Monday, 3 November 2014 00:00
-
- {{hitsCtrl.values.hits}}
THE importance of a country’s annual Budget can hardly be overstated, yet it can be ignored. After vehemently seeking and acquiring a competent amount of time to debate the latest Budget presented by President Rajapaksa, the main Opposition has badly dropped the ball on pushing for financial accountability and transparency.
The days ahead of the Budget were tense with accusations over how the Government had limited the time available for debate. It was largely believed this was to make way for President Rajapaksa to announce snap presidential polls early next year. The Opposition, true to form, launched a vitriolic criticism of what they termed as the gross financial irresponsibility of the Government.
Successive press conferences from the front liners’ of the United National Party (UNP) went out of their way to point out how the transparency of the Budget was being sacrificed by leaving out borrowing taking place outside of the consolidated fund. They alleged the Government is attempting to push through a Budget dangerous to the economic wellbeing of the country and to add insult to injury were denying the Opposition time to discredit or steer Government policy. The UNP staunchly made demands from the Budget for handouts and taking it a step further UNP MP Ravi Karunanayake insisted a shadow Budget of sorts will be presented to Parliament on 25 October.
Yet when all the hot air cleared, post-Budget the show was disappointing. Few if any Opposition MPs bothered to counter the Budget based on sound economic principles and fact based arguments, but rather allowed the debate to disintegrate into the standard mudslinging.
So trivialised has this incredibly important space of time become that both sides of the divide used it to make and quote quaint poems at each other with Prime Minister D.M. Jayaratne leading the way. It was a terrible display where the representatives of the people completely failed to make a mark on their behalf.
UNP MP and the party’s Treasurer Eran Wickramaratne accused the Government of attempting to undermine the Budget debate as it was “running scared” after the election results of the Uva Province. Yet it would seem that after the poor fact-starved debate over this most crucial of Budgets, it is the UNP that has let its supporters down. On some days proceedings had to end early as sufficient members were not present. In fact key members of the UNP including Deputy Leader Sajith Premadasa and Assistant Leader Ravi Karunanayake were absent during the second reading vote. Clearly actions speak louder than words.
Implementation of the Budget is, of course, an executive function. Unless the executive issues public reports regularly on the status of expenditure during the year, Opposition parties have limited ability to monitor the flow of funds. But the Opposition does have an interest in an effective oversight system that promotes adherence to the Budget and reduces mismanagement or corruption.
They can advocate reforms to strengthen budgetary control. Similarly, they may engage in some monitoring activities in an independent oversight role. For instance, the UNP can focus on whether amounts for specific projects, especially infrastructure, have been used for the intended purpose. They also can assess whether the government funds allocated for these purposes are being used effectively and have reached the intended beneficiaries. They can analyse and educate the public on the pitfalls of the Budget. But all this and more has been effectively ignored.
