The world of politics is topsy-turvy. What is good at one stage suddenly becomes bad and leads to some of the most vocal protestations. Such is the case ahead of tomorrow’s budget debate.There are measures in the budget that can only redound to the good of the country, but even these measures are attracting some harsh criticisms. One of these measures is the decision to restrict and eventually the sale of used tyres in Guyana.

If it is anything to go by, Guyana is perhaps the only Caribbean country that imports used tyres, and this is because we tell ourselves that we are so poor that we would accept substandard goods. Already, for the greater part, more than ninety per cent of the cars on the roads are used cars. Because of the exorbitant taxes on vehicle imports, new cars have been priced out of the reach of most of the working class.
But there is a limit to the gains. The older the vehicles, the greater the need for spares. And everyone knows how expensive spares and the attendant repairs could be. At the same time, dealers buy some vehicles that would not be allowed on the roads in some countries that are worried about pollution. So the budget announces a limit on the age of the vehicles that could be imported.

In Japan, vehicles older than six years are taken off the streets. After the first three years they are tested and licensed to operate. After the next three years they are found to be less capable of harnessing the harmful emissions. But many of these vehicles are in pretty good shape, so they are imported. We buy them because Japan is glad to get rid of them.

It is testimony to our skills that we keep them running even twenty years after their manufacture. But we need them, and many of us believe that they are what we can afford. The budget prescribes a lowering of the excise tax on the newer vehicles which could cost a bit more at the level of acquisition but with the cheaper tax, should not be too high priced for the buyer.The advantage is the reduction on the importation of spares. Some will argue that we are putting people out of jobs, but if one were to stretch the argument, then we should have banned trucks and continued the use of the horse-drawn carts and so preserve the jobs of the carters.

And so we come to the used tyre issue. About fifteen years ago Andrew Mendes said to me that many drivers do not recognize that the only thing between them and the road are the tyres. Simply put, if the tyres are faulty then regardless of the other assets of the car, the vehicle is not as roadworthy as it should be.Last week former President Bharrat Jagdeo made the case that many people would not be able to buy used tyres although the government has announced a lowering of the duties on the tyres. A look at the minibuses tells a different story.

For one, people spend a fortune on the mag rims and another sum on the music system. Then they spend even more in decorating the buses. Surely, they could cut back on the spending on accessories and buy proper tyres.It is no secret that if someone dies in a minibus accident the maximum any insurance would pay is $20,000. That is the insurable ceiling. The argument is that used tyres rarely contribute to the spate of accidents; that speeding and carelessness do.

However, even if that is the case, one needs to remove all the likely contributory factors. One importer of tyres said that if the volume of used tyres is reduced then correspondingly, the volume of new tyres would increase. He said that this translates into a lower purchasing price because of the larger purchase volume.There would be savings on gasoline and on those parts aligned to the wheels. Then there is the life of the tyre. A used tyre could last up to three years; a used tyre lasts about six months.But this is now a political issue.

When the price of gasoline fell at the pumps, the passenger believed that he would see a reduction in fares. We now hear that the minibus operators want even more money. I don’t blame them, because inflation often takes a toll on one’s earnings, but at the same time why kill the goose that lays the golden egg?

There is another issue that has been doing the rounds. It has to do with the colours associated with the coalition. The word is that former Education Minister Priya Manickchand is upset that these colours are adorning public spaces. I don’t believe that she has an aversion to either green or yellow, because she wears them.And if it is that she believes that the coalition is flaunting its presence then she would be reminded that her party in power did the same. I saw a photograph of a public event at which tents were draped with the colours of the People’s Progressive Party.

I have a green shirt that I rarely wear because of the fear of being blamed for touting APNU, but in my saner moments I say that is utter nonsense. Yet I bend over to avoid any criticism.I have seen buildings with these colours long before the coalition came to office. I surely do not want to believe that Ms Manickchand would want to see those buildings repainted. Courts would be hard put. Is it that when women go out in yellow they are touting AFC?As far as I am concerned colours are one thing. It is the mood and the mindset of the people that matter.

As for the budget debate, I look forward to the arguments and the response. I am tempted to agree with Mr Jagdeo that some measures should be phased but then again, if I have a bad tooth I simply cannot phase the treatment. Some medicines are also difficult to swallow although they are necessary.