Dear Editor,
Repeatedly, one can hear parliamentarians lamenting on the issue of not feeling any energy from the Minister of Finance. Is it really that the budget is missing its lustre, or parliamentarians have become frail, due to discontentment within the organisation? My conclusion: there is a dirty game that is being played and it is possible that the table will turn sooner than later. So, this dark cloud that is being placed on the budget has absolutely nothing to do with the financial statement.
Isn’t a budget similar to the weather forecast, which is compiled and disseminated, based on the elements that are in the atmosphere at that given moment? Therefore, a budget is a projection of the country’s revenues and expenditures, due to its current economic climate. Just like how the weather can change, so is the financial statement as well.
Parliamentarians need to leave their party displeasure at their headquarters and focus on the matter at hand. How could MP’s make a decision to support a budget before acquiring all of the specifics of the document? This is a very strange and immature way of handling such a critical manuscript. A budget needs to be analysed thoroughly; therefore, no MP should take a decision just for the sake of passing the budget. Then they display this feigned attitude of being frustrated because they are not feeling the Finance Minister? Parliamentarians are the ones who lack the energy when they chose to fight with the Minister rather than to have a meaningful dialogue.
Look at the MP who is desperate to be the next Tourism Minister. What does he do? He always disappears whenever there is an important discussion, even the one as critical as the budget debate. It is such an adolescent mindset to hold the Finance Minister hostage for presenting a “conservative” budget. Politicians are upset with him because he is refusing to allow them to spend monies that are not available.
Our elected officials have failed to realise that due to their lavish spending in the past is what has caused the Minister to present a “shotgun” and a “conservative” budget respectively. Isn’t this approach a model of financial discipline? Part of the assessment of the budget is to analyse the benefits to the country when it does not exceed its expenditures. Another aspect of the budget is to bring into focus that the document is a collective responsibility of the Council of Ministers. Together, they control the finances of the land. Their decisions affect the direction of St. Maarten; it is time that parliament exert its authority and redirect the course of this country.
For instance: the Labour Department is one of the four evils that have destroyed the integrity of St. Maarten. I expected parliamentarians to hammer the Labour Minister on issues that are affecting the livelihood of the people. This section of the Ministry is what is causing a lot of disturbances in this country. If the Minister wants to play hardball, then parliamentarians should give him a vote of no confidence and appoint someone who will stand up for the people!
Again, this is why it is absurd for any MP to say that the budget has his or her support, when answers to critical questions are not forthcoming. This is the reason why discussing the budget has become a merry-go-round because MP’s are the ones who are directing the game, by failing to apply pressure on the Ministers to demand proper representation for the citizens. But this approach can only be successful when elected officials quit the grandstanding and have an intellectual discourse with the Council of Ministers.
Looking at the allocation of monies, it is rather disappointing to see the inadequate funds that are distributed to the Ministries of Justice and Economic Affairs. These two Ministries need some serious revitalisation, otherwise this gloomy economy and sporadic crime will just compound themselves.
Everyone knows that I am a very strong proponent of education, but why is it that the Ministry of Education has to consistently get the lion’s share when it has failed consecutively to stay horizontal with the demands of the labour market? MP’s do not want to dive into the problematic areas within this Ministry. Some shifted the blame to another Ministry without looking at the long-term effect. I will repeat myself by saying that compulsory education has diluted the quality of education.
I have been very critical of former MP Leona Marlin-Romeo, but I must give her credit for being the only MP who has acknowledged this looming dilemma.
It is clear that the majority of parliamentarians do not understand the work of art of the organisation to which they belong. Until they do, mediocrity will continue to take centre stage and people will forever be excluded from economic advancement.
Joslyn Morton
