Budget 2013 is anti-poor

Apr 05, 2013 News

---

–    APNU’s Volda Lawrence
By Zena Henry
Before the Budget debates resumed yesterday at Parliament Buildings, a moment of silence was held by the National Assembly to recognize the passing of former Minister of Education and Labour, Human Services and Social Security, Reverend Dr. Dale Bisnauth, who passed away yesterday morning.

After speaking highly about the former parliamentarian and his contributions to the education system and Guyana, the House got down to business, and A Partnership for National Unity (APNU)’s Volda Lawrence wasted no time in charging that the government’s 2013 budget is “anti-poor.”
Like many of her APNU colleagues, Lawrence was very critical when drawing reference to the varying areas where she claimed that the government failed to recognize the plight of those in need.
Lawrence said that the government in the 2012 budget made numerous promises and as usual spoke of significant growth in a variety of areas of the system. She however said that another debate is being argued and the government has not yet fulfilled on promises of improvement, subsequent to making references to areas such as sugar production, despite the billions injected into the sector.
She applauded staffers of the Finance Ministry in the preparation of the 2013 budget, “As we are not responsible for the political blunders of this administration.” Lawrence stated that the budget failed to touch on areas of tax reduction and to address personal income tax “in a real way”.
She told the Finance Minister that he should, “address the increasing disparity between the haves and the have -nots.” Lawrence said that the Minister failed to address plans for job creation, the spiraling cost of living and VAT reduction.
As the member of the opposition, whose mandate it is to, “examine it (budget) with a critical eye, outline its deficiencies in meeting the needs of the people and where possible make proposals,” Lawrence stated categorically that after examining the budget she found it to be “anti-poor.”
The APNU member said that despite the ‘grow more food campaign,’ food prices are on the rise, although most of the food is grown locally.
“Plantains are now $100 to $200 per pound, eddoes are $120 to $160 per pound.” Sweet potatoes, she said, are in excess of $100, while “chicken foot and chicken neck is $300 and $200 per pound respectively”.
House lot pricing, Lawrence indicated, also seem not to be in favour of the poor, with properties being sold from $300,000 to $1.2M. Requests of fifty percent, she said, are being asked to be paid, and while persons approach the banks for loans, they have to pay off the first loan before getting another while threatening letters are being sent to persons pertaining to them losing their lands.
The APNU member further pointed to an information centre which she said has not materialized by the Housing Ministry, to safe guard home builders against unscrupulous contractors and conmen. She said the budget spoke of no plans to build homes for the poor and for persons who can’t afford to build for themselves.
Additionally, Lawrence touched on the Value Added Tax (VAT) which she claimed the government refused to reduce. According to her, the administration had made it clear that a reduction of the VAT would make no difference in assisting the poor. But in contrast, the APNU member charged that reduced VAT leaves space for additional disposable income, which raises their standard of living.
“An increase in the spending power of the poor would improve their quality of life as well as that of their offspring. More money means more food available, more food available means children can concentrate in class.”
More money, Lawrence emphasised, means better school attendance, since money would be available for transportation. “This means a chance of acquiring an education which further means more employable persons, which results in an opportunity for the poor to get out of poverty.”
In relation to hope for senior citizens, Lawrence said that many have thanked APNU for encouraging a raise in their pension. However, she stressed that it is short of the $15,000 proposed by the opposition and charged that the Finance Minster reneged on that promise. But Finance Minister Dr. Ashni Singh rose to say that he had made no such promise and that the APNU member was misrepresenting the facts and further misleading the nation.
Lawrence further spoke of the subsidies presented to assist senior citizens with their light bills and charged that of the 42,000 registered pensioners only about 29,500 of those persons are eligible for the benefit.  She said it is hoped that the seniors would get the full $20,000 in this year, and not aggregated over the 12 months, thus getting only a portion for the next eight months.
Lawrence suggested that greater emphasis be placed on domestic violence, with an activation of the family court which she said remains a “white elephant.”
In conclusion, Lawrence argued about the lack of emphasis being placed on differently-able citizens, stating that enough resources are not being placed in this area, while attributing her comments to the David Rose School where these persons are most prevalent. She said the government should lead by example, while highlighting that legislation which demands relevant infrastructure to accommodate the differently-able, is still to be addressed.

---

---