NUPW general secretary denis clarke certainly believes so

i believe so too

sure feels like it to me

voting for thompson and d l p was a big mistake -but sometimes people are so happy they take things for granted and tinker with things for no good reason

we voted for change–didnt say what kind of change though !

“(The paper) is full of useful information and (is) a reasonably balanced account
of the events of 1991 and the years immediately following. Among others, it
confirms my firmly held belief that Owen’s reputation for competent economic
management owes a lot to the foundations laid in the adjustment program
implemented by his predecessor. A fact that many Owen admirers either dispute or
ignore. Not least of its virtues is that it preaches the gospel of fiscal
prudence and the essential role of a sound policy framework — especially in small
states.

Incidentally, the person who made the comment was also one of Errol Barrow’s inner circle of the 1970s.

Where are these people, now, when Barbados needs them most?

David:

“Late” as in not early, or late as in now longer with us? I saw the honorable knight last Friday, so any suggestion of his demise is egregiously inaccurate. I think that you owe him a late, as in coffee.

In Barbados the economy was falling apart, and a prime minister came to office called Erskine Sandiford in 1987. He made the ultimate political sacrifice to ensure that the economy was put back on the right track by making the decisions that led to his political demise but were in the best interest of the country. It is to the detriment of the Barbados people that they voted him out, and I believe that they are still benefiting from his policies, though the economy recently has shown some signs of vulnerability.

Source: Jamaican Observer

Maybe the Doctor has a point?

True, true!

I humbly suggest that you should have told the PDC – “Quidquid praecipies esto brevis” !

GR please watch the high pollutin language. The BU household only went to seventh standard!

David

However, I am still of the view that we are becoming a satellite of China. Regardless if the pre-election talk was about Taiwan, I am concern about the PM admittance of trying to satisfy his critics by going to China.

Remember the late Prime Minister Barrow’s statement of ‘ a satellite of none’. Are we begging too hard, thus becoming a satellite?

Dr. Reid, of what relevance, sir, is this historico-descriptive analysis, if we can call it that too, to what is happening socially, politically, materially and financially in Barbados right now, given that Barbados is facing a major economic and financial crisis, and given that this DLP Government seems ill-equipped to properly handle it? If there is any relevance, sir, what is the extent of the relevance of this essay to what is happening socially, politically and other wise in a Barbados that faces such a crisis, and in a Barbados that the DLP has recently lied to the people of in order to help win an election and to partially deflect the worst of such a crisis from their view? If, sir, there is little or no relevance to what is happening in Barbados, why is it that you are harking back to that dark and brutal 1991-3 structural and stabilization period in Barbados? For psycho-historical reasons? For political reasons? Save for historical political reasons and purposes, why is it so necessary for a so-called economics scholar like you to write such an ordinary narrative based on what happened in that 1991-3 period? And why is it that you are casually attempting to link it with a very imprecise but conservative way forward (a minimum 6 point approach) of yours for Barbados, if for some reason you are NOT seen by us as one of those members and/or supporters of this great party (para. 3, lines 8-9) who continues to fail – probably you will never be able to succeed either – if indeed you are a member/supporter of the DLP – at seriously coming to terms, spiritually and psychologically, with the very extensive moral, social, political, material and financial destruction and chaos that this once beloved DLP helped wrought on this country during that time?

It is for sheer literary educational reasons that your method of writing is so historically and intellectually constrained by such conservatism and caution, and is not so much socially and philosophically enlightened and inspired by the greater political and other crises and challenges that currently face the country? Certainly, NOT. But, for sure here is another social commentary, by you this time, that clearly epitomes that endless politico-psychological struggle that many esp. DLP members and supporters in Barbados still have going with regard to, on one hand, what was or should have been better ideologically expected of a pseudo-elite led, majority working class populated, democratic socialist party like the DLP in the 1991-3 crisis, and, on the hand, what the DLP would have actually done in same 1991-3 period to help destroy much of that essentialist Barrowian historical connection between itself and many of the working class, while at the same time helping to do much of that savagery in the interest of Western liberal political economics. Perhaps, you are part of the supposed intelligentsia in Barbados that will still come out, quasi-professionally, for whatever personal/political reasons and defend this already wayward DLP, and, perhaps, we in PDC will look forward to hearing more of your trite commentaries on the economic direction of the country. And, the final question, who are you really addressing this missive to and where are you and they located within the context of this historical trajectory of Barbados?

