For more than 10 months now, Prime Minister Christie and his government have endured their fair share of criticism, from all and sundry. Some of them quite justified, in my view, and others pregnant with political and personal venom.
A bundle of the criticism directed at Mr. Christie himself, focus on his leadership style. Rightly or wrongly, his view seems to be that all of the brain power in our Bahamas is not concentrated in his Cabinet or the Parliament. Because of this belief, he has taken the calculated decision to appoint any number of Comissions to advise him and his government on the myriad of issues facing our country. All other things being equal, this certainly seems to be a very mature and responsible approach to governance. Mr. Christie’s premise is definitely not flawed. My own view is that if this kind of consultative approach was employed by former Prime Minister Ingraham prior to his rushing through the Parliament those financial services laws back in December 2000, this industry would not be in the sorry state it now finds itself.
During the Ingraham years, for a brief moment, there was an attempt at consultation with respect to the Labour Laws, but at the end of the day, Mr. Ingraham had things his way.
One criticism leveled at the Christie government that, in my view, has some merit. It is the fact that, since becoming the government it has not articulated a national development plan for The Bahamas. While his party laid out its vision for The Bahamas in its campaign booklet” Our Plan”, now that they are the government and have had an opportunity to assess the country’s economic and social circumstance, Mr. Christie needs to issue a simple mission/vision statement outlining his government’s plans for the future direction of the Bahamian society and the Bahamian economy, a statement understandable to the average citizen and one which by setting out specific guidelines and targets, would engender resigned acceptance if not unbounded hope. His party won the government in part, because of promises, which after 10 months in office, are withering on the vine, because no proper economic irrigation system has been installed to bring them to fruition, it seems. This has resulted in confusion and disillusionment, and hence the moral imperative for the government to tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. To postpone this until the budget debate in May or June is to risk an accelerating loss of confidence and the festering of speculation and cynicism which might be even more frightening than reality. On the political end, it will also provide fodder for Mr. Christie’s political foes.
There is a school of thought that says there is not much Mr. Christie can do, considering our economic circumstance and that of the world in general, and the United States in particular. The reality of war in the middle east in a couple of weeks make matters even more perilous.
Mr. Christie’s fiscal patience is only equalled by the impatience of an electorate whose expectations of hope and help has been dashed, it seems. I do believe though, that despite the potential political fallout from his fiscal prudence, in many ways, he is on the right track. It is very tempting, politically, for him to pitch a party by attempting to spend us out of this recession, but one night of pleasure can very well end up in a lifetime of pain and suffering. In the midst of all the global uncertainty, steady should be our course.
To his credit, Mr. Christie has acknowledged to the Bahamian people the frustration of his government at not having the financial wherewithal they need to transform the circumstances of our citizens, and he fully understands that it is he who must absorb the impatience of the Bahamian people.
There are those who suggest that Mr. Christie should on the monetary end, reduce the Bahamian dollar prime rate and on the fiscal end, increase government spending on capital projects. While there is merit in both, I am not totally convinced that the net effect of these measures will accrue any meaningful benefits to our economy.
A lowering of the prime rate would result in the reduction of mortgage and other loan rates tied to the prime rate. Only a precious few persons/businesses at the “high end” have such loans and besides, consumer loans usually attract a fixed rate of interest for the duration of the loan,thus any savings from a reduction in the prime rate will be minimal and concentrated in the hands of a few and those who need it least.
With a revenue base that is just rebounding, where will the money come from to fund any major capital works programme? We can always borrow I suppose, because any increase in taxes at this time could be catastrophic.Our credit rating is excellent, but in my view, it will be morally wrong to continue to burden our children and their children with so much debt, to facilitate the present generation’s desire to live outside of its means.
The one initiative though, that I believe makes sense, is the lowering of or the elimination of custom duties on construction materials and equipment. This coupled with the elimination of stamp duties associated with the acquisition of a first home has the potential to create an unprecedented boom in the construction industry. It is my view that depressed areas in New
Providence and the Family Islands should attract even more favourable concessions. The spin-off from this stimulant could really give the economy a much needed boost.
Finally, I am compelled to say that our present budgetary system is inefficient, lacks accountability and is not at all responsive to the requirements of civil society in general and our individual communities in particular.
The current process of dumping everything into a single Consolidated Fund has no basis in generally accepted international accounting principles, especially the matching principle, and camourflages the ineptness of those administering the system.
I wish to propose that by the appropriate constitutional or legislative means, the Consolidated Fund as it is presently constituted be dismantled and a more accountable system be put in place.
This new accountable system will conceptually, attempt to, in the first instance, match revenues with the expenditures for which they are intended. For example, the gasolene tax was sold to us as the source of funding required to keep our road network in good and usable condition. Well then, shouldn’t a separate fund be so established into which the gasolene tax is deposited and from which the cost of road repairs are expended? I further believe that real property taxes should be a tax levied and collected by local communities for their benefit.
Mr. Christie, I urge you not to be rattled by your detractors and the political mischief-makers. Stay the course, for while we weep for a night, it is my prayer that joy will be ours in the morning.
Jerry Roker
Letter To The Editor, The Nassau Guardian
