D.K. Duncan THE PARLIAMENT of Jamaica is fast asleep. To support this conclusion, it is useful to revisit Balford Henry's commentary of April 20, 2003 in The Sunday Gleaner, entitled "So What Happened To The Moses Report?"
The unfortunate series of events related to the current taxation package as well as the last two Budgets presented by the Finance Minister reinforce this conclusion. It points to the need, long overdue, to re-engineer our political system specifically as it relates to the role of Parliament and its nexus with the Cabinet.
Henry reminds us that the Moses Committee set up because of the events surrounding the 1999 Gas Riots recommended that "it should no longer be possible for taxes (or any other measure affecting the lives of the people) to be imposed without prior debate and approval of the Legislature". Prior debate would include "pre-Budget consultations with different sectors of the people, through the media and in face to face meetings in which Government would outline the broad options it may be considering with respect to the revenue and expenditure measures". This recommendation was partially effected through the establishment of two parliamentary committees.
TAXATION COMMITTEE
TRANSPARENCY
The Leader of the House announced in February 2001 that a Standing Committee to deal specifically with taxation, to be chaired by the Speaker, was agreed on. The House also decided that the Minister of Finance should brief the members of the Standing Finance Committee of Parliament all 59 of them on the budget including the possible quantum of taxation that would be required and the likely sources. This should take place approximately three months before the tabling of the Estimates. For the 2003 Budget this should have been done in early January this year.
This decision has not been carried out by the Parliament. The Speaker of the House as well as the Finance Minister should clarify this before the end of the debate on Wednesday. In his contribution to the debate, the Leader of the Opposition promised to take up the matter of taxation measures with the "Budget Committee". He agreed that "the committee should have met before the announcement of the new taxes". He also has to provide some explanation as to why the Opposition had not called for these decisions to be implemented prior to the debate. The untidiness associated with the announcement of the main revenue measures the GCT and the Cess on Imports is just a manifestation of a dysfunctional Parliament. If the Parliament was more than just an extension of the Cabinet, it might have paid attention to the tasks it had set itself. A severing of the tribal umbilical cord that joins the Executive to the Legislature is a necessary precondition for transparency and accountability in our Parliament.
APPROPRIATIONS COMMITTEE ACCOUNTABILITY
To give further effect to its role as an oversight body, a second committee was also announced in February, 2001. This Appropriations Committee was to submit quarterly reports on the implementation of the Budget to the whole House during the year. At least one quarterly report was due after July 31, 2002. Such a report might have given the public and the Opposition an insight into the Budget Deficit fiasco before the elections of October 2002. Furthermore, the real prospect of serious quarterly monitoring could have concentrated the mind of the Finance Minister forcing him to stick to the fiscal targets he had set, or at least disclosing information on the rising deficit. It may also have prevented the need for such a heavy taxation burden now facing the public.
Had the Government and the Opposition put in action the two committees they themselves had agreed on then Earl Bartley writing in The Sunday Gleaner might not have found it necessary to describe the 2003 Budget as an impeachable offence. While having its place, Impeachment is a sanction. What we need are systemic changes which promote independent action by the Parliament while requiring both transparency and accountability.
Quoting Shearson Lehman Brothers a recent "Landmark Education Corporation" document asserts "Accountability is taking responsibility before the fact rather than after the fact... When those who are accountable are right, they take the credit when they are wrong, they take the heat".
The buck stops with the Prime Minister. He speaks in the Budget Debate today. One Love. One Heart.
A dental surgeon, Dr. D.K. Duncan is a former General Secretary and Minister of Government in the PNP administration of the 1970s.
