|
|
The violent reaction to the steep increase in gas prices has forced home to the country in general, but the Administration in particular, the need for reassessment of a wide range of issues. The Administration has used the opportunity to listen to various points of view and clearly the actions which we have subsequently taken would have demonstrated a willingness to learn even as we seek to identify the underlying causal factors and ways in which for the country's good, we reduce the chances of any recurrence in the future. Many have asked did the Administration not expect that there would be a strong reaction to the gas price hike? Whether the answer is "yes" or "no", we would be cast in a negative light. If the public believe that we did not anticipate a protest, then it must be concluded that we are completely divorced from the harsh reality of life for many Jamaicans and therefore, would seem to no longer be capable of representing those that elected us. On the other hand if it is believed that we did anticipate this reaction, then we would seem to be callous, indifferent and uncaring to have gone ahead, regardless of this knowledge. So how then do we explain the reason which led to the imposition of the tax hike? What were the factors which we overlooked when we decided to proceed with this painful step. Many may be impatient with our analysis but if those who call for increased communication between Government and people are genuine then it is a process which must be embarked on, and there is no better time than now to begin. In constructing the expenditure budget we realized that we could no longer postpone bringing on board the debt servicing obligations of FINSAC. In addition, there are additional debts undertaken on behalf of Air Jamaica in an unprogrammed way in fiscal year 98/99. The Government was faced with a delicate balancing act and even with the "resolution" which has emerged, this balancing act continues. We need to meet our debt obligations, domestic and external: we need to continue making investments in the social sector and in physical infrastructure and we need to keep paying our teachers, our doctors, nurses, policemen, civil servants and university lecturers. There is no doubt that there is scope for savings in term of curbing waste and corruption, as well as increasing revenue inflows. But at best the gains from such measures are uncertain. On the other hand, there are obligations which are certain and must be discharged or else not only will the credibility of the Government be eroded, but our credibility as a country deserving of credit will be eroded forever. Many of us have read or heard of countries where at the end of a month teachers cannot be paid, policemen cannot be paid, soldiers cannot be paid. When this occurs, social order disintegrates. As much as we can speak about increased public participation in governance, in the final analysis a Government is expected by all to discharge these responsibilities. There are several lessons which can be derived from recent occurrences and several constructive points have been made which must be incorporated in policy development in the future. One prominent issue relates to the Budget process and although the popular expression is that the public must be involved, it still is not clear that there is any common understanding as to what is implied by this statement. For my own part, there is a need for a greater involvement of all Parliamentarians in the process even if we start with a deeper knowledge of how it works. One major weakness is the fact that in too many cases, policy decisions or the planning and development of major infrastructural projects, are essentially made with little or no involvement of the elected representatives of the people. Hence, it is all too common for major infrastructural work which implies commitment of a significant level of resources to be decided on with minimal consultation with the political representatives. If, as is all too often the case, such major infrastructural works have significant cost overruns, thus eliminating the possibility of investments in other projects, alienation of elected representatives from the budget process becomes even greater. Having spoken in general terms, the trick is how do we combine increased involvement with meeting the strict timetable requirements and most important of all, remaining cognizant of resources constraints. That issue is one which is deserving of focussed attention from all members of the House. Certainly, I would welcome the views of someone such as the Leader of the Opposition who has dealt with this process for 37 unbroken years, 18 as a Minister, 13 as Minister of Finance. A related issue to which many have spoken, particularly those in the media, is that of inadequate communication between Government and people. Part of the problem obviously is related to the fact that many MPs do not have a sense of identification with the Budget except in so far as the SESP and LDP or specific projects in their constituencies are concerned. However, above and beyond that, there is clearly the need for more consistent interaction between the political directorate and the public in terms of what is possible, given the resource constraints we face, as a country. It is important, however, to know that this is not a task solely of the Administration. The media houses also have a responsibility in terms of educating the population. In too many instances, columnists and writers simply play to the gallery, catering to the wildest expectations or even promoting such expectations with scant regard for resource constraints. Despite