Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, as regards part (a) of the question, the Public Sector Debt nominal terms amounted to Rs238 billion as at the end of December 2014 and rose to Rs608.2 billion as at the end of December 2024. In other words, from Rs238 billion in December 2014 to Rs608.2 billion in December 2024. In other words, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, if we just make a quick calculation, it has almost doubled over the 10-year period. At the time, we left office in December 2014, the Public Sector Debt to the GDP ratio stood at 59.5% which was below the 60% then in force, which we had put in together with what was being done in Europe – 60% of GDP. However, the previous government’s irresponsible fiscal stewardship resulted in a sharp increase in the debt ratio reaching 87.4% by December 2024. They had themselves extended the ceiling to a statutory ceiling of 80% – from 60% to 80%. They themselves raised that again; it went to 87.4%. The ceiling was raised, precisely in an attempt to conceal the extent of the fiscal mismanagement. That is why it was done.

28 In real terms, that is, after adjusting for the rise in GDP deflate over the past 10 years, Public Sector Debt stood around Rs382 billion as at the end of December 2024. Concerning part (b) of the question, it is manifestly evident that the estimated level of public debt of Rs642 billion is unsustainable. We cannot sustain it. According to the 2025 IMF Article IV Consultation Report, Mauritius is at a high risk of sovereign stress, reflecting mostly a high level of vulnerability in the medium and long term. This is why I said to the people who are supposedly protesting – they have no idea. They have no idea what they are saying. The previous government has burdened this country with an overwhelming level of debt. In the fiscal year 2024-2025 alone, public sector debt rose by Rs83 billion, which is equivalent to an average daily increase of Rs227 million. We had no options, Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir. We had no options but to act responsibly and come up with a fiscal consolidation plan with concrete measures aimed at reducing both the budget deficit and the public sector debt which the previous government shackled the country with. Without the implementation of these measures, public sector debt would have spiralled out of control and they would have had severe repercussions on the public finances, also on the broader economy and on the well-being of the population, including – I tell people, ‘You do not realise’ – no pension to anyone in the coming decades if we do not do anything now. Not even at 60, nobody would get pensions. This is what we are facing. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this would have inevitably also led to a downgrade of our credit rating to junk status by Moody’s. Some people do not understand why we should care about Moody’s. There are consequences. Such a downgrade would have had far-reaching implications, including high borrowing costs, adverse effects on the financial services sector. The financial sector would be dead. The depreciation of the rupee would continue; capital flight will increase. Why would people put money in a country which has junk status? Nobody does this. FDI would therefore actually reduce for practical elites and there would be broader negative effects on the economy. It would very seriously jeopardise our long-term fiscal stability. With respect to debt servicing, interest payments on Government debt, just interest payment, I think many people do not realise – juste sur les intérêts qu’on doit payer, c’est R 21.8 milliards for 2024-2025 – just to pay for the interest on the debt. This is the second largest expenditure in the whole Government budget after the Basic Retirement Pension. This

29 year, due to substantial debt accumulation over the past decade again, interest rates are projected to rise to a staggering Rs26.1 billion. Some people might say: “but you have been in Government” but the debt is there. We have to pay the interest on the debt. It will be Rs26.1 billion. This is a rise of 20% already compared to the precedent year. It is not our doing; it is the debt that they have accumulated that we have to pay now. Instead of paying Rs26.1 billion as interest on debt, imagine – that amount of money could have been used more effectively. It could have been allocated to different priority sectors such education, health, housing. This money could have gone there. The money could have been used to pay the interest on the debt. Thus, the opportunity cost of high debt servicing is substantial in diverse resources as I said from the development priorities that could stimulate economic growth and improving living standards. Sustained high level debt, if left unaddressed risks undermining, as I said, the whole country’s growth potential and fiscal resilience. Mr Deputy Speaker, Sir, this is why we have made a firm commitment to reclaim the fiscal serenity and gradually bring the public sector debt GDP ratio to a more sustainable level of 60% as it was when we left government in 2014.

No supplementary? The Table has been advised that the following PQs have been withdrawn: B/651, B/652, B/653, B/654, B/655, B/656, B/658, B/659, B/660, B/662 B/663, and B/664. Now we proceed to questions addressed to hon. Ministers. Hon. Members, the Table has been advised that PQ B/665 will be replied by the hon. Minister of Health and Wellness. Hon. Fourth Member for Port Louis North and Montagne Longue! DECLINING BIRTH RATE – MEASURES TAKEN