Judged by some MPs as contrary to the Constitution because it lacks an account closure, the 2024 budget proposal has not garnered unanimous support in Parliament even though it has been significantly modified by the parliamentary Finance and Budget committee.
MPs took turns to express their views in Parliament on Wednesday, the first day of a plenary session that is expected to continue through Thursday evening to adopt the annual state budget for 2024. Some MPs, particularly opposition figures and the Free Patriotic Movement (FPM) bloc, went so far as to challenge the legislative session being held in the absence of a president, a position that has been vacant since the departure of former President Michel Aoun on October 31, 2022.
To contextualize the morning session of the budget debate, it is important to recall that the text, devoid of any reform projects, was transmitted to Parliament in September 2023, where it was profoundly amended by the parliamentary Finance and Budget committee. The committee criticized the initial draft for “lacking an economic and social vision.” This was asserted by the committee’s president, Ibrahim Kanaan (Strong Lebanon Bloc), who denounced “the meager funds allocated to investment expenses and the anarchic use of surtaxes and taxes.” Nevertheless, he considered that “although the second version is not ideal, it remains essential to ensure the continuity of the state and the public and private sectors.” In this context, he strongly opposed a “project based on the abolition of bank deposits.”
The president of the parliamentary Administration and Justice committee, Georges Adwan (Lebanese Forces), argued that “this project is contrary to the Constitution because it is not accompanied by an account closure,” suggesting that the Strong Republic bloc “will not vote in favor of the final version.” Hezbollah MP Hassan Fadlallah made a similar argument regarding the account closure.
MP Michel Moawad (Renewal Bloc), who strongly criticized the lack of vision in the budget project, announced that he would not approve the “prejudicial” text, which he believes is detrimental to the Lebanese people, the private sector and even the administration and civil servants.
He addressed the executive, outlining the foundations of any economic and financial recovery policy, justifying his opposition to the text that MPs are called to examine.
If the budget proposal is not voted on, the executive will have the option to promulgate the budget by decree, with the original version (not the one modified by the committee) published in the Official Gazette and becoming enforceable. However, as prepared by the government, the budget draft is considered to “ignore the economic crisis the country is facing, not provide specific figures and not be based on clear data,” as some MPs have noted. They argued that the Cabinet “seeks to impose taxes on the Lebanese people who live below the poverty line and constantly endure the burden of the economic, political and social situation.”
Hence, they expressed their support for amendments, during the planned sessions, to the contested articles in the version proposed by the Finance and Budget committee. MPs also emphasized that a reform plan must accompany the budget law, with a distribution of responsibilities and a sharing of losses.
The Evening Session
During the evening session, nine MPs took the floor to criticize the draft budget, arguing that it was far from reflecting a clear economic or financial policy.
Michel Daher (Independent) questioned the budget figures. He also called for financial decentralization and the lifting of banking secrecy “on the accounts of officials in order to identify the sources of corruption.” He also proposed a one dollar tax on every 20 liters of fuel to finance road maintenance projects.
The leader of the Strong Lebanon bloc, Gebran Bassil, criticized the draft law for lacking economic vision but used the parliamentary forum to continue settling scores with the government, accusing it of usurping the prerogatives of the head of state. In this context, he challenged the planned appointment of a chief of staff, before criticizing what he considered to be an all-encompassing law.
The Batroun MP demanded that Parliament adopt a bill tabled by his bloc. Otherwise, he said, he and his bloc members would withdraw from the Chamber, with the exception of the members of the Finance Committee. The latter, he said, would not vote in favor of the budget.
He then, warned against a president imposed by force and called for dialogue to break the deadlock over the presidential election. He said the next president should reassure the opposition and Hezbollah, which earned him a “well said” from Nabih Berri.
In a similar vein, MP Ghada Ayoub (Strong Republic bloc) ironically pointed out that “the man whose entire policy and career was based on blocking things is now the one criticizing the blocking.”
Ayoub then quoted figures from memorandums sent by the Ministry of Finance to the Finance Committee, pointing out that the official figures are a mess.
Her colleague Ziad Hawat began by pointing out that “for the first time since its foundation, Lebanon is facing the threat of dissolution” and decried a draft budget that he said proposed “anything and everything.” He criticized the Ministry of Finance for not publishing its monthly balance sheet of state expenditure and revenue.
MP Sajih Attieh (Moderate Bloc) defended the government and welcomed the fact that it was able to submit a draft budget to Parliament within the constitutional deadline. However, he questioned the budget figures, particularly those allocated to ministries in charge of vital sectors such as telecommunications, agriculture and public works.
His colleague Neemat Frem said the executive should have proposed a five-year plan. He also questioned the budget figures but distinguished himself from his colleagues by suggesting that the government should tax Syrians working in Lebanon. He indicated that he would not vote in favor of the budget.
For his part, MP Wael Abou Faour stressed the need to combat tax evasion and warned that raising the VAT would lead to a further increase in prices.
Last to speak, Ibrahim Mneimneh (Independent) strongly criticized the authorities, saying that in the current circumstances, the government “should present a recovery plan spread over at least two years.”
