Latest update April 4th, 2025 6:13 AM
Serious budget talks will avert 2012, 2013 gridlock – Former Auditor General
In a few weeks’ time, the Government is set to table the 2014 National Budget but unless critical talks are held between the political parties in the National Assembly, there are likely to be problems again.
Writing in his weekly column in Stabroek News, former Auditor General, Anand Goolsarran, indicated that he hopes that there is not a repetition of what happened in 2012 and 2013 when this year’s National Budget is presented.
Former Auditor General, Anand Goolsarran
“It is not too late for there to be meaningful consultations with the combined Opposition so that the budget as presented will enjoy smooth passage. One looks forward to a healthy debate on the budget and not to “a fish market scene”, once described by the late Attorney General, Doodnauth Singh in his farewell speech in the National Assembly.”
The budget situation has been a worrying one, since the November 2011 General and Regional Elections left the ruling administration, the People’s Progressive Party/Civic (PPP/C), without a majority for the first time since assuming continuous power from 1992.
The Opposition – A Partnership for National Unity (APNU) and Alliance For Change (AFC) -promptly made cuts to the 2012 National Budget, an authority that the administration insisted that the Opposition did not have. Last year, the cuts continued. There were calls for budget talks, but the Opposition has been claiming that not much advancement has been made.
With a few weeks remaining and the budget likely almost completed, there is the feeling that a replay is likely.
According to Goolsarran, “In April 2012, I attended the budget debate, and the scene was one of outright hostility, shouting, booing and heckling. Such behavior in the highest forum of our land is unbecoming of our elected representatives and is unprecedented in my years of association with the National Assembly, first as Deputy Auditor General, then Auditor General. I have since not returned to the Assembly to listen to another debate.”
Goolsarran noted that in 2012, the Assembly voted down several items of proposed expenditure where in its opinion satisfactory explanations were not provided.
This prompted the Government to mount a legal challenge to the Assembly’s decision on the grounds that it was unconstitutional for the body to amend the budget as presented and the “Assembly could either approve or reject the budget, but not reduce it.”
The former Auditor General said that in his preliminary ruling, the Chief Justice upheld the Government’s position but suggested that, in view of the new configuration in the Assembly and in order to overcome any disagreement, it would be appropriate for the Minister to rework the budget instead of the assembly.
“The Chief Justice did not grant any relief since the Government had amended the Appropriation Bill to reflect the reduction in the budget. The amended Bill was passed by the Assembly and assented to by the President, and therefore the Court could not invalidate such actions.” However, the Minister could withdraw sums from the Consolidated Fund to restore the budget of the Ethnic Relations Commission which is a constitutional body.
“In no other situations did the Court rule that sums over and above what was contained in the Appropriation Act could be withdrawn from the Consolidated Fund to restore the budget as presented. Only an Appropriation Act can authorize the Minister to make withdrawals from the Consolidated Fund.”
Goolsarran believes that the Government, apparently misinterpreting the Chief Justice’s ruling, went ahead and withdrew funds from the Consolidated Fund in an attempt to restore the original 2012 budget.
“When the Government sought to regularize the expenditure, the National Assembly once again voted against certain items. The Assembly did not approve of excess expenditure totalling $571.627 million incurred in the first half of the year while for the second half of 2012, the anticipated shortfalls in expenditure totalling $1.225 billion did not find favour with the Assembly.”
In relation to the latter amount, Goolsarran said the Government would have withdrawn funds from the Consolidated Fund to meet the related expenditure.
“Therefore, the total unauthorized expenditure for 2012 would amount to $1.797 billion, a significant blemish in the history of public accountability in Guyana.”
The same scenario played out in 2013.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
The reciprocal tariffs
Peeping Tom… Kaieteur News- Vice President Bharrat Jagdeo has once again proven his talent for making the indefensible... more
The U.S. “Joining” the Commonwealth: an unreasonable expectation
By Sir Ronald Sanders Kaieteur News- Recent media stories have suggested that King Charles III could “invite” the United... more
Weekend Cartoon
