It is a strategy often resorted to in a multi-party democracy; one generally accepted as a legitimate weapon, even if it comes at very surprising occasions and when its occurrence could provoke more cynicism than have any intended significant impact.

Friday's walk-out from the Parliament Chamber by the PNC/Reform, led by its leader, Mr. Desmond Hoyte, as Finance Minister Saisnarine Kowlessar rose to present his 2002 Budget, was a surprise.

But it could hardly have diverted any serious attention from the fiscal and economic policies to be pursued by the government in this fiscal year.

The walk-out could have been consistent with the most recent negative comments from the leader of the PNC/Reform about Guyana heading for "economic crisis" and even a "constitutional crisis".

Yet, it is recognised that however misconceived those statements may be, or however misdirected Friday's walk-out probably was, such tactics could be tolerated when compared with politically-inspired street demonstrations and ethnic violence.

The latter has too often created problems not only for innocent people and the business community, but made even more difficult the bi-partisan cooperation that is clearly desirable for nation building.

It can arguably be the case that having learnt of the size and nature of the government's new budget, the biggest ever presented and, for an unprecedented fourth occasion, without the introduction of new taxes or fees, the opposition decided to score a propaganda advantage by its walk-out.

Corbin's explanation
The PNC/Reform Chairman, Mr. Robert Corbin, offered a strange explanation to justify the walk-out, something that normally happens during the actual debate of a national budget. He blamed, for example, failure by the government to honour its "responsibility for good governance" and, specifically for its "refusal to implement decisions made during the process of dialogue" between the two main parties.

Undoubtedly, the government or the PPP/Civic itself may feel constrained to respond to the claims made by the PNC/Reform. Tit-for-tat is also a name of the game as parties make politics.

What, however, seems quite surprising, is the charge made by Corbin that the government appeared bent on a course to "subvert the functioning of Parliament". Perhaps when the opposition offers its examples of this alleged "subversion", it would be in the public's interest for an enlightened response from the government, and specifically the Minister responsible for Parliamentary Affairs.

It is doubtful that even reasonable and well-placed supporters of the PNC/Reform would easily accept the claim of "parliamentary subversion" with a respected member of the legal profession of the calibre of Ralph Ramkarran, known for his liberal views and democratic credentials, holding the office of Speaker of the National Assembly.

At the same time, the governing party has a moral obligation to critically review the extent to which there has been failure, for whatever reason, to implement decisions made in good faith and to be more proactive in ensuring compliance.

For now, it would be quite relevant to benefit from the informed responses of the business sector and social organisations to the government's fiscal and economic policies as articulated by the Finance Minister.

One important factor cannot be ignored - that for all the gloomy predictions, Guyana has succeeded in making further economic gains, as noted by regional and international financial institutions.