Given the infamous passage of Section 34 and the subsequent uproar, the political environment in which the 2012-2013 national budget will be presented is charged with political contention and counter-contention. While it is vital that the political democracy that is being developed here is nourished by contending views and the expression of those views without let or hindrance, unfortunately such an overheated environment is not the best one for sober contemplation.
The present wrangling could influence the discussion of the fiscal package and its presentation in the narrow politically partisan environment of the times. It is unlikely, then, that the national budget will have the unbiased attention of parts of the population. This is unfortunate, as budgets must have a measure of goodwill and buy-in from all sides to be successful.
Very troubling too is the possibility that, with the Government and Cabinet having scripted their own difficulties, the Cabinet could very well seek to sweeten its way out of those matters with handouts as a means of assuaging anger and dissatisfaction with the performance of the Government and Cabinet in the Section 34 debacle.
As if the back-and-forth over Section 34 were not sufficient, both the ruling party and the opposition are having political rallies this week. The People's National Movement will be attempting to agitate its supporters and the national community to press its case against Cabinet and prime ministerial culpability in the Section 34 scandal.
Next, the Government is holding a pre-budget rally in the heart of its constituency to support a budget which has not yet been presented. How can people come together in a celebratory atmosphere to support a fiscal package that has not yet been unveiled? It is a bewildering question. This event must be without precedent in the run-up to the presentation of a budget.
Considering the nature of a budget is and the fact that it is a matter of national importance as a Government seeks to make best use of financial resources and to plan for the future, it should never be the subject of partisan strategies more appropriate to election campaigns. Instead the probability is that the parties will emerge from their meetings with mandates of a political nature, perhaps totally unsuited to the presentation of a budget.
Already in the run-up to the budget the Government signalled an intention to have the Finance Minister allocate $410 million annually for what will amount to no more than slush funds to campaign for the three elections scheduled over the period. Finance Minister Larry Howai, a newcomer to the politics, and himself without a constituency, will have to find the courage to resist attempts to distort his package to meet political needs.
He will face a stern test. He must contemplate the reality that he will be the one who will have to take the major responsibility for the budget. He therefore will have to summon the willpower and point out to his colleagues the dangers of engaging in political spending to soften the blows that the Government is receiving for its role in the construction and passage of Section 34.
In the circumstances, the media's responsibility to its audiences has intensified. Both the electronic and print media must accept that there will be even greater pressure to perform the task of providing the population with the information on the budget. At the same time, the media have to allow political commentary from all sides to follow the budget.
But most importantly, the media must know they will have to bring clinical understanding and non-political technical views to dissect the elements of the budget and what they will mean for citizens and the economy as a whole.
