Dear Editor,
For a few years I have been reading the annual diatribe by Christopher Ram on the budgets which the government has been tabling. This year I find that Mr Ram’s comments have not changed from the usual lack of objectivity, professionalism, political attacks and political pandering. His comments have, however, especially since he had joined a political slate of candidates, spewed more vileness and venom. Also since the ascent of Dr Ashni Singh to the post of Finance Minister, Mr Ram seems to have personally gone after him with an unusual amount of animosity and envy.
I decided to pen this piece because Mr Ram cannot match up to the capacity and abilities of Dr Singh. The credentials of Dr Singh are impeccable. He has not only passed through the stage of Mr Ram, but exceeded and excelled all the way to the top – nothing less was expected of this brilliant son of Guyana. Dr Singh has always been at the top, academically, of his cohort. A few weeks ago at a popular social spot I ran into a gentleman (Mr Michael Joseph) from St Lucia, who mentioned to me how he started his doctoral studies with the “bright and talented Ashni Singh.”
Dr Singh has acquitted himself in all his stations and when asked to serve at the level of the Cabinet, has, in the last five years, delivered the goods in an exemplary manner. He has produced budgets that have kept us on a growth path despite internal and external shocks to our economy – unprecedented spikes in food and oil prices in 2007, global financial meltdown and falling commodity prices in 2008 and 2009, an unrelenting opposition campaign to stop loans and assistance to Guyana and of course unpredictable climatic changes.
Mr Ram’s contentions are that Dr Ashni Singh’s numbers are unbelievable and his projections unattainable, and he paints a picture of our country that not only misrepresents our progress, but is dishonest at best. For example, Mr Ram says that, “The Minister expects the nation to believe that the economy grew by 3.6% .”
In a statement by an IMF Mission to Guyana (Press Release No. 10/448, November 19, 2010) it was said: “An IMF mission visited Guyana from Nov 8–18 to conduct the Fund’s yearly review of the Guyanese economy. Despite external and domestic shocks in 2010, Guyana’s economy has exhibited resilience, registering a fifth consecutive year of robust growth. Real Gross Domestic Product (GDP) is projected to grow by just under 4 percent this year, above the outturn in 2009, supported by increased activity in the sugar, gold, and services sectors. Notwithstanding downside risks, including the global environment and concerns in the sugar sector, the team expects growth to continue on a steady path, supported by expansion in the mining and construction sectors. Despite a small increase reflecting movement in food prices inflation remains relatively low.”
In addition, a report of the Managing Director of Republic Bank (Guyana) it was stated: “However, in spite of the contagious effects of the global financial crisis, developments in our country’seconomy enabled the Bank to deliver strong returns to its stockholders… an overall balance of payments surplus of US$34.6 million was recorded, while the Bank of Guyana increased its external reserve position from US$628 million at end 2009, to US$677 million at end June… Future Outlook – Republic Bank (Guyana) Limited takes confidence in the performance of the economy which has been commendable despite the setbacks of the sugar sector and the global economy.”
Mr Ram also goes further with his incomplete and dishonest analysis; he says, “Contract employees continue to drive up employment costs while some traditional public servants earn monthly salaries equivalent to less than US$175 per month.”
Mr Ram fails to remind the reader that in 2010 we moved all the cleaners, handypersons, drivers and lower level skills to contracted positions. Thus, there will be an increase in this category of workers.
He also fails to tell the reader that the U$175 he is quoting is on the pay scale for the lowest level of staff in the public service and these are, now, all contracted workers.
For clarity and to leave it to your judgment I list the pay scales of the public service
Mr Ram makes it sounds like the differential in corporation tax rates is something new. He now calls this tax policy an affront to the supreme law of the country. This differential has existed for decades. He knows that every country uses taxation, or the lack of it, to discourage some activities and encourage others. SIN Taxes are a classical example. So what is wrong if we would like to give an incentive to non-commercial activities in our economy? This differential was not created in this budget.
Then he does a broadside with the paint brush claiming, “Several entities with a poor record of audit and accountability continue to receive huge subventions and in certain cases increases. Indeed so pervasive is this situation that only those entities whose audits are in arrears by more than five years are publicized.”
Name them. I say and speak with the Auditor General; he is responsible to Parliament for auditing and reporting on such, not the government.
Lastly, on the issue of his comments on supplementary provisions my response is the same as that contained in a letter captioned ‘Greenidge is far removed from the realities in Guyana’ published in SN on January 22.
I could do a line by line rebuttal of Mr Ram’s budget comments here, but I only used a few examples, for I am sure that his mentors on the opposition benches will regurgitate his comments, giving us much more space to deal with them.
I challenge Mr Ram to come into the arena since from his perspective this government is so inept and has so mismanaged the state, and his friends in the opposition are so noble and brilliant. The PNCR is looking for a leader, so he should come and join them and test his theories.
Unlike the excellence of Dr Singh, Mr Ram’s claim to fame is as a critic.
We are grateful for the talented Dr Ashni Singh. Congratulations again to him.
Yours faithfully,
Manzoor Nadir