When is regionalism useful and necessary?

"We want no unwilling peoples within our empire" - so stated Clement Atlee, Labour Prime Minister, on the issue of moving the colonies to independence after a financially exhausted Britain, with the help of its allies, had defeated Germany for the second time in less than half a century.

Churchill, associated with his oft-quoted description of humanist, nationalist and tireless advocate of Indian independence Mahatma Gandhi, as a 'half-naked fakir', had earlier steadfastly expressed the view that he did not come to office to oversee dissolution of the British Empire. So what was this, a major change of heart, a pang of collective conscience in an imperial power? No, it certainly was not. It was rather a new policy dictated by fundamentally changed circumstances. The colonies could no longer be maintained, they weren't providing the kinds of returns to the mother country as they did in an earlier era.

More importantly though, the passion and eagerness for self-governance had grown remarkably and independence movements came to be recognised as unstoppable. These changed circumstances were evident in several policy initiatives of the British government of the time. Sir Raymond Firth, the New Zealand-born LSE anthropologist, feared that post-war planning for the colonies would be hampered by a lack of information about society and economy. His idea of gathering this information led to creation of the Colonial Social Science Research Council in 1944. At the war's end, the Colonial Office, on recommendations of this Council, established research institutes in the colonies of East, West and Central Africa and the West Indies - the forerunner to our Sir Arthur Lewis Institute of Social and Economic Studies. These institutes were funded under the Colonial Development and Welfare Act - the colonial power's self-interest underlay all these initiatives.

Wrong order

During Atlee's prime ministership, India, Pakistan, Ceylon and Burma became independent. Progression to self-governance and independence was clearly settled British 'colonial' policy as subsequently Conservative governments granted independence to Ghana, the Malayan Federation, Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Cyprus and Tanganyika (Tanzania). The West Indies Federation was to be next in this convoy of independence and accession to the Commonwealth of Nations.

The beauty of this trend for the West Indies was the unity of purpose, though for differing reasons, between the British government and the West Indian colonies aspiring to independence. The position then was no independence without financial viability, which would translate to no independence without federation. Marryshow, a Grenadian leader and integrationist, had the slogan 'Educate, Agitate, Federate'. To West Indian leaders, independence at that time was synonymous with federation. This drive, however, was shattered partly because the political arrangements preceded the crux of the matter - financing the venture.

Why should Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago share their only recently found bounty from mineral wealth? Additionally, arrangements for taxation were fuzzy. But perhaps the biggest crack came when the Colonial Office let slip the thought that perhaps Jamaica and Trinidad and Tobago could "go it alone". Jamaican domestic politics and leadership issues then put paid to the venture after the referendum. Eric Williams' 'one from ten leaves zero' was merely icing on the cake.

The usefulness of integration, however, as confusing a construct as it may be to them, has never disappeared from the minds of Caribbean people, including most of their leaders, most of the time. CARICOM and other regional institutions attest to this. Yet, a look into the truth mirror reveals not all is well as perhaps the single most ambitious initiative since the Antigua declaration and creation of CARIFTA, the CSME, seems stalled if not mortally wounded. Yet, for CARICOM, self-interest could prove a powerful stimulant. Perhaps we might take a page out of the book of the mother country after the war.

At the Cannes meeting of the G20 Summit, while the world's top-20 most powerful leaders could not agree policy decisions on a host of critical matters currently hobbling the world's financial system, a few statements and their repercussions must raise adrenaline levels in some of the CARICOM family. Prime Minister Manomohan Singh of India (one of the recent invitees to the anteroom of the G20 banquet) urged the group to agree a regime of automatic exchange of tax information. That was important. But more important, for financial services and international business in the Caribbean region, was the French President's rather strong, almost pugnacious words in his statement at the end of the meeting.

President Nicholas Sarkozy, pro-vided a list of 11 'uncooperative jurisdictions' that should be 'excluded from the international community'. These included: Antigua and Barbuda, Barbados, Botswana, Brunei, Liechtenstein, Panama, Seychelles, Switzerland, Uruguay, Vanuatu and Trinidad and Tobago. Sarkozy also indicated the name-and-shame process that would be shared with the world at all future G20 meetings: a list of non-conforming countries to 'acceptable tax practices' would be published. He said their message is very clear: "We don't want to have tax havens any longer."

Barbados' Minister of Foreign Affairs and Foreign Trade, Senator Maxine McClean, insists that "Barbados is a low-tax jurisdiction ... not a tax haven." Prime Minister Freundel Stuart who, in a statement asked "that all countries use insight and accuracy in their characterisation of other countries, especially when that characterisation has negative connotations", supports her.

In light of vaunted Swiss financial secrecy and the Isle of Man's well-advertised and known prowess in legally avoiding taxes, these statements and pleas may be fine, but on their own cannot achieve the desired outcomes. Swiss and Isle of Man jurisdictions, I daresay, have more influence than Barbados. The Caribbean financial services sector, defined by G20 as 'off-shore' operations, need to take united action in face of this threat. Better yet, CARICOM needs to become proactive in this. Former Governor of the Central Bank of Barbados, Winston Cox, suggests the time is ripe for "creation of a sector-wide national and regional college of financial industry supervisors to bring together all the regulatory and standard setting bodies - a national and a regional Financial Stability Board, if you wish." I do wish. We should immediately begin such a venture to be agreed and implemented as quickly as possible!

wilbe65@yahoo.com