SHARP BARBS, repartee and hectoring are common features of Parliaments all over the world, but there is a thin line between pointed responses and the kind of undignified behaviour one would expect on platforms by politicians on the hustings. Members on both sides of the House came pretty close to behaving like fishwives early yesterday afternoon. We would urge them to resist the temptation to go down that road.
On the broader issues of the Prime Minister's intervention, Mrs. Simpson Miller's speech was long on presentation, high on emotion at points, yet lacking in real substance.
While the main point of her speech was the outline of a raft of job creation schemes supposedly designed to "balance people's lives" and apparently to be undergirded with money from the Urban Development Corporation and supported by the National Insurance Fund and the National Housing Trust, there was precious little information on the specifics of how this is to be done. She stated how much was expected to be spent on specific construction projects, but the country was not told, for example, how much money was going to be withdrawn from either the NHT or NIF.
WAITING TO HEAR A VISION
The Prime Minister read her script relatively well, but the nation is still waiting to hear of a vision of sustainable projects that will go beyond building a few hundred housing units for the short term or renovating some attractions in tourism resorts. We need to hear more for example about the urban renewal programme on which $23 million is to be spent.
The Finance Minister's presentation last month indicated that this year's budget is to be funded essentially by external and domestic borrowing. This reflected the real dilemma confronting the country where the already high indebtedness has forced us into even tighter financial straits. Social intervention programmes to relieve the plight of the indigent and others at the bottom of the social and economic ladder are necessary. But while the extensive crash programmes for lower-income workers may offer some temporary relief, what will the long-term benefit be without productive enterprises to sustain them?
Mrs. Simpson Miller's presentation did not sufficiently outline a broad vision of where she wants to take the country, of the practical ways in which we can get there and more importantly, why we should throw our support behind the Government. The generalisations outlined yesterday fell short of what the country needs at this time.
THE OPINIONS ON THIS PAGE, EXCEPT FOR THE ABOVE, DO NOT NECESSARILY REFLECT THE VIEWS OF THE GLEANER.
