Tweet
Open enquiry into alternative investment schemes, Bunting challenges Gov't
ALICIA DUNKLEY, Observer staff reporter dunkleya@jamaicaobserver.com
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Opposition spokesman on industry and commerce, Peter Bunting, yesterday challenged the Jamaica Labour Party Government to begin an enquiry into the operations of alternative investment schemes, hinting that some of these schemes might have given financial backing to political parties as well as individuals to defend them.
Making his contribution to the 2008/09 Budget Debate in Gordon House in Kingston, Bunting said "responsible persons must have the courage to speak the truth and not be part of any conspiracy of silence or any public relations spin".
"I believe it would be appropriate to enquire into the operations of alternative investment schemes. Let us learn how much of the public's money these schemes gave to political parties.
"Let us hear how many persons speaking or writing in their defence were actually benefitting financially from doing so. Let the chips fall where they may," Bunting said.
He also took Finance Minister Audley Shaw to task for what he said was his "deafening silence" on the alternative investment schemes in his budget presentation last week, despite having spoken "in defence of these schemes last January in the House... in stark contrast to responsible players in the financial sector who warned the public about the risks and dangers of these schemes".
According to Bunting, reports suggest that since a statement by Shaw in support of such schemes, which "considerably confused the situation, membership in one collapsed entity grew from 4,000 to over 40,000".
"Does the minister feel a sense of responsibility towards these persons, many of whom gave their life savings at risk?" Bunting asked. "The money in the schemes is reported to be tens of billions of dollars."
In the meantime, he also chastised the Government for presenting what he said was a budget chock-full of "populist agenda items", namely "free health care, free education and 100 per cent salary increases".
"The idea of freeness can always be relied on to provide some popular response... I believe this is bad public policy," Bunting said.
In criticising the free health care initiative which came into effect on April 1 and saw the removal of user fees at public hospitals and clinics, Bunting said "public opinion polls do not show health care as a pressing issue of national concern relative to unemployment, crime and galloping food prices".
"The National Health Fund and the Jamaica Drug for the Elderly Programme are already making a tremendous impact on expanding access to drugs and medications; therefore, why was this freeness initiative necessary?" Bunting asked.
He also said the idea of relieving parents of the responsibility of paying tuition fees for their offspring was a retrograde step.
"The Government should play a supplemental role... and may even have to play a principal role where necessary to compensate for market and personal failures, but it should not, from the outset, assert a paternalistic type of responsibility," Bunting argued.
He also took the Government to task for being 'silent' on the level of inflation which stood at close to 20 per cent at the end of the 2007 fiscal year in March.
"The Government has sought generally to take a hands-off approach to inflation, blaming it on imported costs of food and energy. However, when we compare our rate of inflation to other Caricom countries it is revealing," Bunting charged.
According to Bunting, Prime Minister Bruce Golding, who has portfolio responsibility for the Statistical Institute of Jamaica and the Planning Institute of Jamaica, should explain why Jamaica's rate of inflation was more than twice the Caricom average, even though those countries are subject to the same imported food and energy factors.
ALICIA DUNKLEY, Observer staff reporter dunkleya@jamaicaobserver.com
Thursday, April 17, 2008
Opposition spokesman on industry and commerce, Peter Bunting, yesterday challenged the Jamaica Labour Party Government to begin an enquiry into the operations of alternative investment schemes, hinting that some of these schemes might have given financial backing to political parties as well as individuals to defend them.
Making his contribution to the 2008/09 Budget Debate in Gordon House in Kingston, Bunting said "responsible persons must have the courage to speak the truth and not be part of any conspiracy of silence or any public relations spin".
"I believe it would be appropriate to enquire into the operations of alternative investment schemes. Let us learn how much of the public's money these schemes gave to political parties.
"Let us hear how many persons speaking or writing in their defence were actually benefitting financially from doing so. Let the chips fall where they may," Bunting said.
He also took Finance Minister Audley Shaw to task for what he said was his "deafening silence" on the alternative investment schemes in his budget presentation last week, despite having spoken "in defence of these schemes last January in the House... in stark contrast to responsible players in the financial sector who warned the public about the risks and dangers of these schemes".
According to Bunting, reports suggest that since a statement by Shaw in support of such schemes, which "considerably confused the situation, membership in one collapsed entity grew from 4,000 to over 40,000".
"Does the minister feel a sense of responsibility towards these persons, many of whom gave their life savings at risk?" Bunting asked. "The money in the schemes is reported to be tens of billions of dollars."
In the meantime, he also chastised the Government for presenting what he said was a budget chock-full of "populist agenda items", namely "free health care, free education and 100 per cent salary increases".
"The idea of freeness can always be relied on to provide some popular response... I believe this is bad public policy," Bunting said.
In criticising the free health care initiative which came into effect on April 1 and saw the removal of user fees at public hospitals and clinics, Bunting said "public opinion polls do not show health care as a pressing issue of national concern relative to unemployment, crime and galloping food prices".
"The National Health Fund and the Jamaica Drug for the Elderly Programme are already making a tremendous impact on expanding access to drugs and medications; therefore, why was this freeness initiative necessary?" Bunting asked.
He also said the idea of relieving parents of the responsibility of paying tuition fees for their offspring was a retrograde step.
"The Government should play a supplemental role... and may even have to play a principal role where necessary to compensate for market and personal failures, but it should not, from the outset, assert a paternalistic type of responsibility," Bunting argued.
He also took the Government to task for being 'silent' on the level of inflation which stood at close to 20 per cent at the end of the 2007 fiscal year in March.
"The Government has sought generally to take a hands-off approach to inflation, blaming it on imported costs of food and energy. However, when we compare our rate of inflation to other Caricom countries it is revealing," Bunting charged.
According to Bunting, Prime Minister Bruce Golding, who has portfolio responsibility for the Statistical Institute of Jamaica and the Planning Institute of Jamaica, should explain why Jamaica's rate of inflation was more than twice the Caricom average, even though those countries are subject to the same imported food and energy factors.
ing!
Comment