Geof BrownIN THE wake of Butch Stewart's wake-up call to the government on crime intervention, there has been a flurry of comments. Most of it supports Stewart's position. This should not surprise the government. The present crime wave is like the summer's heat. It feels worse than any wave before at least in recent times, statistics to the contrary notwithstanding. So the government must expect the pressure from below. It occupies the hot seat; the buck stops with it.
And it is no surprise that criticism of the government varies from an accusation of doing nothing at all, to caring not at all. If what is done makes no appreciable difference, it is as good as nothing done. The baby who was fed two hours ago will cry for hunger as if it never ever had a drop of mother's milk. And this is the position captured by Bruce Golding in his Tuesday evening national radio broadcast. For as he pointed out, there has been a rash of government responses to crime. Operation this and Operation that have been tried. These have only worked as stopgaps. The baby continues to bawl as each 'feed' runs out. Crime flourishes.
So where does this leave us? Things cannot continue like this. But I find it hard to believe that the government knows what to do, yet wilfully, stupidly refuses to act. That would be courting suicide. This brings us back to Butch Stewart's "shape up or ship out" call.
That call says in effect, if whatever the government has done (or failed to do) is ineffective, it must get help from wherever to make the difference. Stewart has put something on the table. What about us?
War, it has been rightly said, is too important to be left to the generals. Isn't crime too important to be left to the government by itself? No one would suggest that the generals in a war should fold their arms and leave the conduct of the war to civilians. The generals must do what they are trained and paid to do. No one should suggest, either, that the government sit back and leave crime solution to the rest of us. They must do what they are elected and paid to do.
However, if what the government is doing is not adequately working, why should whoever can think or help save the day, simply say "Fie on them"? We can change the government, yes; the government itself can quit, yes. Minister Knight can quit or be fired, yes. All of that could bring about some change for the better, if a better team takes over, or for the worse if a worse team succeeds. I am making no bets as to which alternative is likely. But whether the existing team stays, or a new one takes over, I am dead sure no government will ever have such all-knowing wisdom or such all-encompassing competence, as not to need help for managing the type of crime we face today. Butch's call is therefore relevant.
That explains why I was disappointed in the statement of the Private Sector leaders carried in last Sunday's Gleaner as an open letter to the Prime Minister. That statement was a proper call but it put nothing on the table. NDM president Bruce Golding's broadcast intrigued me. He put some very concrete suggestions on the table. And I think JLP spokesman Derrick Smith is on good ground when he advises the Private Sector leaders to take concrete short, medium and long-term plans to their meeting with the Prime Minister today.
It is time for anyone who has anything worthwhile to deal with the crime wave drowning us all, to bring it to the table. It is suicidal for us to do otherwise.
Amina Blackwood Meeks implied in her Gleaner column this week that it is counter-productive for critics to wait for the government to slip on a banana peel, (metaphorically speaking) to prove that they are right. And I might add, if we think it is enough to try to cut back the current crime wave without dealing with its causes and sources, we merely fool ourselves.
We tend to focus on law-enforcement as the be-all and end-all. That's rather like killing cockroaches each time they appear without understanding the role of pesticide control. This column has repeatedly pointed out that the multi-focal attack on crime needs to deal with three areas: prevention, containment and rehabilitation all at the same time.
Without prevention, the crime stock is forever renewed; without rehabilitation the stock is forever replenished. Without containment we get hurt as the current wave is now hurting us.
Delroy Chuck observed this week that the current wave is like 'deja vu'. We have been here so often before. He said if we tour the inner city, the only wonder we would have is that crime is not worse than it is. Attacking the wave is short-term quick-fix. It will return again and again like cockroaches do, until we deal with causes and sources. Chuck observed that the resignation of Minister K. D. Knight will not, by itself, change that. Golding in his statement concurred. But that brings me back to Butch Stewart's call. A strategic plan, as he observed, is what is first needed.
Ship out
This cannot be just a plan for short-term fixes which will leave the baby still bawling after the latest feed. It must deal comprehensively with the multiple causes of crime, in all three main areas.
The government must lead. But like Bruce Golding, all of us who can, must bring something concrete to the table. This column has at various times in the past put something concrete on the table and will again. It is, after all, our collective stake. And if the government, given our concrete contributions, then refuses to listen or to act, that's when it should 'ship out'.
FOOTNOTE: I appreciate all you readers who tell me you missed the column. I needed the four-week break. You, too, perhaps.
Geof Brown is an HRD consultant who lectures part-time at the UWI, Mona.
