Over the past two years, Gulf states have gone through significant financial reforms aimed at having a deep positive impact on their economies, support resource usage and diversify sources of income for the post-oil era. Interestingly, these reforms are being widely welcomed by many international organisations.

The reworking of public expenditure was the first of the reforms. It focused on subsidy policies that had lasted for long decades, especially in the oil sector. A second reform was the value added tax (VAT) that will become effective from 2018.

In this regard, Gulf states — except for Kuwait — have gradually coordinated in making the necessary changes to create up-to-scratch financial systems fully responsive to the development levels achieved in these countries.

The council members are also expected to chart out a unified roadmap for their financial policies, a move that would have wide acceptance from their citizens who are so passionate of a better future for themselves and for generations to come and for the stability of their countries. In this, they studiously ignore all seditious campaigns as well as those that churn out a distortion of facts, carried out by internal or external powers for their personal interests or just don’t wish the Gulf countries their prosperity.

However, the situation in Kuwait is a different story. The National Assembly stands as a barrier in the path of reforms for personal and electoral reasons in spite of the government’s serious attempts to make necessary changes that would serve the financial future of Kuwait.

Subsidies are still exhausting key resources to the tune of $18 billion (Dh66.11 billion) a year of the government’s budget, and especially so after the National Assembly suspended a government proposal to lift energy subsidies and refused to increase prices on some services that strain the government budget. This is quite unlike the other five Gulf states who have made giant strides in various areas.

In fact, Kuwait has a practical public finance reform programme similar to that in the other states, but it is not that resilient. By not getting approval in the National Assembly, it has set off an impasse that is difficult to get out of and wastes a precious opportunity that, if seized, would have serve the country’s developmental needs.

Given that the available solutions are limited, the possible one seems to be taking decisions outside of the National Assembly, which added further burdens to the government’s budget by increasing the cost of treatment abroad twice in one year — $1.5 billion in 2015 compared with $500 million in 2014.

The 2015 cost of treatment, for example, equals the value of bonds issued in 2016 to offset the deficit, even though many of the cases can be treated inside Kuwait with its unparalleled medical services.

Apart from financial reforms, there are a number of public development projects that have been suspended pending endorsement from the National Assembly, which rejected them without giving practical justifications.

Furthermore, some MPs led a sedition campaign during the strike of oil workers in April, and that prompted workers to come up with unconvincing demands even though they get salaries higher than those working in other sectors.

We can come to a conclusion that the National Assembly should seriously consider the development demands for Kuwait’s present.

The National Assembly should cooperate effectively with state institutions to implement public programmes to further the economic and financial systems and in line with the needs of the post-oil phase. It would place Kuwait in line with the other Gulf countries, who make great progress year after year by adopting workable visions that contribute to an integrated and diversified economy.