Education Minister Elvin James' admission that $6 million was trimmed from his Ministry's budget at the last minute – and that the cuts contained in the Budget are not in fact the cuts that will be made, gives great cause for concern.

First, it seems to confirm that cuts and changes to the 2010-11 Budget were being made up to the very last minute; and that this was occurring even after the Budget day had been pushed to the very last day it could be held. This stands in stark contrast to the usual Budget process, when work is usually completed in advance and in line with a strict timetable.

To be sure, these are unusual economic times, but the midnight hour cuts seem to suggest that the Government is literally flying by the seat of its pants, for all the spin about a "recovery budget". Mr. James' revelations do not give the impression of a calm and methodical approach.

What is more concerning is the idea that any Government Ministry would slash and cut programmes on the one hand and then come out weeks later to say that the cuts are not in fact taking place in these programmes at all, but will occur somewhere else.

What other parts of the education budget are "flexible"? How can anyone plan anything in this environment? One also has to wonder what other parts of the Budget are real. If costs are shifted and cut in Education, where else are the same practices taking place?

It is no secret that Government missed its Budget estimates in the 2008-9 and 2010-11 Budget years, but there now seems to be no connection between what's put in the Budget and what is in fact reality.

One area where Government actually under-spent last year was in the Tourism Budget, where $2 million was allocated for marketing was not used.

While this newspaper would normally applaud such restraint, in this case it seems foolish. It is a truism that tourism destinations should market themselves more heavily in an economic downturn because it is harder to convince visitors to come. Some destinations, like the Bahamas and Jamaica, did that last year and are doing it again.

Asked last year by the British Broadcasting Corporation why Bermuda wasn't doing the same, Premier and Tourism Minister Dr. Ewart Brown said it was because Bermuda was not of sufficient quality until new resorts were built. "We didn't want to create new interest in Bermuda and have people come and find the same old situation," he said.

But last week in the House of Assembly, Acting Tourism Minister Derrick Burgess said Tourism's marketing budget had been cut as an austerity measure and was now being restored. It is not possible that both statements are true. Bermuda's only two new resorts came online last year, and none will this year, even if ground is broken on some of them.

Nonetheless, $6 million has been added to the Tourism budget this year, a move this newspaper supports, with one caveat – will Tourism spend the money wisely? Last year, Tourism's advertising agency did not get its new TV ads finished until August when the high season was nearly over. And far too much money was lavished on events which attracted few visitors.

The confusion and changes in requirements for the Morgans Point project, the hiring and sacking of Sales Focus in New York, followed now by the replacement of Corbin Associates and the rehiring of Lou Hammond as Bermuda's public relations agency and Bermuda's muddle of a cruise ship policy all raise concerns over the management of the Tourism Ministry.

None of this inspires confidence.