Disappointing...again

THANKS to modern technology, social media and reform of the Parliament Standing Orders, budget debates are more accessible now than at any other time in history. Yet, the irony is despite the plethora of ways in which we can engage with the issues, genuine insight into how the State is spending our money is still hard to come by.

Undoubtedly, we should all celebrate the fact that fiscal decision-making is closer to us than ever before. Each year, hours after the finance minister concludes the budget, all documents related to both recurrent and stand-alone expenditure are published on the website of the Ministry of Finance. While the formats of these documents require some degree of parsing, if anyone is serious about accessing the information, they can find it with a few clicks of a mouse.

Additionally, social media platforms allow a substantial degree of engagement. Not only does the Parliament broadcast its sittings to television screens, but it also goes ‘live’ over YouTube. Thousands can comment in real time there and also on Facebook, Twitter and so on. Not only is this possible for the finance minister’s presentation, but every MP’s contribution is shareable in this way.

But what is the use of all this if the level of discourse remains vapid, unmoored and deeply partisan? Another year, another budget debate. What have we learned? Government has stated the economy is in turnaround mode. The Opposition claims the books have been cooked. We hear that every year. Oropouche East MP Dr Roodal Moonilal makes allegations in relation to Prime Minister Dr Keith Rowley and a petrochemical contractor. Rowley denies all suggestion of wrongdoing. The matter will head to the Privileges Committee. Moonilal also queries whether the prime minister’s lawyer Michael Quamina, is entitled to speak at a press conference in Parliament and make adverse remarks about an MP, citing the rules in relation to strangers.

Yet, while contempt is still an offence, the new Standing Orders have long removed all references to “strangers”. Even Moonilal must admit members of the public, whatever they are called, are entitled to offer fair comment on matters that occur in the House of Representatives. And then there was the “PMIS” matter.

Marlene McDonald announced a new Public Management Information System (PMIS) that would allow people to see how government is spending money on rents, leases and property. About $.7 million has already been allocated. Yet, the response in the House was stunningly infantile, with MPs chuckling and questioning if the programme was really “PNIS”. We are left none the wiser as to when this latest service will be online, who will be able to access it and how.

The McDonald gaffe, perhaps, best captures the way this disappointing debate has gone in the House of Representatives and its Standing Finance Committee. Having been left to collapse, it will now head to the Senate tomorrow where money bills cannot be voted down. Will things be any better there?