|
Last Updated: Jul 3, 2010 - 1:32:17 PM |
Mid-Year Budget Communication
Senator the Hon. Dion Foulkes
Minister of Labour & Social Development
8 March 2010
Introduction
Madam President:
Accountability and transparency are hallmarks of FNM governance.
The Mid-Year Budget Review is yet another example of our commitment to these principles of good governance.
Accountability and transparency are practical democratic virtues. They serve higher ideals, such as progress, freedom, opportunity and equality.
The side opposite claims to be dedicated to these ideals.
But in ignoring the demands for accountability and transparency, the PLP has abandoned many of the progressive ideals upon which it was founded.
Madam President:
I am privileged to serve in a government that strives to match its promises and its ideals with its performance.
In the interest of progress, it was the FNM that instituted a minimum wage, not the party that carries the name progressive.
It was the FNM, in the name of freedom, that made possible the public broadcast of parliamentary debates, such as today’s proceedings.
It was the FNM that launched the first ever National Retraining Programme which, so far, has provided new training and business opportunities for over 700 Bahamians in just one year.
And, it was the FNM that made generational changes to labour and family-life laws, helping to provide for more equality for women in the workplace and at home.
PLP Double-Talk
Madam President:
The side opposite is uncomfortable with accountability and public scrutiny.
Because of a sense of entitlement, they feel that transparency is a burden, rather than an obligation to the Bahamian people.
This is why a number of their members in the House of Assembly believe that this mid-year review of public finances is a waste of time.
As a matter of course, the PLP speaks out of both sides of their mouth. Some of their House members said this mid-year review was unnecessary.
Yet, the Leader of Opposition Business in the Senate asked that we treat this mid-year debate like a full budget debate, in order to provide her side with more time to speak.
The PLP’s parliamentary caucus may wish to use some of this extra time to sort out how they actually want to proceed during this mid-year review.
Not only have PLP members in the Senate and the House contradicted each other on the importance of a mid-year review. As we saw during last Friday’s first reading in this chamber, PLP members are also at cross-purposes in the Senate.
The PLP really should contain their leadership fights to convention time rather than using parliamentary debates to score points against their own colleagues.
Madam President:
I note with interest an editorial in one of our daily newspapers on the importance of a mid-year review of public finances and budgetary priorities.
Last Friday, the day of the first reading of the supplementary bills for recurrent and capital accounts, The Nassau Guardian noted:
“Several opposition members of Parliament have argued that the mid-year budget debate instituted by Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham is a waste of time.”
It continued: “The time, runs this argument, could be better spent debating other matters of national significance. This argument is nonsensical.”
The editorial further noted:
“The mid-year budget debate was created to increase transparency. The public and Parliament should be updated as regularly as possible on the state of public finances.”
The Nassau Guardian also stated:
“Under the old budget method, a series of appropriation bills for all types of funding for the previous fiscal year accompanied the next budget. Limiting this practice is useful. The mid-year debate is needed.”
Credibility
Madam President:
The institution of this mid-year review speaks to the seriousness of the FNM’s commitment to financial stewardship and accountability.
This review, along with improvements in revenue collection and spending controls, are a testament to our budgetary discipline and fiscal innovation.
The opposition of certain members of the PLP to the need for a mid-year review is not surprising. The PLP have typically been sloppy, late-again and indifferent when it comes to managing the finances of the Bahamian people.
Ironically, after complaining that this mid-year review was not addressing the pressing needs of his constituents, one of their House members went on and on at great length talking about a government website. This is typical PLP doublespeak.
It seems that in the members mind, the website was more important than what the FNM is doing for the very people he claims are not being served by this mid-year budget review.
This includes two million additional dollars the Government has added for social assistance.
Madam President:
We have set the bar and raised expectations with regard to accountability with public finances.
We continue to make tough choices to reform and revitalize public finances that the PLP would never have taken.
They lacked the leadership, will power and discipline to make tough choices, even in good times.
In these tough times, their indecision and pandering would have wreaked havoc on our public finances.
Indeed, the FNM’s effective management of the economy during two prior terms in government has given the Bahamas the headroom to better manage a downturn caused by the massive global economic meltdown.
