Jul 09 - Government says "GSD Divisions on Economy Blatant"
The Government have today noted the “unbelievable press statement” from Daniel Feetham’s GSD which, according to Government, attempts to “Paper over the huge cracks on the economic argument between them and Sir Peter Caruana”.
The press release quoting Sir Peter Caruana states that "Sir Peter has confirmed the GSLP/Liberal view at the election that the debt limit was being reached". Sir Peter said: "... I would have been willing whilst keeping within the economically prudent guidelines to have changes the law to increase the debt ceiling, the debt limit, which I acknowledge would have been necessary.”
The above quote is “totally contrary” to Hon Damon Bossino MP’s assertions that the previous administration had left behind a “treasure trove” and that the position of HM Treasury stating that there was “only £2.5m usable cash reserve by the end of the GSD’s last financial year in office”
The statement continues to quote Sir Peter Caruana talking about the level of debt incurred by the current administration:
“…let's be clear, I think that the levels of net public debt remain, even increased as they have been, well within the levels that are prudent in macroeconomic terms by any European standard. So, I am not saying any of this to criticise the level of public debt. THEY ARE THE LEVEL, OR PERHAPS LOWER FOR ALL I KNOW, THAN THEY WOULD HAVE BEEN HAD WE BEEN IN OFFICE.”
According to the Government’s press release, "these arguments are directly contrary to those advanced by Mr Feetham for the GSD”.
Fabian Picardo, Chief Minister said:
"I will be happy to remind Mr Feetham also at the Chamber Dinner on Thursday, of the reasons why recurrent expenditure is rising; most of which are GSD related or related to expenses we have to incur but which are driven higher by market forces and to ask him what he would cut if he is so intent on cutting recurrent expenditure. Will it be scholarships for our students, sponsored patients' allowances or the generation of electricity that Mr Feetham would cut to keep recurrent expenditure down?"
