25 March, 2019

Blog

Budget 2019 Should Not Fall Into The Pitfall Of being An Election Budget

By W.A. Wijewardena

Dr. W.A Wijewardena

Race to offer free goodies to voters in election years

The tradition in all developing countries has been that just before elections, politicians in power choose to offer the general public a host of unaffordable free goodies in the hope of winning their votes. Since voters expect them and politicians could offer them at no personal cost, this practice goes on unabated.

The corollary is the stunting of the growth momentum due to the allocation of scarce resources away from investment for unproductive consumption. Sri Lanka had had this experience ever since it became independent from the British in 1948.

Politicians wishing to bribe voters should bring money from homes

The Budget 2019 to be presented shortly in Parliament runs this risk because there are at least two elections in the pipeline. When an election is around the corner, the minister of finance is under pressure from his party colleagues to relax the tight budgetary controls which he had been following previously. On the side-line, the Central Bank also comes under increasing pressure to relax its monetary policy. Both measures, it is believed, will allow the government party members to go before the voters and demonstrate their people-friendliness.

However, a forgotten fact has been the reaction by the opposition parties to the goodies being proposed by the governing party. In order to win the voters away from the government party, they propose to double or treble the value of the goodies being proposed. For instance, if the government party proposes to provide employment in the government service, say, to 50,000 unemployed graduates, the opposition will come forward to absorb double that number to the government service.

This eternal battle to provide free goodies to the people at the expense of the taxpayers has cost Sri Lanka dearly in its past growth initiatives. For instance, during 1961-2017, its average annual economic growth amounted only to 4.8%. In comparison, Singapore which had followed the opposite economic policy of getting citizens to pay for better public services had maintained an average economic growth of 7.4% during this period.

The hard rule adopted by Singapore with respect to politicians willing to be good Samaritans, according to its first Finance Minister Dr. Goh Keng Swee, had been that if they wished to incur vote catching expenditure programmes, they should have brought money from their homes.

Present economic conditions unsuitable for budgetary relaxation

The current economic conditions and fiscal situation in Sri Lanka do not permit the Government to go willy-nilly in its finances. Economic growth has been slowing down from 2013. According to the projections by the World Bank in its recent Sri Lanka Development Update 2019, in the next three years, it would be on average a dismal 3.5%. The country is saddled with a massive debt repayment problem in which it has to spend more than what it earns to repay the principal and pay interest.

Though domestic debt could be rolled over by issuing new debt to the people, the Government cannot do the same for foreign debt since rolling over involves borrowing anew from foreign markets to repay the maturing debt. After the 52-day constitutional debacle toward the end of 2018 during which there was no government in the country, all the three rating agencies downgraded Sri Lanka’s credit rating, a warning issued to foreign investors that they should take a hard view on the country. So far, this has not been corrected.

In the absence of any new borrowing from external sources, the external debt that had matured in January in 2019 had to be repaid by using the country’s foreign exchange reserves. It cost a little more than $ 1 billion to Sri Lanka bringing down the freely available reserves to $ 5.2 billion when its next 12-month obligation of foreign debt repayments will amount to $ 5.9 billion.

The rupee had come under increasing pressure for depreciation and any holdup would have been possible only by releasing the borrowed dollars to the market. The budget is out of alignment with the targets agreed with the International Monetary Fund when the country got an Extended Fund Facility or EFF in 2016. The IMF has finally given one year’s breathing space to Sri Lanka by postponing the timeline of satisfying the achievement of targets till end 2020.

These tight fiscal targets are like cutting down the sugar supply to a diabetic so that it could build up its inner system to recover from the ailment. But, when more sugar is given to him through an election budget, there is no possibility for the patient to recover. This is the paradox faced by any minister of finance: he wants to cut the sugar supply but his colleagues and opposition parties force him to abandon the idea.

Sri Lanka is a republic of meta-beliefs 

Strangely, this situation is not known to those in the government as well as those in the opposition. Perhaps they are aware of it but pretend ignorance because it serves their purpose. That is because to remain in power or to come to power they should keep the electorate supplied with as many free goodies as possible. In making the choice, they could always sacrifice the future prosperity for short-term immediate gains. The population is also attuned to this mentality perfectly through successful ‘blind faith building’.

When a society as a whole believes that it can live comfortably without doing anything, it is called a meta-belief and if anyone who writes or argues against it, he is considered as a freak. The underlying rationale is that if my neighbour can live comfortably out of the free goodies supplied by the government, why should not I too enjoy them? It does not matter whether I am myself paying for it and what the politicians do is to organise it formally to collect it from me and give back to me. I do not see the reality that the cost is collected from me. I have been made to believe that it is collected from rich citizens and therefore, it is perfectly normal to get them to share wealth with me.

