Maroc - NEWSDAY.CO.TT - A la Une - 21/Oct 04:26

Interpreting the budget

WAYNE KUBLALSINGH ONE WAY of interpreting a national budget is to study its language, its rhetoric. Here are seven points which might assist in interpreting the 2025-2026 budget presented by our Minister of Finance. Exaggeration/hyperbole. The budget alleges that the PNM has left the country in “economic ruin,” the Treasury was “empty,” in a state of “collapse of law and order,” that Tobago had been “abandoned,” and that state enterprises were in “absolute decay.” Is the minister simply scoring political points? Or is he telling us that his government saved us from utter PNM disaster, to make his own promises seem the rosier? Or is he inducing us into accepting the budgetary ambushes lying in wait for us with thankfulness? Are promises wins? The budget uses the word “will” 296 times. And the phrase “intends” four times. That’s a grand score of 300 shots of promises. Nothing too wrong with that. The budget is a plan for 2026. But these yet fulfilled promises are presented as “wins,” with table-pounding self-congratulation. As if they were already achieved. “Promised made, promised kept.” And “When UNC wins, everybody wins.” “They talk it, we do it.” But a promise may only be considered kept if fulfilled. Many of the promises are long, unfulfilled PNM/UNC promises. “Transparency and accountability,” “strengthening institutional capacity,” “sustainable jobs,” “capacity building,” “modernisation and digitisation” of Inland Revenue or TTRA. It repeats manifesto promises as achievements. Strategic words. Beware of strategic word usage. The budget refers to the property tax as being “halted.” Halted does not mean stop. Halt means a respite or temporary stop. This is different from the promised “scrapping” of the property tax. Buzzwords and glitz. Buzzword and borrowed glitzy development phrases are used to impress, to give the impression that the government is on the cutting edge of the global development game. “Best international practices.” “A seamless, end-to-end digital tax ecosystem.” “PPP-driven marinas and super-yacht facilities.” And certain words are used to suggest action. “Roll-out.” “Drive.” And “targeted.” “Targeted staffing intervention”. “Targeted training, mentorship, and rotational exposure.” “Targeted economic growth.” “Targeted capital investment.” “Targeted attention on zones of national security weakness.” “Targeted flood mitigation and shelter management exercise.” “Targeted” suggests military precision, laser-like aim and focus. Pilfering success. Successful ongoing works by past administrations are presented as current government success stories. To celebratory desk-thumping, the minister announced, “The PoS General Hospital central block will be operationalised by March 2026, and the Sangre Grande Hospital commissioned this fiscal year.” Likewise, the routine clearing of drains, rivers and flood-mitigation measures are hailed as novel or revolutionary accomplishments. Plans for flood mitigation infrastructure, rainwater harvesting, emergency responses specific to the South Oropouche River Basin is an ongoing project facilitated by UWI and funded by the Adaptation Fund and the Development Bank of Latin America. The partnership between UNCTAD and the Ministry of Finance to improve the Automated System for Customs Data (Asycuda) is a long-standing UN initiative to standardise and modernise global Customs administration. Sweet-eye and sweet-talk. India has given or promised our government 2000 laptops, US$1 million to Namdevco, technical support in natural farming systems, 20 haemodialysis units and two sea ambulances, a 50-day camp on artificial limb fitment, and signed an MoU to sell us Indian generic drugs. The US promises security co-operation, gave us medical equipment, and provided free dental and eye care on a ship-stop. China will grant us US$94 million to fund national projects. And India and the US congratulated us. But not all sweet-eye or sweet-talk bring wedding ring. Each of these global giants is playing the globalisation game in Latin America and the Caribbean. For the capture of investment, supply and consumer markets. For all these gifts or grants there was self-congratulatory desk-thumping. As if these nations give carrots for free; or we had accomplished some worthy deed. Euphemisms. Euphemisms are words which sweetly phrase undesirable things. At WASA, the budget promises “smart-metering”: “A $50 million smart-metering programme will improve billing accuracy and reduce losses.” Then, “The government proposes the introduction of an electricity surcharge as a targeted fiscal measure to address the growing cost of electricity subsidies and promote efficiency in energy use.” And finally, “the retirement age for a full NIS pension will move from 60 to 65 over the next decade,” and NIS contributions are to increase on a phased basis. What do these mean? Higher bills for public utilities? The increase in the NIS pensionable age is clear; future 60-65 aged citizens will be sacrificed to “save” the system. Thus, we see the budget making grand claims of successes and victories which are yet to be, or may not be, achieved. It phrases unpopular measures, the potential resumption of property tax, increases in WASA and T&TEC bills, NIS penalties, in disguised or euphemistic language. The cans of big-expenditure items, Cepep/URP and public servant pay increases, potential big-protest, street revolt matters have been kicked down the road. Why might the minister be doing this? The government has little room for manoeuvre on the fiscal front. It was heartening to see the minister sidestep the twin-terror of devaluation and the IMF. It has little income for significant investment – Keynesian (John Maynard Keynes) big-money intervention – in real development, or in our lethargic economy. It has little to show and no clear economic vision. It is thus dressing up itself in powder-puff face and expensive dress. The post Interpreting the budget appeared first on Trinidad and Tobago Newsday.