The devil is in the detail when it comes to the Budget and the beauty of the Budget Debate is that MPs are given the time to examine Government accounts a.k.a. the Estimates of Revenue and Expenditure — and in detail should they wish. In fact, a total of some 56 hours is set aside for the annual exercise; usually over two weeks, starting Monday meeting three days a week. You might think that sufficient. Maybe. It all depends on how well our MPs organise themselves, whether they are prepared to, well, you know, actually collaborate to make it work, not just for themselves but for us the taxpayers and ultimately the country.

You think I exaggerate. Not so. Let me give you an example of what could and, in my view, should be done. Government has announced there will a $70-million cut back in spending for the coming year. We are also told there will not be any job losses. Okay, so where are the cuts going to occur? Who will feel them the most? Are the cuts the right ones? Fair questions, the answers to which voters deserve to know, and in my view it is the job of backbench MPs, Opposition and Government, to zero in on these cuts, search out the answers and in highlighting what’s planned offer up not only a penetrating analysis, where possible, but alternatives as well where they disagree. That makes for good debate. I think.

What the heck, Government Ministers might even think it advantageous and progressive to take the lead here and offer up the information without having to be asked and instead of, please not again, reading pre-prepared, pre-packaged puffery in the form of interminable briefs that are anything but, which deaden debate rather than inform.

If Government leads on this, and it does fall to Government to take the lead on this, the Opposition may follow suit. But even if they don’t, good practice is good practice and that is what our leaders should be looking to establish on the Hill. It is the Opposition’s debate in any event — tradition and the rules dictate that they get to establish what will be debated, in what order and for how long. What we need to see emerge are benchmarks and promises by which Opposition Shadows can track the work of their Ministers and measure delivery and performance, or not, as the case may be, in the coming year.

Holding the Cabinet to account is what it should be all about. Like on the $30-million overspend on current account for the current year (with one month still to go), a full year of an OBA Government. Questions need to be asked — where were these increases incurred and why and by whom and for what reasons. Inquiring voters want to know. Incentive enough, you might think, for an ambitious Opposition. Like on travel: $5-million, up almost $1.5 million from that spent the year before. Some things don’t change, do they?

This sort of close examination is all part of bringing about greater transparency and accountability which as we all know, is sorely needed and which, frankly, we have been promised. The bonus is that this also puts to work in a meaningful way all those MPs who don’t sit in the Cabinet.

It is why I have always advocated for cross-party committees to tackle on an on-going basis, and with public participation, some of the big, important issues Bermuda is facing. Number one up: healthcare. The Finance Minister made a point of underscoring in his Budget Statement how rising healthcare costs are threatening to bankrupt the Government — “a runaway [car] with no brakes”. Similarly, he might have also mentioned what the impact that this is also having on the people his Government serves.

It is long since time to have a national dialogue on the problem and potential solutions. This is what a cross party committee can achieve, meeting in public, giving all those who have a stake in healthcare (and who doesn’t?) the opportunity and forum to air their views. It should not, and need not, be left t to Government and discussions behind closed doors. We all need to be brought in to get a sense of what we are facing and the options available to us.

The same approach could be employed to tackle other tough issues which the Minister raised in his Speech e.g. banking, specifically lending practices, and the cost and supply of electricity in Bermuda. The former is something which might usefully be tackled by a sub-committee of the Public Accounts Committee (PAC), the supposed watchdog of Government finances, whose mandate and numbers could be broadened to take on these added roles. Sadly however, PAC hasn’t even caught up yet on the role it is supposed to be playing. PAC is still Budgets behind and one year into chairmanship under the PLP Shadow and we still haven’t seen or heard of a public meeting. That’s simply not good enough. We need PAC to get to the point where its reviews are current and not historical (yes, historical and not hysterical). This is what makes for effective oversight and effective oversight makes for greater transparency and accountability, and greater transparency and accountability provides the check and the bite a strong Legislature is meant to have on Cabinet.

Get on with it, please.

* Readers are invited to share their views on The Royal Gazette website or write jbarritt@ibl.bm.