Budget tradition and transparency

The presentation of a budget is a unique combination of tradition and transparency. The annual Budget is perhaps the most important policy document unveiled by the Government so far, especially since its top leaders have indicated that this will be the foundation on which key economic decisions will be made for the next five years. Given this significance, it is disappointing that the Government did not take steps to allow the media to cover the Budget, as done for decades. 

True, Sri Lankans are not living in usual times, but if diplomats and other officials are allowed to be present in parliament during the reading of the Budget, why not the media? The media plays a crucial role in balancing and directing the Budget discourse and a critical part of this is getting varying viewpoints from different stakeholders. Opposition views are central to this democratic exchange of ideas and assists in maintaining both credibility and consistency. 

Successive budgets in Sri Lanka presented by governments of different hues have failed the credibility and implementation litmus tests. Sri Lanka does not have a Parliamentary Budget Office, nor does it have a dedicated branch of Government to monitor implementation and update the public on whether the proposals laid out in the Budget are being implemented in the right way. 

Routinely key allocations for education, healthcare and housing as well as a host of other measures are listed in the Budget, hailed for a few weeks and then sadly swept under the carpet. Critical policies such as pension schemes, measures to increase female participation in the workforce and progressive legal changes have died a silent death behind the scenes, because they get lost in the jumble of competing interests and priorities. The public only even get to know of how much did not get done, because of media and civil society efforts to demand information and evaluate Budget performance.  

Therefore, the inclusion of media at the start of this entire yearly process is of critical importance. Journalists, particularly parliamentary correspondents, use their years of experience to filter out the possible from the embellished and try to present a realistic version of what the public can expect. Budgets are notorious for understating expenditure and overstating revenue at high cost to the public, who have to bear the brunt of the macroeconomic repercussions. 

The Budget also presents proposals that can impact millions of people. In the latest edition, the Government has proposed increasing the retirement age from 55 to 60, which has been criticised by many as a regressive step. Other measures such as increasing the plantation worker wage to Rs. 1,000 has also been slammed for undermining the collective bargaining process and not taking into account market realities.

A proposal to set up a contributory pension scheme for self-employed people seems to have overlooked the fact that several previous attempts for farmers and fishermen have ended in failure. The private sector is also awaiting more information on the goods and services tax mentioned in the Budget as well as levying 0.25% on the turnover of selected companies to set up a COVID-19 insurance scheme, which could run into headwinds as they move forward.  

There are good and not-so-good policies in any Budget, but the point is that the media is integral to the process of unpacking them, analysing and making informed implementation decisions. If media is kept out of this process then everyone is the poorer for it.