It is then engraved into a right: right to free education, right to a government job, right to free health services, right to a vehicle and so on. The whole of the Sri Lankan society from top to the bottom or across lives with a set of unchangeable meta-beliefs. Hence, Sri Lanka is not just a Democratic Socialist Republic; it is a Democratic Socialist Republic of Meta-Beliefs.

Politicians too contribute to perpetuate the belief system

These meta-beliefs were initially installed in the mindset of the citizenry by the country’s political leadership for personal gain. Then, the leadership soon found that while pampering to these meta-beliefs, it too can function as an extractive institution. Accordingly, the political leadership became a benevolent dictator functioning under the realms of democracy. As a rule, a free goodie is first given to people posing as if they are being helped out; then, it is helped out to politicians too. Thus, when free vehicle permits were granted to public servants to satisfy ‘a right’, it was offered to legislators too as a right. When the public servants began to sell those vehicles or vehicle permits to appropriate to themselves the duty-free allowance foregone by the government, legislators also followed the suit. Now it is believed to be a right and therefore, no one would consider it as an instance of misappropriation of public faith.

This is only one instance of building meta-beliefs in Sri Lanka’s society. There are many more that are encompassing the socio-politico-economic system of the country. Anyone attempting to change them would surely have to face acrimonious objections coming from all quarters of society.

Society cannot rob from itself into prosperity

But, it is an instance of society robbing from itself to have a good life. Can I rob from one pocket of my trousers and become richer by putting it into another pocket? Surely not. The secret to become richer is working harder than before and not by transferring money from one pocket to another. This rule is valid for the entire society as well.

Without working and merely relying on government free goodies, nobody could upgrade his conditions. But, then, why do people harbour this meta-belief within them? That is because they are told that moneys are taken from the rich and transferred to others.

When Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi decided to demonetise the high value currency notes, the reason given was that the rich had been hoarding their wealth in those high value notes and by demonetising them, they would be forced to hand them over to the banking system, enabling the Government to redistribute the same among the poor. Any policy presented suggesting redistribution of wealth from the rich to the poor could easily be sold to the people at large because they believe that it is possible.

But in the Indian demonetisation exercise, it is now revealed, it is the poor who had suffered and not the rich people.

In reality, the poor are the payers

But in actual practice, it is the poor people who are either victimised or have to bear the true costs of such redistribution. Take for example, inflation. Inflation hits most severely those who are unable to adjust themselves to the expected inflation. They are able to protect their assets from the harmful effect of inflation by either transferring into other assets or by simply taking money out of the country. Those who just sit without doing anything will have to bear the full brunt of inflation.

The rich people normally insulate themselves from inflation by transferring their assets into real estate, gems, gold or foreign exchange. The poor people who do nothing will have to experience a reduction in the real value of the assets they are holding. It is on them that the full burden of inflation is normally placed.

Grade Five Scholarship Scheme works against the poor

Another example has been provided by researchers at the Institute of Policy Studies or IPS with regard to the real beneficiaries of the Grade Five Scholarship Examination being conducted by the educational authorities in Sri Lanka. The purpose of the examination has been to permit the students in less privileged schools in remote areas to gain admission to good schools in the city and those in poor families to get a bursary to support their studies. But Ashani Abayasekara, a researcher at IPS, has found that both goals are not being fulfilled by the way the examination is conducted in Sri Lanka.

The examination is extremely competitive and to gain the pass mark which is around 80% per subject, a student has to compulsorily attend tuition classes from Grade 2 onwards. Only the middle and the rich classes can afford to do so. Thus, by natural selection, the students from poor families cannot score the pass mark. Then, a half of those who get the pass marks are those who are from good schools. They do not have to change the school after passing the examination.

Another reason that has gone against the poor as observed by Abayasekara has been the threshold limit of the income to be eligible for a bursary. That income standing at Rs. 50,000 per family per annum is too low an income, disqualifying many of the poor students from the scholarship since they have no means of paying for the tuition fees for three years to get a good score at the examination. Even if they become eligible for a bursary, it is nothing much since the bursary amounts only to Rs. 500 or $ 2.50 a month. Hence, a public expenditure programme aiming at helping the poor has indeed gone against the poor.

Growth is stunted by the free goodie system 

Thus, offering free goodies is a poor way of helping the poor. But it brings in the adverse consequence of misallocating resources from investment to unproductive consumption. Studies on growth dynamics in Sri Lanka have revealed that the main driver of economic growth in the country has been the accumulation of capital arising from high investments, supported by increases in productivity. A budget aiming at winning elections by offering free goodies to people will impede both capital formation and improvement in productivity.

Hence, in the long run, the country loses. Then, what about the short run? In the short run too, the country loses because when one party offers one set of free goodies, the opposition party seeks to better it by offering more goodies. Thus, the government that makes the initial offer loses because it cannot win the faith of the voters. The country loses because we are producing a nation that believes that it can rob from itself into prosperity. At national level, such a thing is not possible.

