Ian Boyne
THE FIRST major challenge Portia Simpson Miller would face as Prime Minister of Jamaica is a reappointment of Omar Davies as Finance Minister.
In terms of pure political gamesmanship, the Jamaica Labour Party's (JLP) best short-term hope of making a bid for the hearts and minds of Jamaicans, now captured by the charming and charismatic Prime Minister-designate, is the reappointment of Davies. The propaganda line is easy to detect and the emotional cascade unmistakable: Many Jamaicans, including Comrades, feel they have been set back, stymied and crushed by Omar's economic policies.
The policies have failed to produce growth over a long period of time. Employment has not expanded sufficiently, wages have not been rising to workers' satisfaction, and the increasing crime and violence is being linked to the failures in the
economy.
Dr. Davies is on record as saying that the only condition under which he would serve as Finance Minister under any PNP Government not his own is if he is allowed to continue those same policies which many Jamaicans resent. So, if Dr. Davies is reappointed, that would be the clearest signal the JLP would say that Sister P will not make one difference; that it is the same old 17-year-old, rickety PNP bus, only with a new driver. What we need is a spanking new luxury bus built by Labour!
DENTING PORTIA'S ENTHUSIASM
In terms of raw politics, the only way to dent the enthusiasm for Sister P at this time is to convince the Jamaican people that a reappointment of Omar Davies is a sure sign that it is business as usual, same-old same-old.
I am not optimistic about
the value of rational discourse on the political hustings,
but as a media practitioner I have a public responsibility and obligation to deconstruct propaganda and Machiavellianism, and to bring the weight of empirical scholarship to bear on public issues. But, I remain very pessimistic about its value, even in the intelligentsia and civil society.
TIME FOR PUBLIC DEBATE
The time has come, though, for a serious public debate on the economy and economic alternatives. I challenge the Private Sector Organisation of Jamaica and the Media Association of Jamaica to organise a public debate between Omar Davies and Audley Shaw, or preferably Omar Davies and Bruce Golding, to discuss the way forward for the Jamaican economy. Seeing that Omar is the target in the PNP, let the JLP debate him.
If these organisations don't take up the challenge, I urge electronic media managers to rush to be the first to organise a full two-hour debate between Omar and any representative or representatives the JLP might choose to discuss what the JLP would do differently, and where there exist brighter prospects
for short-term economic
transformation.
The media must really take their role seriously at this time when histrionics, playing to
the gallery and psychological manipulation are clear and
present dangers.
The media must fulfil their obligation to the public to provide hard information, raw data, substantial research and the opportunities for the disputants to debate their ideas.
MORAL OBLIGATION TO INFORM
We can't abandon the Jamaican people to the propagandists on both sides. More importantly, we ourselves as media practitioners, though we might have our own political preferences, must subordinate those preferences to our
overarching moral obligation to inform the public.
When people talk about the need for 'radical change' from the policies which have been pursued, what kinds of changes are we talking about? What are the practical ideas for containing the debt? To cap the debt?
What are the implications of capping the debt in a small, import-dependent, structurally fragile, hazard-prone economy like ours? Do the average man on the street and 'youth and youth' on the corner and the sistas who are blinging at Passa Passa understand what it means to cap the debt, or to have a constitutional amendment to limit the fiscal deficit? Do they understand what that will mean for employment and the ability to fund social services?
If we significantly reduce our borrowings and try to live within our means, do poor people in Tivoli, Tawes Pen and Tower Hill understand what that will mean for them and their children in the short term? Are these things being spelled out for
them in ways they can clearly understand?
Alternatively, if we decide to throw out 'Omar's policies' of fiscal restraint and adopt expansionist policies to 'mek dollars run' for the masses, what will be the implications for inflation, the exchange rate and the exacting and volatile international institutional investors? Do the public commentators and politicians who hold up white Americans and Europeans as the model of fiscal responsibility in contrast to our inefficient politicians here know that in the United States the Federal debt has grown from 32 per cent of GDP in 1980 to 63 per cent at the end of 2004?
