BASSETERRE, ST. KITTS – St. Kitts and Nevis’ Leader of the Opposition, the Right Hon. Dr. Denzil L. Douglas is urging civil society and the public in general in the twin-island Federation to resist the desecration of Parliamentary and Democratic traditions and the presentation of the Budget Address “to a political or town-hall meeting.”
Dr. Douglas, a four-term prime minister, who is serving his term in the lawmaking body, expressed that concern Thursday and made several objections to the way Prime Minister and Minister of Finance, Dr. the Hon. Timothy Harris presented the 2017 Budget Address in the National Assembly on Wednesday.
Instead of sticking to the 67-page Budget Address, Dr. Harris departed from the text on several occasions and fired salvos, some unparliamentry, at the opposition much to the consternation of members of the public including representatives of the Diplomatic and Consular Corps, the business community, the clergy and civil society.
Dr. Douglas began his response to the Budget by expressing his serious concerns with the way the budget address was presented.
“It is a significant departure from our democratic traditions and norms and if it is allowed to become a precedent for further incursions into our democracy, our country would have taken a giant step backwards. I therefore start my presentation by raising the following objections to the manner in which the budget was presented to this Parliament.”
He told the Speaker, Hon. Michael Perkins and the Nation, that parliamentarians have not been presented with a written copy of the budget address as delivered, as the basis for preparing their contributions to the budget debate and responding to many statements made by the Prime Minister Harris in his oral presentation to the House on Wednesday.
Dr. Douglas noted that more than half of Dr. Harris’ presentation was delivered ad lib and was not provided to the Parliament in the printed budget address.
“In view of the substantial differences between oral presentation and the printed budget address, it is unclear which version is the real one. In my opinion, however, only the oral presentation to the Parliament can be considered the real budget address,” said Dr. Douglas, suggesting that “the massive difference between the written budget address and the oral presentation is actually illegal, because it deprives the Parliament of the right to deliberate on the actual address delivered in Parliament. This issue has been the subject of a legal challenge in another country where a shortened version of the budget was presented instead of the formal printed address provided to Parliamentarians.”
He said that the mainly ad lib presentation did not present the strategy of the Government in any focused and coherent way, as would be expected in perhaps the most important policy presentation in the entire fiscal and economic calendar of the Government.
“The mode of presentation was in the form of a political speech at a political meeting. If this is to become the practice from here onwards, then the Country would have lost a very critical policy forum, where the Government is provided the opportunity to address policy issues, account for its actions, and provide policy guidance on the way forward,” said Dr. Douglas.
He said there was no reference to any fiscal measures in the oral presentation and whether the Nation was likely to see new taxes introduced during the new financial year.
“Even in circumstances where there are no fiscal measures intended, it is necessary for the Government to indicate in the Budget Address the basis on which it has avoided implementing any new fiscal initiatives,” Dr. Douglas said.
He noted that the oral presentation, because of its political style and lack of strategic substance, was actually very disrespectful to the audience which included the Church, the Business Sector, the Governor of the Eastern Caribbean Central Bank, our living National Hero, Ambassadors and representatives of foreign Governments and many proud citizens.
“I urge civil society and the public in general to resist this attempt to desecrate our Parliamentary and Democratic traditions and reduce the Budget session to a political or Town-hall meeting,” said the former prime minister and minister of finance.
“I urge you Mr. Speaker to give consideration to making a statement in relation this assault on our proud Parliamentary traditions. We must speak up now or the consequences for our country in terms of its ability to engage in constructive dialogue about fiscal and economic policy matters could be grave,” Dr. Douglas concluded.
There was no response from the Speaker.
