There is a Josephson Institute of Ethics in the USA which does studies and polls on morality and ethics. It did a study in 2000 as to how bad things have gotten in America. It found that nearly half of all high school students steal; seventy percent cheat at exams; ninety percent say they lie. And most of these kids felt no guilt at all. Remorse has become obsolete. What were the causes? Firstly, “cowardly parenting”; and, secondly, “a corrupt national leadership”.

I am certain that if such a study was conducted in Guyana today, the results would be similar. If any difference, then it would be as regards the percentages… they may be higher. Or, maybe, the placing of the causes.

Parents and politicians are presenting terrible examples to children in Guyana. Public misbehaviour by the powerful is soon drawn upon by young people who then regard it as orthodox behaviour. What this leads to? When there is no public morality, the nation perishes. Unless this slide is halted, Guyana will perish.

There is no indication that there will be a halt if the conduct of our Ministers is used as a yardstick.

What happened recently in the National Assembly 11th January 2010 revealed how bad things have gotten in Guyana. Ministers have been found confessing to contraventions of the law and seem not to have any feelings of guilt or any remorse whatsoever.

In 2003 our Legislature passed a most important statute making provision for management and accountability of Government’s financial affairs. The Constitution also has certain provisions dealing with these matters. By a combination of these two statutes, taxpayers’ monies are only to be expended and released in defined ways. Contraventions can realize criminal liability.

An illustration can better explain the point being made about the law and Ministerial misconduct here. And the Budget example will do nicely.

1) The Minister of Finance presents his Budget annually which details the Government proposed expenditure for the upcoming year based on his projection of the revenues that the country will receive. Before making his final decision, all Government agencies would submit their request for funding. This Budget is debated and approved by the National Assembly. Since the PPP/C Government has a majority, the Budget gets easy approval. Only upon such approval can monies be released from the Consolidated Fund for spending. Hence if a Budget fails to get the Assembly’s approval, spending cannot occur and a crisis is the result.

2) On occasions when what was initially budgeted for proves not to have been sufficient, the Government must go back to the National Assembly to seek approval for such amounts as to take care of the insufficiency which has arisen. This it must do through a Supplementary Appropriation. Like in the Budget in the beginning of the year, only when the Assembly approves the Supplementary Appropriation, must monies itemized there be released for spending.

3) On very exceptional occasions when there are emergencies and unforeseen circumstances will the Government, without approval of the Assembly, be allowed by the law to spend monies. This is called spending out of the Contingency Fund, specially set up for these necessitous circumstances. However, when this happens, the portfolio Minister or the Finance Minister must at the next following sitting of the Assembly, after such spending, inform the members of the Assembly of the amount and reasons for such a spending. Once approval is given the contingency Fund is then replenished to that said amount with monies from out of the Consolidated Fund.

4) The country’s fiscal year runs from 1st January to 31st December, and all unspent monies in a Ministry or agency after 31st December, 2009, must be returned to the Consolidated Fund.

Now, firstly, in the instance of the Prime Minister. Honourable PM Hinds applied for a Supplementary provision of $1B for his Ministry to spend on the electrification programme for the period ending December 2009. He earlier in the year 2009, March, had been given a substantial sum for the said purpose. The fact that he came for a Supplementary Provision meant that his initial budgeted sum was insufficient. So indeed he could come and once the further $1B was approved he then could have gone on to spend it for that purpose.

But he was asked the question whether this sum was not already released to his Office of Prime Minister and his response was”No!” That “all of it had gone to GPL”. Now this sum ought only to go to GPL after it was supposed to be approved by the Assembly. So whilst we were deliberating on the amount, it had already been disbursed. Our approval did not matter. This is criminal conduct by virtue of the penalty sections of the 2003 Act.

Secondly in the Housing Minister’s instance. Minister Irfaan Ali applied for a Supplementary provision of $4B for his Ministry to spend on housing development for the period ending 31st December. He, too, at the Budget earlier in 2009 had been given a huge amount for the said purpose. But there was an obvious shortfall since he came for a Supplementary provision of this magnitude.

When questioned as to when the monies will be released and spent, he said “it was already spent to provide houselots for the 17000 people the Government was giving homes to”. So again whilst we were deliberating on the amount and whether it should be approved by the Assembly, this sum of money had already been released and spent. This is criminal conduct!

And it appears that the Minister realized this after I quoted section 85 of the 2003 Act to him, because shortly thereafter, he held tightly to his right to remain silent behaving like a criminal suspect rather than a Minister. He just stopped answering any questions whatsoever.

Thirdly in the instance of Minister Westford, she took $15M out of the Contingency Fund to charter a plane called Vargas to transport students to Cuba. Indeed our students ought not to miss classes. But the Minister failed to report to the Assembly in accordance with the Statutory requirements, that is, at the following sitting of the Assembly. She was doing so in January 2010 when she had disbursed the $15M since early October 2009 and after five Parliamentary sittings. Should this kind of misconduct be condoned?

And have you noticed the spin being given to such criminality even by the President? At the Berbice outreach the argument was being made to the Berbicians how “Ramjattan and Trotman do not want Berbicians to get houselots and lights. They want you all to live in darkness. They want your children not to arrive in time in Cuba”.

How shameless can these administrators get? The Josephson Institute of Ethics should come do a study here in Guyana. As regards their ethics, our administrators would be found most bankrupt. And “brave parenting” will be advised as a way to rectify this bankruptcy. Are our parents ready for such parenting?

Please follow and like us: