Trevor Manuel’s finest hour: a selection of gut responses on the first Budget devised by an ANC minister
NATIONAL PARTY: ”The budget demonstrates shocking insensitivity towards the agricultural and forestry sectors of the economy.”
”The budget demonstrates a shocking insensitivity towards individuals in the middle and higher-income groups.”
The NP said it was shocked by the ”unacceptably sharp” 52% increase in the excise duty on cigarettes, cigars and pipe tobacco.
It was also ”shocked that the Budget speech presented to the portfolio committee on finance was available in English only”.
* Freedom Front: ”The huge increases in excise duty on cigarettes and liquor were unacceptable and shocking,” the party said.
”At last the government has committed itself to stick to its economic plan. In the past, too many plans have come and gone without being carried out,” it said.
* Mangosuthu Buthelezi: the 1997/8 Budget was the first to take into account all of society. ”We have entered into the real democratic South Africa”.
* The South Africa Communist Party: ”generally” welcomes the Budget, specifically the targeted tax relief for lower-income groups and the significant increase in the housing budget.
The SACP welcomed the fact that the Budget made no provision for privatisation ”windfalls”.
* The Democratic Party’s finance spokesman Ken Andrew: ”All in all this is a Budget with a sting in the tail for ordinary taxpayers. Beneath its benign facade lie increased individual taxation, increased excise duties on a range of consumer products and no relief for people wanting to save.”
The DP warned of cuts in capital expenditure at a time when the country needed new roads. There was a danger that roads that were already deteriorating would collapse, it said.
* The ANC in KwaZulu-Natal: ”This money will go a long way to address the problems of internal refugees, orphans of political violence, traumatised communities, the building of houses that were destroyed during political violence etc,” it said.
Of Trevor Manuel’s Budget speech it said: ”This is in stark contrast to former apartheid regimes that budgeted for the death and destruction of innocent South Africans and the peoples of Southern Africa.” The ANC said it would remain the eyes and ears of the people and ensure that every cent of this money would be used for peace in the province.
* Gauteng Premier Tokyo Sexwale: said Manuel’s offering was ”prudent”. The Budget showed that profound thinking had gone into its compilation and it would go a long way in increasing the confidence many people had in Manuel. He accepted the Budget with enthusiasm for its balanced nature.
* The South Africa Foundation: ”While it is unfortunate that the tax burden remains high, it was more important to meet the deficit reduction targets at this stage. But achieving higher growth targets will require further movement in tax reduction in succeeding Budgets.”
* The South African National Civic Organisation: It accuses Manuel of bowing to pressure from big business by relaxing exchange controls, which was going to negatively affect the government’s revenue. ”Even developed countries have exchange controls to ensure that income generated in domestically does not leave … in huge amounts,” it said.
”We do not want to trumpet the same old song, but we must ask if it is enough to ensure that every South African is in a position to get a house which is electrified and has access to clean water in a clean, stable, healthy and peaceful environment.”
Extracts courtesy of Sapa