With regard to your seeming penchant to look into the future backwards to learn lessons from errors made in the past, the fact, sir, is that the present DLP Government will go on to make many more monumental political managerial blunders and errors than could ever be thought of them by its members and supporters for the duration of this term, and to which it will NOT care much about, primarily because of the still stifling and lingering political stench that was very much created by then Sandiford Government’s very untouchable, very irremovable and very abhorrent contribution to one of the most odious chapters in this country’s post-independence history, and secondarily because of its supposed belief that no greater blunders and mistakes can be made now than those that were made then. So, Dr. Reid, it is NOT so much about “going back and correcting” any errors, which is really impossible to do, as much as it is that many of these present and future blunders and errors are and will be being made by different DLP actors within a post 2008 context.

Dr. Reid, we also want to remind you that the history of contemporary fundamental social, political, economic and financial problems of Barbados did not begin in 1991, or even begin in an immediate post-independence period in Barbados, but began with the British/European/African transatlantic slave trade, and the British/European enslavement and colonization of our people in this part of the world. Recent times and events have greatly exposed, not compounded, those historical problems. So, the 1991-3 crisis would have been essentially a lond standing pre-determined symptom of many of those historical problems, and in many senses would have been seen later by our party as a continuing legacy of those kinds of historical problems. Just check the so-called conservative, neo-liberal and neo-liberalization economic policies of the said IMF in 1991-3, and see the extent of their destructive effects, then, on the Barbadian society and how many thousands of Barbadians protested seriously in response, and make the connections now, which you patently failed to do in this essay, between them and the historical classical role of the political economic dominationist, expansionist and accumulationist agendas of those western countries and their international interests that were, and still are, the primary beneficiaries of the then IMF-led exploitative and impoverishing schemes.

Thus, it is entirely wrong to say that “the challenges created by the implementation of the promise of the income tax cut that was made in the General Election of 1986, were compounded in the 1990-1 by the loosening of fiscal and montary policies in the run up to the 1991 General Elections”, when the inveterate a priori facts are such that this is the way how Western politics and economics have been historically and structurally designed to fundamentally help put so-called Third World countries – Barbados included – into deep and recurring crises no matter how they twist and turn or how long they think they are going to avoid such crises, whereupon these bigger Western countries and their international interests would come in and finish destroy or strangle much of these countries affairs. It is inherent in ALMOST ALL of these particular western policies and schemes that we in Barbados and the rest of the so-called third World have long adopted, for them to do so and to assist any other compatiable features in doing so. Also, in this current hostile international political and relations environment, any growth and development of many of the affairs of this so-called Third World must therefore be primarily mediated and controlled by Western society and with its fundamental interests in mind. That is why a future PDC Government of Barbados shall Abolish ALL Taxation; Abolish Interest Rates; Abolish ALL Exchange Rates Parities with the Barbados Dollar; Make Imports of Goods and Services Zero-”priced” at ALL points of entry, among other things, so as to as much as possible minimize such inherent adverse Western political and other effects on our Barbadian society.

Finally, it is also totally wrong for Dr. Reid to suggest, in a presumably all-embracing context, that on average very small states have larger governments and higher public debt …. (and) that though there are intrinsic factors ( we wonder what these are? ) that explain why governments are bigger in very small states, those with smaller governments and lower public debt tend to grow faster and are less vulnerable (to what may we ask, Dr. Reid?) What mangled, convoluted and mishmashing nonsense!! The facts are that the particular size of government and the particular size of the government debt has very/little to do with the particular rate at which Barbados, or any other relevant country, grows and develops, in contrast to how bigger/smaller governments with bigger/smaller government debt profiles in bigger countries do grow and develop. For there are so many historical, social, political, material and financial variables and their interrelationships with other variables that help determine the size of a government, its debt, the growth/decline of a country and how more or less vulnerable it is to certain external shocks and forces, etc. more than what Dr. Reid allows for in his essay.

It is a pity that, having started the essay with such vigour, imagery and play on words, the goodly Doctor ends the essay on a rather non-contentious, vague and subdued note, dealing with, et al, the significance of the country’s making good use of scientific and technological advances, the significance of the Social Partnership in the national decisional making proceses, and his dealing with the desirability of a minimum 6 point approach for helping manage the economy of Barbados between now and 2013. WHEW!!!

PDC

How can there be outrage at discussions between a newly elected PM and the de facto world superpower?

Possibly Inkwell is aware of the terms and conditions agreed as a result of those discussions PM Thompson held with the Chinese.

… If indeed we have gone begging and prostituting ourselves, then I am with Inkwell…

But if on the other hand, discussions and agreements were professional, respectful and mutually beneficial arrangements between China and Barbados then what is the issue?

My problem with the BLP approach was the articulated policy of OSA that ‘…if we want to maintain our standard of living then we had better be prepared to bend over…’ (well he did not actually put it in those words – he was on about selling assets – which is only different by a ‘t’).

