Prime Minister Bruce Golding has announced that the Government is kicking some state agencies off the Budget. Bold move, but not going far enough and not without problems. And the prime minister has thrown down a challenge which, beneath the surface, is even more radical: He has advised members of Parliament who want more spent in a particular direction to say where cuts should be made since the laws of pie-sharing arithmetic cannot be broken.

A key difficulty which the Government faces in attempting to kick state agencies off the Budget is the constitutional fact that all income by public agencies belongs to the Consolidated Fund. There are a large number of Government agencies which can and now earn more than their keep but which must go cap in hand to the Consolidated Fund for budgetary support, having handed over 100 per cent of 'their' income. Some of these cash-cow agencies have been starved of resources even for adequate self-maintenance. How does the prime minister plan to get around the current situation?

Budget presentation

Contrary to the image of rationality and balance projected by the Budget presentation and debate, the Budget process is a mad scramble by budget-holding agencies to maintain and expand budget lines. Many of those budget lines, including some salary lines, are old and redundant. But without an over-arching philosophy of government and a strong determination to get out of the employment-provision business and clean house, agencies, budgets and employees survive to drain off public revenue without value for money. Forcing agencies to earn their keep, at least in part, is not only good for saving public revenue, but is good for improving their efficiency like businesses.

The question arises, though, as to what extent should citizens who are paying heavy taxes be forced to pay user fees for services delivered by state agencies. This Government has already decided that users of some state educational services and virtually all health services should not pay user fees. There have been many reasonable arguments that this is not sustainable, at least not with adequate quality.

Jamaicans are not averse to user fees if payment comes with quality, speed and efficiency. There is, in fact, massive under-the-table payment of user fees to get things done. Inefficiency feeds corruption. But we are, as the prime minister deeply understands, averse to more taxes on top of the present back-breaking burden which comes without sufficient quality, speed and efficiency in the delivery of public services. This month marks the 10th anniversary of the 1999 gas-tax protests.

The Patterson government introduced the Citizen's Charter programme, into which I poured a lot of volunteer effort, as a mechanism for improving public services in a business-like fashion, delivering high-quality service courteously with the user treated as customer with a right to redress. With the accompanying Public Sector Modernisation Programme, a number of state agencies were converted into executive agencies with the autonomy to sell their services and earn their keep. I have not seen a review of how well that model has worked.

State agencies

Crisis and opportunity are often two sides of the same coin. And timing is crucial, in politics more than most other areas. Right up there with the need to get state agencies off the Budget is the need to freeze and possibly cut the public-sector wage bill, the second-largest slice of the Budget pie after the debt. The prime minister, an astute political strategist, out-manoeuvred, outflanked and out-gunned the trade unions, one of which gave birth to his political party, in announcing a public-sector wage freeze - or job cuts - in his broadcast to the nation ahead of what he says is the toughest Budget presentation in which he has ever participated.

Union leaders kicked up the usual dust and fuss, bawling dictatorship, but quickly found themselves on the wrong side of public opinion and the opinion of their rank-and-file membership who understands the global economic crisis, a calculation which Golding had shrewdly made and tied to his own symbolic but politically potent salary cut. Only the silence of the Bustamante Industrial Trade Union (BITU) in the whole episode has been more conspicuous than the rapid retreat of the Confederation.

Elements of the chattering class and the political class have been proposing 'renegotiating' the domestic debt and not leaving poor people and workers to bear alone the costs of adjustments in the economic crunch. In fairness, I have not heard the pastured former finance minister, Dr Omar "Run Wid It" Davies, backing this proposition, a proposition which is full of danger. He knows better. The unfeeling Golding has said, "No!" "This Government is not insisting upon any negotiation of our domestic debt. We incurred a liability and we must prepare to stand up and fulfil our obligation."

The clear and present danger in messing with the debt does not require A-grade know-ledge of economics or human beha-viour to spot. The private financial institutions have lent to the Government depositors' money, yours and mine, not 'unowned' public money as from the multilaterals and bilaterals. Debt renegotiation has to mean a renegotiation of some sort with depositors also. If people lose confidence - and that is easier than ever under the present circumstances which have prompted the call - runs on financial institutions could quickly deve-lop - the 1929 crash scenario all over again. This would deliver a crisis which would make the present one look tame.

Cuts

The prime minister has challenged MPs, in Daddy-knows-best-fashion, to identify where cuts should take place in his Budget to finance their demands for more in other areas. MPs should not back away from the challenge. This is a golden opportunity for the Standing Finance Committee, which is the whole Parliament, to get down to serious work. Instead of wagging their tails and rubber-stamping the Golding Budget, they should shred it and build a new one responsive to the voices of 60 elected representatives of the people. In your dreams, Martin Henry, in your dreams!

Martin Henry is a communications consultant who may be reached at medhen@gmail.com or columns@gleanerjm.com.