In his Mid-Year Budget Statement, the Minister of Finance re-stated the three pillars of the Government’s medium term strategy in light of the global economic crisis. These pillars are:
Maintaining fiscal flexibility in order to be able to deal with any worsening of economic conditions and, to the extent possible, maintaining employment and living standards;
Implementing projects to both create employment and build the infrastructure our country will need to prosper as the economic upturn takes hold; and
Reducing the debt-to-GDP ratio as economic conditions permit in order to recreate the fiscal headroom used during the crisis, thereby positioning us to be able to deal with any future crisis.
These are the three pillars of our strategy. Here are the three pillars of the PLP’s strategy. They are all built on make-believe and pretending:
Pretend that the global financial meltdown was the fault of the FNM;
Pretend that their billions upon billions of Monopoly dollars in investments were real, and
Pretend that sound-bites like “stop, review and cancel” are a substitute for sound ideas.
Madam President:
We will hear throughout this debate some version of these three great pretences by the great pretenders in the PLP.
But you will notice that these PLP talking points are about what the FNM supposedly didn’t do.
Not one of them is about what the PLP would do during this economic crisis. This is because all they have are talking points instead of economic solutions.
The reason they have nothing relevant to offer in opposition, is because of their failed record in government.
The Straw Market is a perfect example of their multiple failures. They talked for five years about helping our straw vendors. But it was just talk.
As the Prime Minister has previously said, if they really wanted to help our vendors they would have stopped quarrelling over an inflated, rip-off scheme that never got off the ground.
Unfortunately for them, one of their own cabinet ministers let the cat out the bag about their plans for the Straw Market.
Their man told the country that a world class market could be built for far less than their inflated numbers. And he walked away, refusing to take part in the rip-off.
It seems that there were a lot of extras built into in the PLP’s Straw Market scheme in order to give hope and help to some of their special friends.
Don’t take my word for it. This is what one of Perry Christie’s own Ministers admitted.
So when we came to office we had to stop their greed, review their incompetence and cancel their assault on our public finances.
Madam President:
The FNM has begun constructing a brand new Straw Market designed by cultural icon and noted architect Patrick Rahming. This isn’t talk. This is vision turned into action.
The Straw Market is set to be finished by early 2011.
It will complement our other plans for the revitalization of downtown Nassau, including the relocation of the container port.
It will complement the dredging of the harbour to accommodate new classes of cruise ships.
It will complement a new boardwalk along the Bay Street foreshore.
It will complement a repaving of all of the major roads in the City of Nassau.
It will complement our plans for heritage and cultural tourism.
It will complement our refurbishment of Rawson Square and public buildings downtown.
It will complement a vision that is turned into action through wise management and active governance.
Madam President:
The Bahamian people do not trust the PLP. They know that the rhetoric of the party opposite is rarely turned into action.
They know that the FNM has done more for the country in two and a half years than the PLP did in five.
The Bahamian people also know something else. They know that a PLP that refuses to pay its own debts can’t be trusted to oversee the public’s finances.
If someone can’t handle their own money, they can’t handle other people’s money.
For five years and counting the PLP has refused to pay off their debt to Bahamasair. They have refused to pay ZNS nearly a quarter of a million dollars. And, of course, they owe hundreds of thousands of dollars in Election Court cases.
Now, the same people who won’t pay their debts to public corporations want to give these same corporations advice about fixing their finances.
In all of the hypocrisy of the PLP over many decades, this is some of the worst. While the PLP wants everyone else to pay their debts, they are happy to ignore their own.
If we didn’t shame the PLP into acknowledging these debts, they wouldn’t promise to pay them. Of course, the country knows about PLP promises, like building a Straw Market and dredging the harbour and national health insurance.
Instead of simply giving lip service to ZNS, the PLP should pay its debt to the Broadcasting Corporation of the Bahamas.
Madam President:
Upon returning to office in 2007, the FNM had the considerable task of conducting audits in numerous public entities that the PLP failed to conduct over five years.
Now, the same people that failed to audit millions of dollars of public funds have found religion about overseeing the very same funds they failed to audit.
This is yet another case of financial hypocrisy disguised as financial responsibility.
But the Bahamian people are not fooled about this recent so-called conversion. The PLP have not been born again when it comes to public finances.
They were irresponsible in government. They remain irresponsible in opposition.
In 2007 the FNM provided MPs $100,000 for projects in their constituencies. Some MPs overspent because of pressing needs among their constituents. Some may have under-spent.
