Latest update May 6th, 2024 12:59 AM
Jan 09, 2016 News
By Kiana Wilburg
Tempers flared in the National Assembly on Thursday as the Opposition passionately objected to Government using its proverbial scissors to cut most of the proposed budget estimates for 16 constitutional offices and other agencies.
It was an auspicious occasion as it was the first time that the Constitutional offices and other agencies brought proposed estimates to the House. These were arrived at without the input of the Executive, specifically, the Ministry of Finance.
This display of financial independence was credited to the recent amendment to the Fiscal Management and Accountability Act. The amendment brings the Act in line with Article 22 of the Constitution which supports constitutional offices and agencies enjoying such financial freedom.
The estimates of the Constitutional agencies will be incorporated into the budget for 2016. When the 2016 budget is being considered by the House later this month, these sums which were already passed will remain untouched. They will be passed as part of the Appropriations Act.
The sums for these agencies will have a first claim on the Consolidated Fund. This means that the full sum will have to be paid to the entities when the 2016 budget is passed and the entities will have control over how they spend it.
Audit Office
The deliberations on the estimates for the Constitutional Offices and other agencies lasted into the wee hours of the morning. The first agency up for consideration was the Audit Office of Guyana which had a proposed budget estimate totaling $790M.
But before the discussions could get underway, Opposition member, Irfaan Ali, said that, he, as the head of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), should answer any questions on behalf of the entity.
Ali said, “The Audit Office does not report to any Minister. It reports to the Public Accounts Committee and therefore, since I stand as the Chairman of this Committee, it is only fitting that I speak on their behalf and not a member of the Executive.”
The Opposition Member posited that should any member of the Government speak on behalf of the entity in this regard, then it would undermine the principle of having the entity insulated from the Executive when it comes to its finances.
The Government however objected to this. In fact, a total of seven speakers from both sides of the House exhausted various arguments on whether the Executive should be representing the Audit Office on such a matter. Hours passed and no consensus was reached.
Taking note of the gridlock in such unchartered waters, House Speaker, Dr. Barton Scotland, suggested that members select on both sides to use part of the recess to clarify the way forward on this matter.
After over two hours of in camera deliberations, it was decided that Ali would speak on behalf of the Audit Office.
Minister of Finance, Winston Jordan, took the floor and informed the House that while the entity is requesting $790M he is recommending $714M.
The PAC Chairman objected to Jordan’s proposal stating that it is tantamount to starving the Office of the resources it needs for ensuring transparency and accountability. He said that should the House accept the reduction to $714M then it would be hampering the work needed to be executed by the office.
In support of Ali’s position, Opposition Leader, Bharrat Jagdeo said, “With the change in laws to support the financial independence of these agencies, we expected that the proposed amounts would remain unaltered.
“To now reduce the proposed allocation without explanations would be seen as politicking and flip-flopping on the part of this Government as they were the ones who called for the financial independence of these agencies when they were in Opposition.”
Minister of State Joseph Harmon disagreed with the Opposition Members. He reminded the House that the total appropriation voted for the agency last year was $601M. He said that the $714M as recommended by Jordan represents an increase from then to now.
He said, too, that it is a mere $76M reduction from what the office is requesting. Harmon said that based on his examination of the proposed budget estimates by the entity, the monies allocated for supporting staff employment and other critical areas were not touched.
In light of his arguments, he challenged the former Housing Minister to show how the reduction would hamper the work of the AG’s office.
Ali said, “We are considering a lump sum not line by line items and that is the poor inconsistency of your argument. I may be crazy but this crazy man will stand up and defend the interest of transparency.”
The argument was also put forward by the opposition that if Government cuts the proposed budget allocations for these agencies then it is essentially telling the entity how much it can and cannot spend. It said that this dilutes the entire meaning of financial independence.
However, Foreign Affairs Minister Carl Greenidge told the Opposition that it is sorely misguided. He emphasized that financial independence does not mean that an entity should have unlimited access to the nation’s purse.