PUBLIC DEBT TO GDP IN EU
Do they know that in the European Union, despite the Maastricht Treaty of 1991 and the Stability and Growth Pact which sets a cap on the fiscal deficit, public debt to GDP has remained around 72 per cent because of high interest rates and low growth?
Despite the mantra on the talk shows morning, noon and night that Jamaica is one of the few countries in the world with no growth or sluggish growth, is it known that between 1990-2003 only 18 developing countries had an average growth rate of five per cent or more, and only two of these Chile and the Dominican Republic are in the Latin American region? Despite Latin America's being the poster child of neo-liberalism?
ECONOMIC STRATEGY DEBATES
The myopia and parochialism of debates about economic strategy in Jamaica manifest themselves in the utter disregard for the international context. Some commentators and politicians, to mask their own ignorance of international economic developments, simply and tritely say that "Globalisation is being used as an excuse for economic mismanagement and incompetence." But, we in the media must have the information at our fingertips and we must be au fait with the best research globally to be able to serve our public.
In a major paper put out last month by the International Labour Organisation, the former director of the Division of Globalisation and Development Strategies, Yilmaz Akyuz (From Liberalisation to Investment and Jobs: Lost in Translation), we read that "Macroeconomic policy in developing countries has a been circumscribed by global economic conditions shaped in large part by the mix and stance of policies in industrial countries. In this respect, developments in financial conditions, notably in respect to international liquidity, risk spreads and interest rates and capital flows have exerted greater influence on the scope and effect of policies in the developing world than those in world trade and commodity markets, except for the poorest countries" among which we are not numbered. We are a middle-income developing country.
Akyuz goes on to say that "Policy constraints have generally been tighter in most middle income Latin American countries with high and volatile inflation, chronic budget and payments deficits and high levels of pubic debt than Asian countries with relatively stable prices and sustainable fiscal and external balances."
And no one should be naive enough to ask 'If the East Asians could do it why can't we'?
ECONOMIC TRANSFORMATION
IN EAST ASIA
People like economists Dani Rodrik and Joseph Stiglitz have shown how a more developmentalist and interventionist state facilitated economic transformation in East Asia and how the policies of the World Trade Organisation precisely forbid those proven successful strategies today. I recommend a book just published by Joseph Stiglitz and Andrew Charlton titled Fair Trade for All: How Trade Can Promote Development. The book looks at the WTO policies, the Doha Development Round and the prospects for growth in the developing world.
It should be an eye-opener to those accustomed to making wild charges about economic recklessness being the only factor for the lack of growth in developing countries. The book says openly that "We have an international trade regime which, in many ways, is disadvantageous to the developing countries." It is not just a matter of changing finance ministers.
There is not much policy space available for 'radical change' in the Jamaican economy. But there can be significant shifts. There is a well-established body of literature which critiques the Washington Consensus model which has been imposed on developing countries like Jamaica (not to take away from Omar's astuteness, but the policies he is pursuing is not his originally!)
What is needed is for greater attention to be given to employment creation, equity, small business facilitation, community regeneration and mobilisation. There are things which can be done within the limits of the neo-liberal model. There needs to be a more activist state. Eddie Seaga, to his credit, has never believed in the purist laissez-faire model which we have too uncritically adopted.
CHILE'S GROWTH
As Fair Trade for All says, "To date not one successful developing country has pursued a purely free market approach to development." East Asia grew because of an activist state. That is how Chile has grown, too. (See the paper 'A New Developmentalist Welfare State Model in the Making? Chile In Latin America' by Manuel Riesco, CENDA, February 2006). Chile has the most impressive growth in Latin America and tops the global competitiveness index for the region. The same with China and India.
Omar would have to be willing to preside over a more activist state which would give as much attention to employment and wealth-creation as it does to inflation targeting and monetarism. There is no way to deal with crime and the social deterioration of the country without some adjustments to the model.
But there will still be the need for sacrifice, fiscal restraint and prudence and some band-your-belly policies. Politicians are only fooling the people when they suggest there is a painless path for this structurally maladjusted, lopsided economy.
I repeat, let us have a debate between Omar and his accusers. I know what the result will be.
* Ian Boyne is a veteran
journalist. Email him at
ianboyne1@yahoo.com.
