PNCR calls for aggressive drive for increased foreign investment

Feb 16, 2010 News

---

– PM blames opposition for restricting such investment

By Gary Eleazar
The 2010 budget debate got underway yesterday in the National Assembly with what some are calling the usual rhetoric. Members of the Government side praised Finance Minister, Dr Ashni Singh, for his outlined expenditures and the opposition repeated some of its critique of previous years and injecting some new ones.
Shadow Finance Minister, Winston Murray, led the charge. He accused Dr Singh of presenting a budget which not only concealed more than it revealed but also violated the Constitution of Guyana as a result of what he called the lack of consultation.
Prime Minister Samuel Hinds in his presentation that followed Murray’s, rebuffed this notion saying that members of the government met with stakeholders throughout the year and suggestions and information emanating from those meetings were injected in the Budget.
The Shadow Finance Minister told the House that his party’s observation of the budget was the fact that there was a failure of the Government to cast the budget, “and indeed previous budgets, within a clear overarching strategy with clearly identifiable medium and long term objectives.”
He questioned what were the targets for job creation and the projected levels of investments and in what sectors.
“What, if any, tax reforms are to be implemented to create a more competitive and welcoming business environment for investors and what in the medium term is the rate of economic growth we are striving for if Guyana is to attain its true and full potential, and prosperity is to be realised?”
Murray reminded the House that in 2006, a review of the Guyana tax systems found that Guyanese were severely taxed and there were suggestions for a reform. This, he said, is currently gathering dust.
He also chided the Finance Minister for the minimal growth in the economy, adding that the actual growth was far below projections which in themselves were below what is in the National Development Strategy.
The Prime Minister once more took Murray to task on this issue. He said that Murray failed to mention that the world was in an economic crisis and as such Guyana’s growth, however minimal, should be lauded.
Murray told the House that for the Finance Minister to come to the House and declare the largest Budget ever each year did not necessary mean any betterment for the Guyanese people, a position that Hinds again refuted, speaking of the many schools and health facilities among other infrastructural works that greet the Guyanese people each year.
He said that Guyana was in a far better position now than a decade ago.
Murray suggested to the House that with respect to Guyana’s debt situation, Dr Singh reported “considerable reduction of the stock in recent years”. The PNCR agreed with this.
“What the Honourable Minister did not say was that the bulk of the US$933 million stock of debt at end of 2009 represents new money borrowed by the PPP/C Government,” and it is projected to rise to some US$1.3 billion in 2010.
Hinds explained that while Murray sought to paint a picture that there was nothing in the Budget for the average citizen, the populace must recognise that sustained macro-economic stability was of utmost importance to them.
Hinds also congratulated the Bureau of Statistics and the Finance Minister for the rebasing of the National Accounts which he said has removed several anomalies that hindered the placement of Guyana in a better position when an assessment of the economy is done.
The Prime Minister also took Murray to task for his suggestion that the Budget was without vision, adding that the party’s vision is not necessarily placed in the budget but in other documents such as the party’s manifesto and the Low Carbon Development Strategy among others.
He said that as part of the government’s vision, the planners are repositioning and modernising all of the traditional revenue earners to better face the challenges in the future.
Hinds told the House that growth in any economy is achieved in stages and that the ruling party has put measures in place to ensure that the populace could be trained.
Murray had suggested to the Finance Minister that there must be a comprehensive reform of the tax system; clear and uniform ground rules for investment without the imposition of ministerial discretion; a facilitating institutional framework; and an aggressive programme for seeking out investors and investments.
The Prime Minister responded to Murray by telling the House that it was the PNCR that caused the conditions that restricted foreign direct investment, given the numerous demonstrations that had created an unstable environment.

---

---