But the Leader of the Opposition and the Member for Farm Road failed to spend any of those funds to assist his constituents. So much for hope and help. He claims he was still in the planning stages.
Every other MP planned and executed his or her plans within a year or so. Yet the Leader of the party opposite couldn’t make up his mind how to spend a fraction of the national budget in a single constituency.
Madam President:
A former Prime Minister and Minister of Finance who fails to plan how to use $100,000 for his own constituents can’t be trusted to oversee an annual national budget many times that amount.
If he were in office during the worst financial crisis in more than half a century he would still be making plans to confront that crisis. The effects of his paralysis and indecision would be catastrophic for the Bahamas.
The PLP lacked the competence to manage our finances when in office. Now in opposition they lack credibility in speaking about our public finances.
Environmental Stewardship
Madam President:
I wish here to acknowledge the fine contributions you have made to the environmental well-being of our nation over many decades.
As you well know, environmental stewardship requires more than photo-opportunities and rank opportunism.
Showing up on a beach with the media in tow to score cheap and inaccurate political points should be beyond responsible politicians.
Genuine concern and stewardship is the work of decades. Not the work of a single afternoon before the cameras. Such stewardship requires getting your hands dirty and your feet wet. It requires study, research and careful policy planning.
It requires making tough choices beyond what camera angle in which one might appear for the evening news. Stewardship requires hard work rather than easy posturing.
Madam President:
The FNM’s environmental record cannot be matched by the PLP in the lifetime of any member in this chamber. Rather than a snapshot from a publicity stunt, let us look at a broader portrait of the FNM’s environmental record.
Instead of taking my word for it, allow me to repeat some of the points made by the leadership of the Bahamas National Trust during the Trust’s 50th anniversary celebrations last year.
The Trust noted and I quote, that: “The 1990s saw a revitalization of concern for the environment” and that “the present government listened and understood that the environment was an important issue and included a strong environmental component in their 1992 Manifesto.”
The Trust further notes that upon taking office in 1992 that the FNM: “Created the Bahamas Environment Science and Technology Commission and began the development of an Environmental Impact Assessment Process for the nation.”
Despite 25 years in office the PLP failed to initiate an EIA process and when in office again in 2007 they failed to revise and renew the process.
It was on our watch that the Bahamas “became a signatory to the Convention on Biological Diversity and to the Ramsar Convention on Wetlands.”
As dramatically, the FNM “created the 20,500 acre Abaco National Park, protecting the northern breeding ground” for the Bahama Parrot.
The Trust goes on to note, and I once again quote: “In April of 2002, in an action of global significance, the Government of the Bahamas doubled the size of the National Park system, protecting over 700,000 acres of marine and terrestrial environment.”
I continue to quote: “This included protection for Little Inagua; the largest uninhabited island in the Caribbean, and large areas of Andros containing blue holes, crab habitat, extensive mangrove tidal creeks so important for our marine nurseries and portions of the Andros Barrier Reef.”
I should note that it was the FNM that brought the number of parks in the country to 25, and that we will add to this natural patrimony during this term in office.
When we returned to Government in 2007 mindful of the increased number of parks we created in 2002, the Government increased the subvention to BNT to $1 million dollars annually.
In 2008, the Government provided BNT with an additional $250,000 to increase the number of wardens so that our parks may be managed more effectively.
The Trust also noted that: “The Creation of a Ministry of the Environment in 2008 brought departments and NGOs concerned with the environment under one administrative system, leading to better coordination of environmental management issues.”
Madam President:
As you know this administration’s concern for endangered species, including sea turtles, led to revised regulations and full protection for all sea turtles in The Bahamas.
We have also provided additional safety for the security of our marine resources. In this regard, in 1999 the FNM began implementing closures to protect the Nassau grouper during their spawning cycle.
In 2000, we announced our intention to establish five no-take marine reserves throughout our archipelago.
The Trust also praises the Government for our international diplomacy. It states, and I quote:
“Demonstrating fierce global environmental leadership, in 2008 in Bonn, Germany, the Government of The Bahamas joined forces with the Nature Conservancy to launch the Caribbean Challenge.” End of quote.
The Caribbean Challenge is an extraordinary and unprecedented commitment by Caribbean countries to manage and support new and existing national parks and protected areas throughout the Caribbean. It is set to protect at least 20 percent of their marine and coastal habitats in the region by 2020.
