Priorities at 50

Squabbling over transition issues in ministries as government changes hands has never been a fruitful or productive use of the people's representatives' time, or, despite popularity of TV and radio shows reporting on them, that of our journalists taking to the airwaves seeking listeners and viewers.

Partisans shall always find a good 'cass cass' rewarding, it lays blame, soils the reputation of another and generates lots of chatter. But this is as far as it goes.

The better approach should be, once there are murky issues to be explored and adjudicated, that they be identified, quickly clarified and a report placed in the public domain. Commitment to transparent efficiency in governance demands this.

Other matters like the malaise in the condition of the economy, with its negative impact, particularly on the disadvantaged, require immediate attention of our ministers and their technocrats who should, therefore, not have to waste time on irrelevant squabbles.

So what does the man in Half-Way Tree square think ought to be the three topmost issues of focus? He thinks jobs - and though not intimately, he knows of potential IMF setbacks - combating crime and the cost of living.

As we think of these matters though, we confront the scale of the task at hand - there are actually a multitude of problems requiring a fix. More complication: they seem interdependent.

Can we actually determine, or to use a word that twists my tongue, 'prioritise' these in a way that finds consensus amongst a broad cross section of Jamaicans?

Several contestants for priority positions, as well as ways in which to choose, exist. Jobs, cost of living; housing and urban decay; Jamaica 50; IMF agreement; fighting and avoiding crime; naming boards and chairs for critical entities; energy and electricity policy; transportation policy; resuscitation of bauxite/alumina activity - as we list issues needing attention the quandary emerges.

This obviously partial, limited list, which we can agree are related, we quickly identify as all critical. The other interesting thing is, they seem to have been with us for a very long time.

When in 1948, Nobel Laureate Arthur Lewis responded to Eric Williams' call from his position heading research at the Anglo-American Caribbean Commission, to consider industrial possibilities in the British West Indian colonies, he confronted the two beasts: unemployment and poverty.

He cast the fact of overpopulation in the islands as a major piece of the foundation for his prescriptive design. This he based on the carrying capacity of arable land available. "The case for industrialisation in the West Indies", he argued "rests chiefly on overpopulation. The islands already carry a larger population than agriculture can absorb, and populations are growing at rates faster than 1.5 to two per cent per annum. It is therefore urgent to create new opportunities for employment off the land."

The Caribbean could not provide a reasonable standard of living for its population with these resources. He made comparisons with Europe and elsewhere:

• A European family needs 12 acres for reasonable subsistence;
• West Indies apart from Belize and Guyana, less than half the land is cultivable;
• In Jamaica, merely 15 per cent of the country is flat land. Of this flat land, only 12.5 per cent is under cultivation.

In Jamaica, European peasant standards would allow a population density of 60 per square mile. The actual density: 294 per square mile [written circa 1948/9].

Lewis recommended industrialisation. With low Caribbean savings and income levels, investment would perforce be foreign and protected - tax, location and tariff protection status - output must be for export, locals would "learn the tricks of the trade".

Proximity to the world's largest market, compatible legal system, English language, capital resources - all these were positively aligned and made this a possibility. The international system accepted the 'infant industry argument' for protection of local markets.

We know the outcome of our attempt to implement the Lewis prescription. We threw away his architectural drawings and commenced construction, having abandoned the rules he insisted upon.

Industrialisation failed to deliver the gains claimed for it: income and employment growth coupled with development. Lewis was castigated for this failure which was not of his making.

Dubbed 'roast breadfruit' among other pejorative names, he finally went off to Princeton and basked in the recognition his Nobel Prize provided.

Today throughout the region, commentators look at Singapore and Lee Kuan Yew; many suggest FDI as our only salvation. FDI is the current acronym for investment by foreigners - Foreign Direct Investment.

We've come a long way to double back in the 'wheel and come again dance'. If we're to prevail we'll need to be careful.

Lee visited Jamaica and formed the view we were too carefree.

The international system has changed drastically. Today, WTO rules are fundamentally different than GATT; infant industry argument for protection is toasted like so much charcoal; cold war stances no more; China, Brazil and India demonstrate an enhanced role of the state in variants of capitalism for which Charles Darwin would have difficulty building a taxonomy.

Charting a path of sustainable development, balancing both budget and people's lives, navigating the relatively new and troubled waters of sustained international recession is not easy. One thing we might note though: infrastructure, broadly defined, is an absolute key. Infrastructure is not merely hardware - roads, bridges and sewage treatment plants - it includes the institutional and 'soft' or social capital that makes a country and its society rank as a nice place to live as well as, importantly, to make a living.

Ask why so many Jamaicans migrate. Is their question what their country cannot do for them? If so, is this unreasonable? Jamaica offers life on a human scale that is enchanting - but to whom is this available? More needs to be done to generalise this reality and enhance its appeal.

Alas, to do this, we must know the data and, more importantly, understand why they are what they are. Only then can we truly seek to change the relationships they shout at us.

Wilberne Persaud is author of 'Jamaica Meltdown: Indigenous Financial Sector Crash 1996'. wilbe65@yahoo.com