He posited that $790M is excessive in any case; hence it was reduced to $714M. This reduced sum was subsequently approved by the House.
Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)
The Chambers of the DPP proposed a budgetary allocation of $235M. However, the Finance Minister recommended $160M. This sum was passed but not without objections from the opposition.
Specifically, Opposition Member Anil Nandlall said, “I am against this. We have moved the power to cut allocations from the Ministry of Finance into the Parliament. So instead of the Finance Minister cutting as before in his Office he is coming to the Parliament to cut and then it will be approved by the Executive. This defeats the purpose of the independence given to these agencies.”
Public Security Minister, Khemraj Ramjattan found Nandlall’s arguments to be without merit.
He said, “Indeed these agencies should have financial independence but how far should it go? Should the DPP say she wants $3B and we approve whatever is asked? We must not get ridiculous here. What we have is a request of reduction by Jordan based on what is in line with the national budget.
“We would be making the assembly impotent if we can’t say anything about the proposals. There would be no point for the House if we just take any request and approve without question.”
Parliament and the Office of the Leader of the Opposition
Based on the grounds of affordability, the proposed $20M and $1.4B for the Office of the Leader of the Opposition and the Parliament Office respectively were not passed by the House. They were reduced.
On Thursday, the House passed an amendment to the FMAA which allowed for the Parliament as well to enjoy financial autonomy. The House then passed $1.3B for the Parliament Office and $12M for the Office of the Opposition Leader.
Jagdeo seemed unhappy with this cut and challenged Jordan to explain to the nation why his Office will only receive $12M.
Other agencies
The Finance Minister did not propose cuts to three agencies and their recommended allocations were passed. These agencies included; the Guyana Elections Commission (GECOM) with $3.6B; the Judicial Service Commission with $10M and $44M for the Office of the Ombudsman.
Additionally, the Ethnic Relations Commission (ERC) had requested $131M but only $81M was approved.
Opposition Chief Whip, Gail Teixeira chided the government for making such a decision. She said that the cut is a most insensitive response to the work of this Commission and can be seen as an injustice.
Foreign Affairs Minister, Carl Greenidge, said that Teixeira was being unfair with her comments. He said, “Let me remind the house that if they look at the estimates of the past, they will find that this Commission is in the habit of being given sums and spending far less than it got.”
Greenidge noted in 2013, the ERC received $83M but only spent $49M. He said that there is no reason to now grant the entity $131M when it is not absorbing even half of the funds it is usually granted.
Furthermore, the Human Rights Commission was allowed $28M instead of its proposed $53M while the Indigenous People’s Commission was allowed $23M instead of its $66M request.
The Rights of the Child Commission received $31M while $87M was passed for the Public /Police Service Commission. Instead of its proposed $20M request, the Public Service Appellate Tribunal received $12M with $1.5B passed for the Supreme Court of Judicature.
Additionally, the Teaching Service Commission was granted $109M with $38M being approved for the Women Gender Equality Commission.
The National Assembly is expected to continue its work on January 14.
GRA catch EXXON trying to hunch GUYANA over 11 BUS dollars in one shot!!!!
May 06, 2024
(CMC) – West Indies lead selector, Desmond Haynes and white-ball head coach, Daren Sammy, said they were confident that the right squad was selected for the ICC Men’s Twenty20 World Cup next...Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News – In his address to the 32nd Congress of the People’s Progressive Party, Second... more
By Sir Ronald Sanders Waterfalls Magazine – On April 10, the Permanent Council of the Organization of American States... more
Freedom of speech is our core value at Kaieteur News. If the letter/e-mail you sent was not published, and you believe that its contents were not libellous, let us know, please contact us by phone or email.
Feel free to send us your comments and/or criticisms.
Contact: 624-6456; 225-8452; 225-8458; 225-8463; 225-8465; 225-8473 or 225-8491.
Or by Email: [email protected] / [email protected]