This Government led the way on this measure. We have pledged $2 million towards the capitalization of The Bahamas Protected Area Trust Fund.
It is also this Government that passed the bold, forward-thinking and landmark Subdivisions Bill which is designed to better and more fully integrate planning and development with protection of the Bahamian environment for generations.
Against the backdrop of the extensive aforementioned record, hasty and amateurish photo-ops, called in an attempt to label this Government as insensitive on the environment, is beyond laughable.
Indeed, it says more about those who engaged in such public theatrics, than it does about the rich, extensive and internationally-recognized record of the FNM.
Madam President:
Now some of them get a little agitated when I accuse them of hypocrisy in certain matters. But let me give you an example.
I was flabbergasted when some of them, including my good friend Senator Fitzgerald, took the Government to war for getting rid of the casuarina trees to make way for another seaside park for Bahamians.
The casuarinas are a very dangerous invasive species that we have allowed to proliferate for far too long, to the detriment of our biodiversity.
But the minute we started to deal with them we are accused of destroying these beautiful trees. Well, the lion fish is beautiful too, but very dangerous.
On the watch of the PLP Government, and with the help of the British Government, a study was completed and a report published in March 2003 called the National Invasive Species Strategy for The Bahamas.
In a message introducing that report, the PLP Minister for Health and Environment at the time, Dr. the Hon. Marcus Bethel wrote this:
(Quote highlighted portion on page 2 and 3)
On page 20 of that report is list of species listed for eradication – not control, eradication.
The first species on that list is the casuarina. Typical of the PLP, they wrote those words but did nothing. But as soon as we moved to do what they should have at least started, they accuse us of almost criminal conduct.
It’s a good thing we don’t listen to the noise in the PLP market. The FNM will continue to do what is right to protect our environment, including getting rid of the casuarinas. There are other trees which are just as beautiful and not a danger to our biodiversity.
Social Development & Labour
Madam President:
In my capacity as Minister responsible for social development, I commend all of the staff of the Department of Social Services throughout the country, who continue to provide services above and beyond the call of duty to our people, especially in these challenging economic times.
Since the beginning of the economic downturn there has been a steady rise in requests for all types of social assistance primarily in New Providence and Grand Bahama. Members will recall that it was in October 2008, when the Government introduced new levels of assistance in response to the economic downturn.
Food, as we know, is a basic human need and while persons facing economic hardship are forced to give up non-essential goods and services, the need for food is one of the most basic. Consequently, the Food Assistance Programme operated by the Department continues to be in great demand.
In New Providence between July and December 2009, some 3,754 persons were receiving food assistance. There were 2,722 on temporary food assistance and over 1,000 on permanent food assistance.
The food coupon is issued to the head of a household. But as we know, most households consist of more than one person. Based on this, we should note that many more people are being served than coupons issued.
Madam President
We are all aware that Grand Bahama has been hit exceptionally hard by the economic downturn. On our second most populous island, the Department of Social Services has expended in excess of $200,000 per month in food assistance between July and December of 2009.
To ensure that the basic need for food is met among our children, the National Lunch Programme continues to provide lunch each day to hundreds of children throughout The Bahamas.
In 2009, the Centre for the Deaf was added, which brought the number of schools in New Providence into the programme to 44.
I commend the Salvation Army which ensures that needy children at the School for the Blind are provided with lunch, and the Lyford Cay Foundation for facilitating the programme at the Adelaide Primary School. In Grand Bahama the programme is operational in 21 locations.
Other Assistance Provided – July to December 2009
New Providence
Rental Assistance - $352,851 expended.
Electricity Payments
Four hundred and sixty-five people received assistance for electricity, which cost the Government $209,648. This is less than half of what the Government spent for the same period in 2008.
In Grand Bahama, $249,651 was expended on rental assistance and $97,673 was expended on electricity payments.
Behind all of these numbers and every dollar spent are individuals and families with real needs and concerns.
In the face of our current economic situation we have maintained or improved the quality of life for many of our fellow citizens. Nowhere is this more evident than in the areas which I will now speak about.
Unemployment Benefits
Madam President:
In the report of the Director-General of the International Labour Organization to the 98th Session of the International Labour Conference, he laments the fact that many emerging and developing countries lack unemployment benefits.
Even advanced economies have holes in their social safety nets. In fact, in fifty percent of all OECD countries at least half of all unemployed persons do not receive benefits.
