WHAT AN ANGRY BUDGET

There has never been an angry and harsh budget against the people such as the one currently under debate and nearing finalisation. Among many other wise sayings, King Sobhuza II would say: “Ungayisengi ize iphume ingati.”

With all due respect, this is what the current budget is purporting to do to the citizens, some of the legislators who are supposed to be people’s representatives are adding salt to the wound as they even suggest increasing service charges for the public health centres.
In this scenario, government is cutting her nose to spite the face and this is very unnecessary and irresponsible. 

The proposed model is targeting all and sundry; the unemployed are not spared, people with disabilities are not spared, the sick are not spared, the elderly are not spared as services and basic commodities will increase because the ripple effect of fuel levy will cascade into every commodity and service, at a time when there has been no wage or salary increases for a couple of years. The irony of this budget is that even with such high youth unemployment; it is not talking to job creation, but interestingly talking about over 50 per cent reduction of corporate tax and increase on personal tax.

Certainly, it is not a people focussed and people responsive budget, but a people punitive one.
That is why a plural system of government is most preferred the world over because it guarantees checks and balances on behalf of all the peoples of that country against government policies that would otherwise undermine peoples priorities versus priorities of the elite.

Current system of govT

That is where the current system of government in the country is failing; mark my expression. I am separating the system of government from Tinkhundla structures, because I regard them as venues designed for community development and decentralisation of service delivery to the people.
These structures remain physical buildings and not a system of government as long as government has centralised power, centralised priorities, centralised services and fails to deliver service.

As long as people do not participate in decision making and policy formulation, as long as the public broadcaster only serves the Executive and not the people, as long as policy and budget is constructed and implemented top-down and views of the people not considered and their priorities undermined, such system fails to meet the basic ingredients of the simplest definition of democracy.

Our current system of governance is dictatorship of the people by Cabinet because people are only involved once every five years to ballot, but after that exercise their priorities never feature in the government budget. I want to thank the brave 10th Parliament which has at least two times boldly stood in the way of an Executive prioritised budget that did not consider the priorities of the citizenry.

Over time and repeatedly, parliamentarians’ have called government not to depend on SACU and taxation as sources of revenue, but have always called upon government to create jobs through mining, manufacturing, tourism, retail, creative industry and industrialisation as espoused by the African Union (AU) and SADC with policies that would promote beneficiation and producing value added finished goods as opposed to giving away our primary products without value addition.

There is no wisdom in only growing trees and sell them out and import tooth picks and furniture.
 Our expenditure patterns keep growing their appetite whiles the revenue is not growing this means if a farmer were to eat seeds instead of planting and nurturing them with all necessary ingredients, that farmer would not realise any harvest during harvest season and would not be able to sustain his farming business. If a government ignores service delivery to all basic needs of the people, such as health, education, road infrastructure, basic needs such as shelter, taking care of the vulnerable groups such as the elderly people living with disabilities, orphans, widowed, youth, women and workers in creating productive jobs and taking care of the welfare of the people, that government is running a risk of losing confidence from the citizenry.

serve PEOPLE’S interests
Any government who knows that they are mandated and hired by the people they will always want to serve the interests of the people, and would always want the people’s input before a national policy is concluded.

Government must know that the correct  relation between her and the people is that they are the paymaster and those that govern are the servants of the people, but in a dictatorship system of government it is the government who dictates policy to the electorate without prior involvement and consultation.
In a competitive pluralistic system of governance where multiparty is allowed in line with the international treaties of the freedom of association, political parties have a duty to create a manifesto that informs the people how they would govern if they were given a mandate through the ballot box.
The manifesto would talk to all issues that affect the people and the country’s development politically, economically, socially and culturally.

Because a plural system is open, competitive and democratic, each contesting political party would have their manifesto, ideology, vision, mission and values.
They would be forced if they won the mandate to govern to live to the promise they made in their manifesto during campaign times.

The genuine expectations of the voters would be for the party they have given mandate to govern, to deliver on their promise made during the campaign era. In the event they fail, the people who are mandate givers know that they would not vote the same party into power come next round of elections
The truth I want to raise here is that, when a country is told to engage into structural adjustment programmes, it is not the IMF that makes them poor, it is bad economic governance.

Post your comment

Your name:

Your e-mail address:

Add your comments:

Please enter the code you see in the image:

Image:

Code: