for the company is whether the projections and assumptions underlying the project, particularly in relation to traffic and revenues, do in fact materialise or whether they are simply too optimistic.

For the user, such considerations pale into irrelevance when matched against the usefulness of the Bridge to them.

Budget 2008

At this time of the year, attention usually turns to the National Budget in which the Government signals its intention on policies, revenues and expenditures for the year. Some were even expecting that the 2008 Budget would have been presented this past Friday. But with the Lusignan Massacre still on the minds and lips of everyone and with no success at apprehending any suspects, the Government may have found it difficult to deliver an upbeat account of its stewardship and spending plans in the midst of fear and uncertainty.

The Government has up to March 31 to present the Budget although it would be ideal for the Budget to be presented before the year begins. Instead all we have had from the Minister of Finance is a request last month for the National Assembly to authorise some $9,398,373,968 to cover overspending by the Government which itself followed a similar request in November for $8,679,412,56.

Consultations

Overspending never reflects well on managers since it is evidence of inadequate planning and foresight. We will return to this matter in a subsequent column but for now there should be some concern about the failure of the Minister of Finance once again to consult with stakeholders prior to the Budget. Such consultation was standard fare with past Ministers of Finance who at least gave an audience to labour, consumers, business and even welcomed inputs from professionals.

It is true that the real benefit of those consultations was lost because the exercise was mere photo-opportunism. But the solution lay in enhancing, not dispensing with the process. In other words use the information gathered as far as could be done, explain why others were not feasible and build relationships with the stakeholders. Instead we seem to be throwing away the baby with the bath water.

President Jagdeo, who still exerts an unacceptable level of influence over the Ministry of Finance felt it necessary to appoint two Ministers in that Ministry and it is hard to believe that neither of them can meet with stakeholders who after all pay the taxes that fund the Budget. A Government that takes pride in its democratic credentials does not normally make changes without at a minimum advising the public and offering reasons.

In fact, in his last Budget speech former Finance Minister Saisnarine Kowlessar lauded the views of the private sector bodies, labour unions and ordinary Guyanese, thanking them for their contributions, which we [the Government] value highly. Has that now changed and if so by whom?

Troubling attitude

If the change is due to a new approach by Minister Dr. Ashni Singh this column wishes to place on record its strong displeasure at such high-handed behaviour. I recall publicly commending the appointment of Dr. Singh as ushering in a new, positive era and was actually criticised for going overboard in my praise of the Minister.

There have been concerns recently that the Minister is obsessed with concealing information to which the public have a right, such as data on inflation and VAT collections. I am sure the Minister does not need to be reminded that there is no monopoly on wisdom and the people must never be excluded.