I quote from the Director-General’s report, “In conjunction with unemployment benefits, active labour market programmes play an important role helping individuals adjust to changing labour market conditions."
Madam President:
The Director-General warned that failure to adopt such measures could lead to all indicators of social well–being moving backward. This he termed “Social Recession”.
The creation of the Unemployment Benefits Programme was a landmark in the history of Bahamian labour. It was also in keeping with internationally recognized best practices to reduce the negative effects of the global economic crisis.
This initiative and the National Training Programme were created in conjunction with various trade unions and employers. I must once again thank the members of TRIFOR who were involved in the consultative process.
As of February 12th of this year the National Insurance Board had helped over 15,000 unemployed Bahamians with cheques totalling over $22 million. These funds were disbursed through NIB offices throughout the country.
The Employment Exchange continues to assist job seekers. Thousands of Bahamians continue to take advantage of this service.
Madam President:
In terms of labour and social development, this Government has instituted various initiatives to relieve many of the problems associated with the economic downturn.
Among these are steps helping Bahamians to use their own innovative and imaginative skills and talent to become entrepreneurs and small business owners.
For this reason the National Training Programme was created.
In the 2009/2010 budget the Government allocated $250,000 to the training of unemployed workers.
We formed a National Training Committee comprised of the representatives from umbrella trade unions, the Bahamas Employers Confederation, representatives of the College of the Bahamas, the Bahamas Chamber of Commerce, the Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute and the Bahamas Christian Council.
The purpose of the committee was to investigate and recommend how best to implement a National Training Programme. So said! So Done!
Madam President,
I am pleased to report that the National Training Programme is a success. Over 700 participants were enrolled and more than 80 percent completed the programme with passing grades. Courses were offered in New Providence, Exuma and Grand Bahama.
The majority of those enrolled were between the ages of 36 and 45, with several participants being over the age of 55. The participants took courses at the College of The Bahamas and the Bahamas Technical and Vocational Institute.
The subjects covered included: block laying, accounting, straw and shell craft, welding, computer applications, tiling and engine repair, and learning QuickBooks.
Madam President:
Allow me to share with this body the results of a survey taken by those who completed the programme.
Three hundred evaluation forms were distributed and 270 were collected. Of the 270 respondents, 263 said that the programme was effective. Only two individuals said that it was not effective.
All 270 respondents said that the course had increased their knowledge. But best of all, 162 said the programme was excellent, 92 said it was good, 13 said it was satisfactory and one person found it unsatisfactory. Only two people did not answer the question.
Some 100 people who completed the programme were identified to take part in the next step which is the Micro-finance and Entrepreneurship Programme. This follow-on programme is aimed at creating more Bahamian entrepreneurs.
Ninety-two people have decided to take part and have already produced business plans and will be awarded grants based upon the viability of their plan.
Union Matters
Madam President:
As a former trade unionist and shop steward, the ongoing well-being of our unions is dear to my heart. I continue to be concerned by the lack of unity and cohesiveness within and among labour unions.
I will continue to use my office to create within the national labour movement a greater commitment to the good of labour. Further, I would wish that union leaders find a higher purpose beyond what are too often the narrow interests by some.
A healthy and vibrant labour movement is necessary for the social and economic well-being of our Bahamas.
Conclusion
Madam President:
I wish to close by repeating some of what I said during my budget communication last June.
At that time I noted the essential difference between the PLP and the FNM:
We do, they talk.
We legislate, they equivocate.
We solve problems, they leave behind a mess.
We nation-build, they do public relations.
We seize the future, they live in the past.
We are the original party of so said, so done, they are the party of much said, precious little done.
We are the party of progressive ideals and actions, not just progressive talk followed by inaction, indecision and inept governance.
Madam President:
Despite the difficult times and the hard choices, indeed maybe because of these circumstances, we have had to devise innovative solutions while still pursuing the broad agenda the FNM outlined in our 2007 Manifesto.
It is an agenda of reform and progress in every area of national life, from environmental protection to national security, from social development to governmental reform.
In this vein I am pleased to endorse this mid-year budget review, yet another instalment in the FNM’s agenda of restoring trust in government, but more fundamentally, especially during these tough times, trust in the Bahamian dream and the Bahamian people.
Thank you, Madam President.
© Copyright 2010 by thebahamasweekly.com
Top of Page
|
