What Budget?

What Budget? “Yesterday’s Budget will come to be remembered more for what it failed to do than what it delivered.” Mia Amor Mottley While Barbadians breathed a collective sigh of relief that the Prime Minister did not try to tax his way out of the recession, Opposition Leader Mia Amor Mottley made it very clear in her reply that having cited the problems affecting the economy, he then did nothing to resolve them.

For Barbadians who remember the horrors of the early nineties there was an awful sense of déjà vu about the Prime Minister’s presentation. Then as now, the country’s foreign reserves were of greatest concern. Miss Mottley pointed out that the foreign reserves had not yet reached the perilous state they were, in 1990/91, but if nothing were done to arrest the slide – then Barbadians would be staring harsh economic adjustments squarely in the face. She was of the view that Thompson would have to return to the House before the expiration of the current financial year to correct the problems that he refused to address in the Budget.

It was this delay that concerned Miss Mottley, given the history of 1991. Of greatest concern to her though is the announcement by the Prime Minister to run a primary fiscal surplus of 5.9% of GDP by 2011. The requirement to run this type of surplus is a prescription normally imposed by international lending agencies like the IMF and the World Bank and means that once more, like 1991, we would not hold our destiny in our own hands. It also means that a substantial chunk of any money we generate will have to be put aside to appease the moneylenders and will not be available for either social programmes, support for the private sector or projects that will expand our productive capacity. Effectively they will lend us the money, but tell us how we must spend it – repaying interest.

This remedy is precisely what could lead to social suffering and further economic hardship. Despite those who might advocate otherwise, Miss Mottley continues to offer the Government advice and solutions out of the mess it has generated around itself. As early as last year she cautioned that the large increase in energy prices and the Prime Minister’s $104 million tax grab would lead to an increase in prices and less money in people’s pockets. The advice was ignored. She advised then as well that that was the time to go to the international market for loans when money was still available and affordable. The advice was ignored.

She suggested floating a Stabilization Bond to support employment. The advice was ignored. She called for a Parliamentary Standing Committee on Finance and Economic Affairs in March so that the Opposition could assist the national effort. The advice was ignored. Now that the mess has hit the proverbial fan, the Prime Minister is pleading with the Opposition to join Team Barbados and put country ahead of partisan political interests. Calls for unity must never be disguised as a silence of criticism.

It is not a part of our Parliamentary or national experience. But have no fear; Miss Mottley and the Barbados Labour Party team will continue to show the Prime Minister and his side the error of his ways. She will continue to offer the government advice in the interest of Barbados and Barbadians, even when it is thrown back in her face with all the finesse of a gully boar. Who can forget the jeering from the government benches in the first Budget Debate: “You are not in Government now.” “We don’t want your advice.” She knows that Barbados deserves better. She knows that Barbados can do better. She knows that we can do better.

Against The Tide

Against the tide

myopia, mi-o-pi-a, n. lack of imagination, foresight or   intellectual insight

Prime Minister David Thompson, supported by his Cabinet, has taken the expected reactionary view to the issue of immigration by our Caribbean brothers and sisters without apparently identifying any real solution to what is perceived as a problem by so many Barbadians.

What is even more disturbing is that his lukewarm attempt to solve the “problem” makes no mention of people who are not our neighbours, but who are here illegally. The lack of a clearly defined message makes it appear as if Caribbean people are being targeted as the scapegoats in the immigration morass.

There are a few things that Barbadians must consider when examining this question of intra-regional migration. First and foremost we cannot extract it from the larger mission of regionalism.

Half a century after the concept of a common people with a common destiny was first mooted are we satisfied that as members of a geographic region with a similar historical experience that there is more that unites us than divides us?

Are we satisfied as well that our future prosperity lies in unity and not isolation? If the answer to these two seminal questions is yes then all that remains is how we choose to accomplish the goal.

As a region we are not without experience in this regard. Despite the failure of the political structure of Federation, the University College of the West Indies, the West Indies Meteorological Service, the West India Regiment and the Federal Supreme Court and their successors are proof positive of the benefits of pooling our resources.

From Carifta to Caricom to the CSME the goal has been collective effort for individual gain. Regrettably, community has often been subsumed by sovereignty for the sake of political expediency and to the detriment of greater prosperity than we currently enjoy as a region.

So where do we go from here and why is it important to Barbadians. First, the reality of the situation – in a world where the economic pecking order is constantly being re-defined to benefit the giants it is obviously easier to build alliances with the countries you know and with whom you have something in common.

The facts already indicate that Caricom countries buy fifty-two percent of our exports; twenty percent of our tourists come from neighbouring countries and the Caribbean Basin is a natural extension of the local market for companies, large and small, wishing to expand their operations. So if we are going to continue to grow our economies in an international climate of constraint, the Caribbean community is already a natural fit.

Naturally we must expect our neighbours will wish to have the same opportunity for growth that we do. The stronger they are, the greater opportunities exist for us to trade with them in both goods and services. It therefore stands to reason that if we pool our resources to avoid the cost of duplicating regulatory, legal; research and financing institutions then the benefits will accrue to all.

People though are the market. Not companies or institutions nor even sovereign states. Once the people prosper, the market will prosper. This is why it is urgent for the Prime Minister to push for a common protocol to define contingent rights.

If a man is working and paying taxes it is not unreasonable for him to expect certain benefits from the state. Prohibition does not work. It will create an underclass that can potentially undermine the system. It is better to embrace a man for mutual gain than to try to shut him out.

When will the Prime Minister recognize this next crucial step?

Unsound Clico??????????????

The Government of Barbados earlier this year announced that its strategy to support the more than 40 000 policy holders and investors and the 1600 odd employees in the companies of Clico Holdings Barbados was to sell Clico International Life Insurance Company to ICBL.

ICBL has now indicated that they have discontinued discussions with Clico Holdings Barbados in respect of that sale. This tears into shreds the Government’s strategy for Clico and it raises a few questions.

Why should ICBL break off talks that the Government of Barbados are so keen on?

1. Is it that the assets of Clico are not as sound as the Prime Minister has assured us?
2. Is it that Clico is so confident of the Prime Minister’s support that they were not prepared to sell the company at the right price?
3. Is it that the more ICBL found out about the operations of Clico the more they wanted to get as far away as possible?

 

What is certain, however, is that the Government should now seek urgently to have the Supervisor of Insurance apply to the Court to place the company under judicial management to protect the interest of these 40 000 policy-holders and investors given the sizeable Statutory Fund deficit.

 

This still leaves Clico Holdings Barbados or the Supervisor of Insurance to pursue the option of the sale of Clico Life or any part of its assets therein under the provisions of the Insurance Act.