By AVA TURNQUEST

Tribune Chief Reporter

aturnquest@tribunemedia.net

FREE National Movement Chairman Michael Pintard yesterday questioned whether the government had considered using revenue from value added tax collections instead of borrowing the millions needed for the recovery and repair of storm-ravaged Family Islands.

Mr Pintard pointed out that the new tax was implemented to reduce the national debt and therefore it could be reasonably expected that it should be used to circumvent any further increases to that debt.

He said the FNM was resolute in its commitment to a bipartisan relief effort; however, he stressed that any borrowing must be underpinned by specific guidelines and based on objective assessments for short-term and long-term development.

“The purpose of VAT is to reduce the national debt, when one is engaging in borrowing the clear suggestion is that it is going to increase the national debt,” Mr Pintard said. “So it stands to reason that a diversion of some of the VAT revenue to cover some of recovery and reconstruction – that is in bounds, it’s not a departure from a stated goal which is to reduce the national debt. So it was surprising that the government would so definitively say that it was going to borrow the money.”

He added: “How is the VAT revenue presently being used, and how do they project to use it in the future? The government certainly has the obligation to help the public understand how funds are presently used and will be used in the future.”

Hurricane Joaquin battered the central and southern Bahamas for two days earlier this month, on October 1 and 2, leaving behind widespread damage. This week, Prime Minister Perry Christie said the damage would cost more than $60 million, adding that the government is considering borrowing the money to assist with storm relief.

Yesterday, Mr Pintard underscored three key categories for assessment: social services, healthcare, and capital development. He also pointed to the critical need for a management team that could withstand the scrutiny of an already disillusioned public.

“The government’s projection of borrowing would have been strengthened had we had a sense of those three categories,” he said. “Any discussion about borrowing must be done in the context of those assessments. Also, what portion of damage would be covered by insurance?

“There are international agencies and private citizens who will assist in the recovery effort so a portion of the cost ordinarily left to residents facing hardship, and the government who ought to step in and alleviate hardships, ought to be covered.

“In light of cynicism of a number of donors about the effectiveness and efficiency of government services, and concerns by donors that money may end up in the consolidated fund, the government has to make sure that agencies operate with the greatest transparency.”

Mr Pintard explained that once the public was confident that the funds would not “get lost,” and there would be impartial distribution and efficient reconstruction, that the flow of resources to assist the government would improve.

He called for clear timelines and regular public information meetings to provide updates on the progress of work.

Mr Pintard also suggested that the government’s selected disaster management team include independent representatives from island associations, and trusted financial experts who can assist with attracting resources from the public. He added that members of the public have proven that they are prepared to raise substantial resources and distribute relief independent of the government.