Doubling the social allowance due to President Mubarak's intervention is not just a happy ending to an issue that has occupied the Egyptians for weeks as much as it raises unanswered questions. In his speech on May 1, Mubarak said that he cannot determine the allowance, but he will discuss it with the government to grant it for all. He also said it will be later determined by the People's Assembly (PA) during the budget discussion. A few days later, parliamentary sources claimed that the allowance will be 5%, but then Mubarak announced that it will be 10 %, without explaining to the people from where the allowance will be paid? On May 1, there was no money in the treasury, which is why the president could not announce the allowance. After two weeks, the government has been able to pay an allowance of 10 % and not 5 %. How come? When did the discussion between Mubarak and his government take place? And how did the government manage to get the allowance money that reaches L.E 2.1 billion? Any law has its bylaws that explain, and the allowance should have one such bylaw, for it is clear that the allowance will be at the expense of the essentialities of public expenditure. In the moment the citizen is delighted with the allowance, he will discover that the budgets of education, health, agriculture and public services will be greatly affected because of it. And when this happens, everyone will pity himself and his country, because such a decision is torture in disguise, though it reflects the president's concern of the people. To compare the president's logic when he declared that he could not determine the allowance and would discuss it with the government to his logic when he doubled it, we will find that it is a situation similar to a father who postpones his daughter's engagement because he does not have money, yet two weeks later, he pays for his son the pilgrimage expenses, without explaining how he got the money out of the blues. If a father's prestige prevents his sons from expressing their unanswered questions, he should take the initiative to remove suspicion.
