Finance minister Rama Sithanen?s budget 2008-2009 will not have the people whooping up in joy or marching in the streets to bring down the government. It was a modest and realistic budget aimed at bringing about sustained development within the operating constraints. This budget could not be eulogized merrily as a sunshine budget as we know that the parliamentary opposition went through the motions of alerting the public of the government?s incompetence and bad governance. And this had created a fear in the mind of the public that they would have to expect the worst in the budget.

Instead, the budget proposals unveiled by Rama Sithanen give all the indications of being development- and welfare-oriented. We are conscious of the fact that the term welfare would evoke mixed feelings in some but we urge that welfare be viewed in the correct perspective as an investment in people who could eventually prove an asset in the development process.

From this point of view, the 2008-2009 budget could be considered a far-seeing, futuristically-oriented development plan, which, we hope, in the words of the Finance minister, would enable the country to look confidentially into the future rather than constantly look back with a sense of grievance.

Considering that development in the truest sense of the term has eluded us despite the loudly trumpeted economic reforms, it could be said that one of the foremost achievements of the open-economy apologists was to denigrate the valued economic term, welfare.

In the patron-client politics of countries such as ours, social welfare measures have indeed suffered some serious distortions but such aberrations do not prove the case against welfare economics, which is part of the kernel of democracy in the social sense. Practised effectively with the correct intent social welfare could prove an important development tool and we hope budget 2008-2009 has laid the basis for a development path of this kind.

On the nuts and bolts of the 2008-2009 budget proposals, it could be said that what has been aimed at is a realistic and balanced approach to development. Tax concessions to encourage SME companies to expand and the unchanged VAT are true incentives. The steady empowerment of the vulnerable, so that they would soon be self-reliant and productive as well as incentive packages for the cultivation of agricultural lands are good budget proposals so far.

But the agonies of the stomachs, resulting from the high cost of living have not been put right by the government. Significantly, the pensioners? woes have partly been answered. No budget can bring immediate results to these suffering people. Over a quarter of a century of misguided political and economic ideologies in addition to the profligacy and dishonest leadership, have resulted in the extreme poverty of the people of Mauritius.

The Trade Unions did not grumble this time about the 2008-09 budget but they still think that the Finance minister could have done much better than that. The private sectors are not too happy about the budget, although they have responded that certain proposals in the budget could help their sectors indirectly in the field of construction, SME and agriculture.

The budget at best could be called a pragmatic budget. It is aimed at a steady economic growth. It?s a budget that has not brought great joy or much sorrow. Apart from accusing the government of using its own masterpieces, the opposition is already cornered without ammunition to fight.