Before his first budget in 2006, Rama Sithanen identified four possible ways of tackling the economic problems of Paradise Island: 1/ an increase in borrowing which would inevitably increase the budget deficit 2/ an increase in Value Added Tax 3/ a more efficient control of public expenditure and the elimination of gaspillaz 4/ a programme of reforms to aim for an annual growth rate of 6 to 7%. He abandoned options 1 and 2 as politically and economically unsustainable and, much to his credit, has largely achieved the aims of option 4. The budget deficit has been reduced from 6% to a more manageable 3.8% but we still devote far too much of our income on servicing the loans that successive governments have imposed on us.

What about option 3, with its pretentiously impressive battle cry against gaspillaz? Zero plonbaz is, I am afraid, the rhyming expression to best describe a battle that has never been taken seriously by any of our governments since independence. Sithanen has failed to even touch any of the areas that most of us talk about angrily on a daily basis; in particular, he has failed to:

1/ drastically reduce the budget for so called missions abroad for politicians and their appointees and civil servants. Most of these so called missions have never provided any benefits to this country and are merely symptomatic of the patronage system of government where the rulers dish out airline tickets bought with our money to that bunch of misfits known as nou bann.

2/ Reform the scandalous per diem allowance system and implement procedures for expenses to be reimbursed only on production of receipts. How can it be right, for example, for our High Commissioners to go 'on mission' to Mauritius and claim per diem allowances when they are staying at their own residences?

3/ What on earth is an 'entertainment' allowance? He ought to get rid of this symbol of self indulgence and instead allow a reasonable amount to be paid on production of receipts to only a small number of people, as opposed to the current largesse to anyone who believes that sycophancy is the most cherished of human qualities.

4/ Install movement-sensitive lights in all government departments so that the criminal wastage of energy is reduced to a minimum. This system will pay for itself within a year by the enormous savings generated by simply ensuring that offices are lit up only when the staff is there. Allocate funds for the government to build its own offices rather than wasting Rs 450 millions every year renting from people who are no doubt very close to the politicians. If a cold country like Germany can make its Reichstag the greenest parliament building in the world by relying solely on renewable energy, what is stopping Paradise Island from exploiting the year long sunshine and wind that we get in abundant quantity?

5/ Remove all subsidies and grants to all religious groups, as that money inevitably ends up in the deep pockets of those who shout loudest about God. It is not the job of a government in a supposedly secular society to fund the religious beliefs and practices of its citizens.

6/ Remove the numerous subsidies that benefit the middle classes and the rich. It will take enormous courage and integrity to abolish a system of privileges that simply does not exist anywhere else in the world. No other country allows its richer citizens the obscene luxury of buying brand new cars at duty free prices; those poor pets who get a chauffeur driven limousine at our expense are also allowed to buy another car at duty free prices! No other country entitles its workforce a set number of sick days every year regardless of the fitness of the person for work. Other so called droits acquis like 'passage allowance', 'traveling allowance' irrespective of your mode of transport, and a whole gamut of other allowances that have turned into immutable rights need to be reformed drastically and most of them jettisoned during this economic emergency. It is no use blaming the 1987 Chessworth Report for this obscene level of public expenditure that considerably favours the well off at the expense of the poor. It was the political class that took the decision to implement what in effect are political bribes.

7/ Reform the policy that allows so many individuals unlimited use of mobile phones at our expense. Some ministers and their advisers in the last government had phone bills of over Rs 400,000 each and no amount of self serving justification can possibly explain such a frivolous and criminal waste of public fund.

8/ Why does every contract drawn by ministers for their political appointees include the proviso that their nominee will also benefit from a 3 months salary bonus every December, irrespective of the level of performance? Who was the ministerial idiot who thought that giving two or three business class return air tickets at our expense every year to these appointees was an act of patriotism?

9/ Order the STC to impose a price for petrol and diesel that reflects its true cost, which is precisely the job it is legally required to do. It is not up to the STC to decide whether price fluctuations are politically acceptable or not. Berenger ought to be thoroughly ashamed of himself for once again shedding crocodile tears over the miniscule amount of taxation that the government has imposed on petrol; how can this man talk with such a straight face about the environment when he pretends he cannot see the damage caused to all of us by keeping petrol/diesel at such an artificially low price compared to the rest of the world? Is there anything that he won't say for the sake of some cheap votes?

10/ Do as Evo Morales did in Bolivia and reduce the salaries and expenses of all ministers, politicians, heads of the numerous authorities in existence, and all senior officials. Ensure that the State does not pay anyone more than it pays the President of the country, who is already on a massive, tax free salary anyway. It is immoral to simply expect the poor and less well-off to suffer the consequences of any austerity measures whilst the gro paleto continue to wallow in an obscene luxury that is funded by the rest of us.

