|
2010 budget, some analyses are false - Osafo Marfo
Audrey Agyiri-Inkoom, Ghanadot
Accra, Nov 21, Ghanadot - Statement and Economic Policy for the
year 2010, may have been laid before parliament, but the debate
still rolls on, the latest to join in the fray is the former
Minister of Finance in the erstwhile NPP regime, Mr. Yaw Osafo
Marfo.
Mr. Osafo Marfo strongly argued that to totally rubbish off the
2010 Fiscal policy framework of government is not the best,
adding that there is no substance in the budget will be
disingenuous, insisting that whiles “some aspects of it are
good, other segments of the budget left much to be desired.”
In an interview on Peace FM, the former Finance Minister held
that technically, some of the analysis contained in the budget
are false. He also added that in the presentation of the 2010
budget statement, a comparison with last year’s (2009) budget
should have been done to ascertain whether certain economic
objectives were met.
“If you look at the inflation target, they were talking about
14.59% but they ended up at 18%, so it did not go down well.
“The growth target was 5.9% but it declined sharply to 4.7% and
that is dangerous, because the growth at the end of 2008 was
7.3% so if you contract (lessen) it to 4.7% in 12 months, then
it means you are increasing unemployment, you are not expanding
goods and services of the nation.”
The former Member of Parliament for Oda in the Eastern Region
opined that considering “the rate of unemployment in a country,
with about 25 universities churning out products by the day, it
is unwise to contract the economy”.
He also faulted government for “treating arrears as a deficit,
saying it does not make economic sense.”
“…some arrears have not been paid, so if your arrears have not
been paid, how do you add it to the expenditure line as if you
have spent it, you don’t add arrears to your deficit as if you
have spent the money….When you borrow…,if you have payment over
5 years, only one fifth of it will hit the expenditure. You
cannot use all the 100% to hit expenditure when you can borrow
to pay for only 20% to hit expenditure. That whole analysis is
false,” he added.
He said, “it’s also a matter of fact that proceeds from
divestiture must be recognized as revenue, but to say that
deficit excluding divestiture...it is wrong. You cannot exclude
divestiture proceeds from revenue.”
|
