IF THE tenor of this year's Budget Debate seemed moderate and restrained this may have resulted largely from a recognition by both Government and Opposition that the country's debt problem is so formidable that it limits policy options.
In this regard the Finance Minister's decision to buck the trend of increasing the size of the budget in real terms signalled that the debate had to be rather sombre. Opposition Leader Edward Seaga read the ball well as he gave a statesman-like presentation in which he opted for pragmatic strategies that built on current policies.
Audley Shaw, Opposition Spokesman on Finance, did not abandon his role of blowing the whistle on corruption involving Operation PRIDE. He also focused on the debt-management issue and offered suggestions concerning designing a bond that would tap the overseas Jamaican market. Not to be outdone, the Prime Minister also bought into the mood of realism by responding to the charges of corruption with a proposed Code of Conduct for Ministers.
However, as expected in an election year, the debate did not escape its expected politicking. The Finance Minister listed what he termed "solid achievements" and the Prime Minister made a plea that we should not "stop the progress." For his part, Mr. Seaga couched his comments with the proviso "should we become the Government."
Some of the policy announcements also smacked of electioneering such as the proposed school expansion programme in the West as well as the reduction in NHT interest rates.
It is also noteworthy that, in a strategic move, Government is contending that there are no alternatives to the present economic policies. This is so especially in the discussions of possible cheaper sources of funding.
While this may be clever politics, we believe that the two-party system is predicated on the notion of two sides with oftentimes different perspectives on how the economy can achieve growth. Even where there is consensus on broad policy issues, there can still be differences in the emphases with which policies are implemented.
There is a strong case for the parties to disclose their positions on critical economic issues. This agenda must not be dictated by the parties in an attempt to score points. The nation's interest is still paramount.