Unfortunately, the recent pay awards by the National Pay Council (NPC) and the Pay Research Bureau (PRB) have gone to show that those who earn the most will again receive by far the highest increases. The logic and humanity of such pay awards escapes me: How can it be fair that the hungry person earning up to Rs6,500 monthly will get an extra Rs300 whilst those earning way above that level will receive an extra Rs 400? Has hunger shrunk his stomach so much that a smaller amount of money is deemed sufficient to meet his requirements? It is really quite amazing that Bijaye Coomar Appanah, the PRB Director, cannot find anything wrong in awarding some people a Rs 60,000 monthly increase whilst a large number at the other end of the pay scale are supposed to be ecstatic over a Rs2,000 increase.

It is generally accepted that a far greater proportion of the wages of the poor goes towards the purchase of food. A recent study by the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD) and the UN Food and Agriculture Organisation (FAO) claimed that the era of cheap and plentiful food was over and that high world food prices will continue for at least a decade. Angel Gurria, the OECD's Secretary-General, said that "most agricultural commodity prices over the next ten years will still exceed the average of the previous decade by 10 to 50 per cent... current high priceswill hit the poor and hungry people hardest."

What measures can Sithanen take to alleviate the impact of high food and energy prices on the poor? Equity demands that the funds for helping the disadvantaged should come from those who can afford it, and it is therefore gratifying to note that he does not plan to increase the rate of VAT, a tax that hits the poor disproportionately. At the risk of again making Berenger's leker fermal, I can see no greater moral imperative on fiscal, social, and environmental grounds than imposing a substantial duty on petrol/diesel and using that money to control the increase in prices of basic foodstuff and to improve our calamitous road infrastructure. Sithanen could also replenish the treasury coffers by subjecting luxury items to a much higher VAT rate; it would be interesting to find out the reasons, if he has any valid ones, behind his decision to drastically reduce duty for the super rich in his last budget. He should have another look at the campement tax issue and understand that it is wrong and unjust to charge the 1288 'official' campement sites the new rates whilst the remaining 7,000 so called building, commercial, industrial, socio cultural, agricultural, etc leases go for next to nothing. The fact that most of these leases have been taken by politicians and their friends will hopefully not detract Sithanen from his oft stated desire to obtain value for money…There is a huge sum of money here which could and should be used to, for example, subsidise solar heaters and low energy light bulbs in order to start the campaign to turn Paradise Island into a Green Island, and to reduce our dependence on an oil that is likely to reach $200 per barrel within the next few years.

There are many other measures that Sithanen could take in order to ensure a more equitable society. The two biggest killers in our society, alcohol and tobacco, are sold at prices that discourage people's desire to give them up. Will he increase the duty on those two poisons and follow the lead of Australia where an increase in alcohol and tobacco prices has resulted in a significant rise in people giving them up altogether? All it demands is the courage to withstand the pressure and predictable jibes from an opposition that is quick at criticizing but remains stuck in the starting stalls when it comes to making firm proposals for the betterment of our society.

If progressive politics mean anything, it is the core belief that we should not inherit our life chances at birth and instead our opportunities should depend on our efforts and not on some dynastic connection. It is therefore incumbent on everyone who believes in a fair society to make the case for a fair and progressive tax system to ensure opportunities are made equal. Inheritance tax is one of the few tools that directly reduces inherited inequalities. Much of the opposition to inheritance tax is based on misinformation. There is a public perception that this is an unfair tax that would directly affect large sections of the population. In fact, taking the UK as an example, only the very richest have paid it - around 5.4% of estates. Will Sithanenintroduce this tax in his budget and perhaps use the money raised to build the Firinga type housing so desperately needed by our homeless?

Sithanen can really make a name for himself by simply doing the decent thing, i.e. doing the things that no other minister of finance has done through lack of courage. He must surely be aware that the one thing that unites this population is its universal condemnation of gaspillaz. Has he got the bottle to tackle this problem head on? Or will he adopt the favoured position of the ostrich and hope that the problem will vanish if left alone?

If I was to take a bet, I would gamble heavily on the chances that the next budget will do nothing to reduce the gaspillaz. A change of mentality is required and I am afraid this generation of politicians has given us enough proof that the only thing that matters to them is its own interest.  

Once again, the poor will be left behind in this country where almost all its politicians claim to be socialists.

R.A.J.
Email: servipei@yahoo.com