The point scoring by opposition and resistance about total debt increasing is relatively easily dismissed by the simple fact that for the first nine months there was a fiscal surplus - the first time in several years. Therefore the increase in debt was not due fiscal imprudence
But rather having to service the debt book, which was a legacy of previous governments. Now this was further exacerbated by interest rates increasing to12.5-13%. That increase was necessitated by inflationary pressures as a result of depreciation. The reason for that is obvious!
It's also worth recognising that the nominal value of debt also increased because of the depreciation to the extent of external borrowings. But fundamentally if the government had been borrowing to fund its expenditures it would reflect in primary deficit
The opposition might have dome point when it argues that the GDP growth target stated by the treasury might be too aggressive. It would make sense for government spokespersons on the issue to clarify that given the uncertainty of current environment it is best to think in terms
of range of possible outcomes. While a target has to be set and from that other budgetary target driven, it is important to accept that it is dependent on the possible scenarios. This is even more the case with inflation since this is not only affected by domestic conditions but
also a multitude of variables, many of which are well beyond the control of the government eg international oil prices. Here again an indicative range, possibly with some attached probabilities, should be reflected.
Those of who want a productive debate in critical matters that will affect the course of the nation in years to come might want to choose to be effective in their critique the government in a manner that demonstrates their grasp of reality rather than be seen as cynical nigglers
*primary fiscal surplus