Let us wait and see what the new PM agreed

We hate to say it but we are a tiny speck in the ocean and there is a need to keep it real. But we understand your position and we understand BT’s, that is the great irony. We are all different and will have a different view of things. When all is said and done it is not any earthmoving philosophy which exist between the two parties.

It all comes down to PR!

Is the rebuilding of Culloden Farm and completion of the Sherbourne Conference Centre good enough payment for the sale of the conscience of the government and people of Barbados and its silence with regard to the atrocities of the Chinese government against dissenters of its tyrannical style of rule and its repression of the rights of the Tibetan people?

It is now that I am ashamed to be a Barbadian, when my country’s pride and independence can be sold for a mess of pottage.

question

is george reid a member of the democratic labour party’s aplogists committee which is now seeking to explain a situation as a comforting thought to their beloved david
*******************************************

I am flattered by the discussion that my paper has stimulated. We must remember that we are all in this together, and when the economy goes to hell in a handbasket that we were given to carry water, we will all die of thirst. And Barbados is a water-scarce island.

The main point that I tried to make in my cautionary tale is that deficits matter. Granted, our past colonial experience has shown that it is impossible to promote the development of a small island nation withour incurring some kind of a deficit. But if one looks at the fiscal date from 1961 to the present, there is a step-level difference between the deficits incurred in the first 15 years of that period, and the subsequent 10. I have written about what happened, thereafter, because it has had a critical impact on our economic fortunes, whether we admit it, or not.

is george reid a member of the democratic labour party’s aplogists committee which is now seeking to explain a situation as a comforting thought to their beloved david

…no wonder your blog is such a hit.

I think that the weakness in the various analysts of political performance in Barbados is the temptation to define success in purely GDP terms.

I mean, if a poor man positions himself (possibly, but not necessarily by ‘bending over’…) to borrow or be granted access to significant loans and conditional grants – does that constitute success?

What success What?!?

Does success not have relationships to productivity, PRIDE in self worth, self esteem and holding up high standards?

How does the BLP’s developmental philosophy stand up when measured against such standards?

I personally felt ashamed to be a Bajan, particularly in the last two terms under Arthur. I felt as though I was on sale to the highest bidder as a Bajan and so was all that I held dear…. and Bush tea is no ‘hand to mouth’ poor boy….

…even if the DLP manages ONLY to restore some pride and dignity to leadership in this country, and even if, in the process we have to lose some of the material gains that we have made, Bush tea will be a much happier man.

….what shall it profit Bush tea to gain the whole world and lose the real value of life?

GR made reference to the importance of transforming the economy of Barbados by integrating technology. The BLP did a good job at the macro level but it failed to bring efficiencies to the workings of government through injection of technology. On the face of things we have been doing well but in the back office we have a cart and buggy operation. Public Sector Reform has been a failure and the effort by central Bank to use suasion to encourage key stakeholders like the finance sector, which is a key intermediary in our economy to get on board has also failed. This is one area which the BLP paid lip service. EDUTEC is a noble objective which to date has been poorly executed (a considerable misappropriation of funds which surrogates benefited).

The other point is the absence of a strategy to shift from the traditional fundamentals which have supported our economy albeit with good results up to now. Although we can admit that the hunt for oil off our shores was an attempt to secure the financial future of Barbados, in light of our lack of refining capacity and the finite nature of oil one wonders if it was a sustainable approach.

Finally a point which economists generally don’t pay much attention is the importance of socially cohesive policies rolled-out in parallel with fiscal policies which focus on economic advancement. Maybe GR and JR et al can speak to these issues with more clarity.

In summary the BLP got consumed in the machinations of the global free market economy and forgot about the real concerns of the people and the need to engage in policy formulation which straddled the macro-needs of Barbados and the every day concerns of Barbadians..

Let us further agree that the BLP administration became cocky, arrogant out of touch and by all reports tiefing. the facts are that the economy was prospering, GDP at its historical highest, foreign reserves at their historical highest,unemployment at its lowest and the international rating agencies singing the country’s praises, heady achievements after telling the IMF to get lost in 1994.

In the recent election campaign, the DLP had to take a huge risk again by making promises to impress the electorate and the BLP didn’t help its own cause by being unable to refute the strident charges of corruption.

The long list of DLP campaign promises, headed pointedly by that of integity legislation and a code of conduct for members (we promise to put a stop to all the tiefing and be accountable), followed closely by the promise to reduce the escalating cost of living( the BLP responsible for that: they in bed with the merchants to screw the people) have proven to be unattainable and look like remaining so for the foreseeable future.

An untested government now has the task of navigating the uncharted waters of world recession, a falling dollar and runaway food and energy prices. Little scope for keeping some promises and none at all for reducing the cost of living. Real bad luck. Looks like it was a good election to lose after all.