‘Government policy is inconsistent’
Our reporter FATSANI GUNYA speaks to the chairperson of the Parliamentary Budget and Finance Committee, RHINO CHIPHIKO (Malawi Congress Party – Lilongwe City South West), to seek his views on the Mid-Term Budget Review which was presented in Parliament a fortnight ago.
How do you react to the Mid-Term Budget Review statement made by Minister of Finance Goodall Gondwe a fortnight ago in the House?
The 2015/16 Mid-Term Budget Review was a mixed bag because of its genesis; that is, the current budget which is being implemented under difficult circumstances. In September, 2015 the House approved total revenue and grants of K764 billion and total expenditures (including net lending) of K924 billion, implying a planned budget deficit of K160 billion. At the mid-year, total revenues and grants amounted to K337 billion representing 44 percent of approved estimates. In contrast, the total expenditure amounted to K386.1 billion representing 42 percent of the approved estimates. Therefore, at mid-year the budget deficit stood at K111.1 billion which is 70 percent of the approved estimates. At mid-year government borrowed K4.3 billion against an approved amount of K58.2 billion which is very commendable.
On budget revision, the minister has proposed to increase the total resource envelope (revenues and grants) by 2.8 percent from K764 billion to K785 billion. The bulk of this increase is on account of grants from donors which are expected to grow by 38 percent from K97 billion to K130 billion. Domestic revenues have been reduced by K12.4 billion. The minister has proposed a decrease in total expenditure of 2.5 percent from K924 billion to K900 billion.
In essence, my comment can be that of concern knowing that government policy on grants and donor support is inconsistent. At the time of approving the budget the Minister insisted that the country’s budget is zero aid but what turned out is that the donors have increased their support by the mid-year. What is happening is that the donors are funding specific programmes and not unexciting giving hard cash into the budget. It is worrying that the development budget, which was already thin, has been underfunded by K5 billion confirming our early assertion that the budget was a “consumption budget”.
There seem to be continued tension in the House, which can be traced to the time when government arrested two opposition MPs recently. Do you think this is having an effect on the deliberations in the House?
You are right that there’s a bit of a tension in the House but not directly related to the arrests of opposition MPs. The tension is mainly because the government side is not making contributions in the deliberations. It is sad that the government side has become very defensive. All they are doing is to sit and watch any moves that the opposition is coming up with. Tension increases when discussing “sacred votes” like State residences and Office of the President and Cabinet. The government side is not comfortable to discuss these votes and every time issues or questions come up from the opposition side, government starts making noise. Of specific concern and pertinent was the cut in the allocation to the Ministry of Education. This raised a lot of tension in the House because the opposition felt it did not make sense to reduce resources to an already underfunded sector where most of the children in schools are learning under hard conditions in most rural schools. It was sad to learn that the ministry failed to utilise resources allocated to it at mid-year.
Some commentators have always bemoaned the lack in depth in the contribution to the debates by the MPs in the House, due to ‘blind loyalty’. How do you respond to such claims?
The observations are correct. Whilst some opposition MPs make tangible contributions, it is surprising that some MPs from government side who always make good contributions are sitting silently. This is because of the caucuses that the government sides are conducting every day after suspending proceedings. At these caucuses members are told what to do and say. This is the major reason why they sit idle and silent all the time. However, this is all politics. It’s like a football game where there are two sides and you don’t get supporters of the opposing side clapping hands for good plays by the counterparts. It is bad for the citizens of this country who elect us to go to Parliament. They expect to get more than they are getting at the moment.
Why do you think our Parliamentarians tend to resort to political bickering instead of tackling real issues in the House?
Caucuses destroy individual thinking. This is the major reason for the decline in retention of MPs during elections. Whenever there is a budget session, various sectors tend to court parliamentary committees—including your Budget and Finance Committee—through dinners to help them lobby for increased funding towards their respective sectors and yet we rarely see results on the ground.
