Prime Minister Dr Mahathir Mohamad derided the alternative budget to be presented by Keadilan and PRM as a political gimmick, saying they did not know how much money the government had (The Star, Sept 17).

The opposition parties may not know the government's sources of revenue but they could sure claim to have an opinion on how the money should be allocated and spent.

Is the alternative budget then a mere gimmick or a serious attempt at demonstrating how the opposition as an alternative government would manage income and expenditure of the country, the very stuff of governance?

The alternative budget assumes the daunting task of rivaling and comparing with the federal budget line for the fiscal year ahead.

It is true that federal budgets may be formidable documents drawn up by treasury experts.

However Keadilan's de facto head, ex-deputy premier Anwar Ibrahim, had in his capacity as finance minister, some experience with them and could offer useful advice. So also could Prof KS Jomo give some useful tips that the government could pick up.

What is required are not details these are the domain of treasury experts who do this, fiscal year in and out but broad outlines and directions.

For budgets are more than mere projections of revenues and expenditures. They reflect the priorities of the government, the objectives most important to it and how they are to be achieved. In short, budgets incorporate values.

And the question is, as always, whose values, and whose interests do these values serve? Cronies, rakyat, business interest, consumers, etc? No less, this is the very stuff of political contention.

So what is the purpose of such an alternative budget? Is it meant to capture the imagination of the general public, to convince them, more than Mahathir's budget? (The first question is whether the imagination of Malaysian electorate in general can ever be fired by contents of national budget). Or is this alternative document meant to tap on the national pulse and give the government tips on what to prioritise?

If so, where is the participatory grassroots input for this alternative budget? Were the views of non-governmental organisations, civil societies, trade unions, corporations and businesses consulted by its promoters?

Why, according to news report of what Mahathir said, the alternative budget appeared to be authored by Keadilan and PRM without mention of even PAS and DAP!

The alternative budget should be process-directed, that is to say, it should encourage democratic participatory involvement of all interest and civil groups, businesses and corporations along the spectrum of Malaysian economy. It should not be only results-focused, that is to show how the Federal Budget in comparison is out of line with national aspirations and interest.

Where then is the credibility of such an alternative budget if it were not formulated on basis of broad participatory process involving others mentioned? This is one point it can effectively rival Mahathir's budget and yet it does not have it. It is probably accredited to Keadilan and PRM only.

Just like it will be interesting to watch whether, besides the alternative budget, the opposition parties could unveil the alternative shadow cabinet next.

They have not done this "gimmick" yet.

Might it be that they fear such an attempt at allocating cabinet positions and sharing of spoils of victory ahead of time could bring to surface so much dissension as to render their electoral collaboration stillborn even before the imminent trial of general elections?

I really wonder.