NEALS BUDGET FAILED TO EFFECT DISTRIBUTIVE EXPENDITURE IN ORDER TO ERADICATE INEQUALITY MADE WORSE BY COVID-19.
Budget failed to effect distributive expenditure and instead
continued the trickle down dream.
By Fundizwi Sikhondze
Inequality (Source: Online)
The budget speech read by Finance Minister Neal Rijkernberg
on 26th February 2021 demonstrated once more what many have always
feared around the country, that the government, made up of mainly business
operatives continues not doing much to balance the economic imbalances that afflict
the Eswatini society. The Minister of Finance instead chose to continue down
the beaten path of trickle-down economics.
The trickle-down economics doctrine basically entrusts
the private sector with correcting societal challenges that include poverty
reduction and unemployment reduction. In reality however the markets are never perfect
and thus may not give the expected result as any given moment. For instance,
where companies are supposed to hire more people to undertake certain services,
they can delay and not do the same, continue to use the current workforce if
when their profit margins improve.
This is primarily why trickle-down economics has been synonymous
with gross inequality globally because often the government has very little
power to intervene in order to resolve imbalances in the economic system.
Poverty and Inequality, particularly brought by the
COVID-19, has rendered urgent the need for intervention in order to improve the
conditions of the poor and those who are suffering as a result of not having
livelihoods because of COVID-19. The number of those adversely affected by the
economy keep growing by the day. Sunday newspapers (28/02/21) have reported
that the Happy Valley Hotel, in Ezulwini was retrenching around 76 employees.
These are the people going back to communities and who shall have not have any
income going forward.
Finance Minister Neal Rikjinberg (Source:www.observer.co.sz)
Unfortunately, Neal and his almost E24 Billion budget
again failed to rise to the occasion. While they seem to have responded to
calls to increase the existing grants by increasing the budget for the Old Age
Grant and the Disability Gran. The budget, however, did not provide for the
addition of all possible beneficiaries namely those who are living in poverty
and have been driven to poverty by the COVID-19 economy
One distribution mechanism that would have been
momentous to employ would have been the Basic Income Grant (BIG).
In one of its policy proposals in 2020 the United Nations
Development Programme (UNDP) had advised countries to consider implementing BIG
in order to assist vulnerable people to cope with effects of COVID-19. The UNDP
had suggested to governments that even if these measure were put up temporarily
it would be helpful to citizens in need. The IMF and World Bank had been
studying the effects of distributive expenditure on inequality and found that
there was correlation between distributive government expenditure and reduction
of inequality. The countries with the most equality in their socio economic
systems including Nordic countries such as Norway and Sweden have a high distributive
expenditure of more than 25% and above.
Given this reality, it is expected that inequality
shall deepen in the country.
We are in for a high jump with these financial woes. The government of Swaziland is the least bothered to bridge the inequality gap. The poor are ostracized by the negligence suffered where budgetary measures are concerned. It is quite worrying. There is no hope, capital projects are sucking out the marrow; yet making no attempts in providing hope for a resuscitated economy. Closure or retrenchment of workers in the hospitality industry yet billions are splashed on the ICC and Fish project- one of choice, leaves a lot to be desired. What is the use of such a structure which had been under construction for close to a decade? Why such exorbitant skip from initial budget. Who looks into the proper utilisation of funding for these capital projects? Is the government even worried about the implications of such expenditures? Why are investigations of inquiry for these spendings not instituted?
ReplyDelete