As such, the Budget 2019 should not fall into the pitfall of being an election budget.

 *W.A. Wijewardena, a former Deputy Governor of the Central Bank of Sri Lanka, can be reached at waw1949@gmail.com

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Latest comments

  • 2
    0

    Half of Sri Lankan revenues go to pay off interest & loans borrowed for Mega projects… Unsustainable (development projects.). another potion of revenues are looted by politicians from local government, provincial council & parliament MPs, and we will have some more left you budget, we should borrow more and more,, until Sri Lanka become financially bankrupt.
    70 years are not enough for UNP & SLPF, why not try JVP for at least 5 years,, what is wrong with people of Sri Lanka. why people still live in a stone age..

    • 2
      0

      Dear Critical Thinking,
      .
      Will the JVP run a candidate for President? Either they or Nagananda Kodituwakku will get first preference from me. That will definitely be counted.
      .
      It’s very unlikely that anyone will know where my Second Preference had gone. Let’s hope it goes down to the wire and that my third preference decides the outcome. That’s too dramatic; it may contribute.

  • 3
    0

    Dear Dr. Wijewardena,

    PART ONE

    You are one man whom perceptive readers respect and pay heed to. Despite all the warnings by you, the budget will promise “goodies” of various sorts and the other major party will promise to double it. Finally what is promised to the poor is extended to some category seen right now as government stooges, and at the end of the process, it is the same handful of corrupt politicians who benefit most. He has concluded that strand of reasoning with this:
    .
    Now it is believed to be a right and therefore, no one would consider it as an instance of misappropriation of public faith”.

    Dr Wijewardena has not rested with analysing the economy. He has suggested other leaders who may provide an alternative. Of course, he’s not omniscient; some of those whom he recommends may not be what they show themselves to be. And those messages of his may not get through the foolish voters who matter. It may be that I am another such fool.
    .
    However, what I suggest is that even right now, we look beyond 2020. As I have said, let us understand that the fools are not “some other uneducated people” – it may include us.
    .
    By election time, for the Presidency, all know that the tussle to be actual President is between two crooks. Let each of us vote for the guy who is slightly less odious. However, let it not be your first preference.
    .
    Now we come to the point I made about smug me being one of the fools. However, I realise something: ask yourself if you know it:
    .
    To be continued:

  • 2
    0

    Dear Dr Wijewardena,
    .
    If you know that you can cast three preferences, then you are better informed than 99% of our voters. I ask</ each reader to answer that question honestly.
    .
    If you do, what we have to ensure is that the next “crook-President” should be elected without getting 50% of the votes cast. So far, this has not happened; but this is a definite possibility. One got elected with just 50.4%. Can a reader tell all others who that was, and in which year? Also, can you tell me how many minds had to be changed for, I’m sure, the same person to be elected, but only after the counting of preferences?
    .
    Tell as many voters as possible, that they can get the guy who for them is less odious, but only as second preference. The guys who have to be told include English-speaking people who smugly imagine that they are educated.
    .
    Boycotting the polls or spoiling the vote is something that the main candidates would like from the better-informed voters. That is not the solution.
    .
    The solution is to cast your first preference (it may be even the second, but the first would do), for an honest candidate then cast a vote for the crook whom you are resigned to see elected. If just 10% of the voters do this, there’s bound to be a second count. Then, during that count, the majority of voters will, at last, understand the system.
    .
    The benefits of getting this done will not be obvious in 2020; they may, at last, be seen in 2025.

  • 0
    0

    An in-depth analysis of the current trend and the situation of our country’s economic situation by sighting examples and valuable information gave us the true picture.
    Dr. W.A Wijewardena is certainly a veteran in budgeting and financial management of the country is undoubtedly an asset. In the name of the country, the politicians of this country should sit together shedding all differences to draft a master plan to make our country self-sufficient and sustainable. There are too many issues hampering the economy of our country should be identified and address them meaningfully. At least if we are able to maintain 5% growth for the next three years would put us on a sustainable path.

  • 0
    0

    In democratic countries the world over, the opposition party constantly is on the prowl trying to wrest power off the ruling party through elections. If there were to be elections round the corner, lay-persons expect an election year budget.
    How can SL be different Dr W A W?

  • 0
    0

    Conventional economics are not very relevant in poor countries where governments do not develop policies based on economic rationality. Thus, as the author points out, the poor people (by far the largest group) often bear the full brunt of corruption at the top, the foreign debt burden, galloping inflation in consumer goods and services and the depreciation of the local currency against major world currencies. As an authority on banking and finance, how has the author influenced national economic policy over the years, except in writing to CT?

Leave A Comment

Comments should not exceed 300 words. Embedding external links and writing in capital letters are discouraged. Commenting is automatically shut off on articles after 10 days and approval may take up to 24 hours. Please read our Comments Policy for further details. Your email address will not be published.