Ma­jor con­struc­tion projects should be han­dled by cen­tral govern­ment

Stabroek News Sunday - - LETTERS -

Dear Edi­tor, I be­lieve that hav­ing lo­cal govern­ment en­gage in big con­struc­tion projects ($10 mil­lion plus) is not Pareto Ef­fi­cient.

Lo­cal govern­ment should leave big projects, such as build­ing bridges and the like to the cen­tral govern­ment be­cause it takes away monies that could be de­ployed more ef­fi­ciently, and sub­ject to rig­or­ous over­sight by bi­par­ti­san com­mis­sions. Be­sides, the cen­tral govern­ment en­joys bet­ter economies of scale for starters. For these rea­sons, lo­cal gov­ern­ments should be funded (70%) for the likes of safety and beautification of pub­lic spa­ces, in­clud­ing parks and build­ings. More­over, it is time cit­i­zens get a very ro­bust and re­li­able garbage col­lec­tion ser­vice. It should be noted the 70% fund­ing should be de­ter­mined by pop­u­la­tion size, for starters.

The re­main­ing 30% of fund­ing will have to come ex­clu­sively from the lo­cal govern­ment it­self, i.e. lo­cal lead­er­ship in part­ner­ship with busi­nesses and cit­i­zens will have to en­gage in busi­ness ac­tiv­i­ties to gen­er­ate tax rev­enues, in­clud­ing cre­at­ing in­cen­tives to en­cour­age new busi­nesses to re­lo­cate to the Re­gion . For this rea­son, the de­vel­op­ment of lo­cal tal­ent and in­no­va­tions would be cru­cial to the suc­cess of the re­spec­tive Re­gion. For some Re­gions, tourism would be a nat­u­ral fo­cus, for oth­ers Agro pro­cess­ing, and so on.

If the Pareto In­ef­fi­cien­cies con­tin­ues, it is be­cause politi­cians en­dorse slush funds in the guise of fund­ing for so called large scale lo­cal govern­ment projects with the un­der­stand­ing of buy­ing votes.

Let lo­cal gov­ern­ments and the cit­i­zens par­tic­i­pate in im­prov­ing their own lives with pride and free­dom from party ger­ry­man­der­ing.

Yours faith­fully, Keith Bernard

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from Guyana

© PressReader. All rights reserved.