the above, there is no question that we need to communicate better both directly to the public and through the news media. A third major lesson which we should have learnt relates to various groups, the members of which see themselves as having been overlooked by society and hence have participated in the expressions of popular discouragement which have been catalyzed by the gas protests. These groups include unemployed young people, workers who have lost their jobs as industries have down-sized in an effort to become more competitive and farmers who have lost income with the steady removal of protection against imported commodities. This is not the time and place to have a full discussion as to the appropriate policies to address the concerns of all these different groups. However, I believe it is imperative to focus on the first group - the unemployed youth who see themselves as being overlooked by society and have nothing to lose. Therefore, they have no remorse or regret in destroying property and the image of the country. Statistically, this group - unemployed young people between the ages of 14 and 24 comprises approximately 100,000 with males accounting for 34,000 and females the rest. Perhaps more important is that in the 15-19 age group - unemployment for those with four years or more with secondary education is 53%, and in the 20-24 age group -unemployment for those with the same level of secondary education is 67.4%. Those are chilling statistics on which we have to focus attention. It is for this reason and in the hope of stimulating further discussion on the matter that I share some reflections with members of this Honourable House and with the public on this group and how we should address the "matters arising". In a sense it does not really matter whether in the final analysis, members of this group, will suffer the most from the fall-out which is the inevitable consequence of disturbances such as that we just went through. The fact is everyone will suffer - if not materially, in terms of fear, concern about the safety of loved ones and a constant worry as to when will there be a recurrence. It has now become a national imperative to have a clear understanding as to the composition of this group. This problem exists and any long-term policy position, either in terms of social or economic decision-making, must bear this in mind. There are several points which can be made about the policy imperatives of dealing with this group. We need to examine the extent to which policies pursued to date and investments which have been made to address precisely the problems which have emerged, have been successful in terms of achieving their objectives. Consider for example, an assessment of the impact of the education and training system on such a group. In many instances, persons who were involved in the wanton destruction of property have had several years of exposure to our education and training system. Yet still in many instances, we have persons who have no skills but who have significant obligations but no sustained source of income. Certainly not enough to address the needs of their dependents. Any of us who represent inner city constituencies are daily faced with the reality of a young man not yet 30, who speaks easily of "having got" 8, 10, 12 children or a young mother of five or six who is yet to see her 25th birthday. The challenge is not simply to provide a job, as the remuneration for such an unskilled person will not meet the most basic obligations of his/her immediate family. Stripped to basics, public policy for such a group must be tripartite.
The programme of activities articulated by the Prime Minister yesterday, is consistent with this general formulation but the society must recognize that in the final analysis, the only long-term solution lies in increased employment brought about by expanded economic activity. This increased employment is only self-sustaining if the work force, which is utilized, adds value to the tasks at hand. As I have indicated there are very logical reasons why segments of the society would see themselves as having nothing to lose but to join in social protest and if necessary to take destructive action to bring attention to their plight. As a keen student of our pop music, I am not surprised that our singers and "players of instruments" have identified with the protests. I would be surprised if this were not so. In a sense, everyone is most closely identified with a particular period and for me I identify with the voices of protest as reflected in music worldwide and locally in the 1960s and 1970s. There were causes then too and musicians and singers were in the forefront of that struggle. But even as they struggled they were conscious of the need to ensure that their cause was not exploited by cynics and opportunists. It is for this reason that I address this section of my presentation to the popular artistes. I first quote someone who I believe will be judged as one of the great poets of the 20th Century - Bob Dylan from a classic called "Only A Pawn In Their Game". The background to the song is that during the heart of the civil rights movements, white racists attempted to enlist poor whites on their side by suggesting to them that social progress on the parts of the blacks would be at their expense. The tactic worked for a while and the great civil rights leader Medgar Evers was killed by a poor white man, spurred on by the white racists who were simply exploiting the situation. Listen to Dylan's statement on the issue
Let us listen to our own poet - Bob Marley in the tune "Zimbabwe" and he says
What I am saying to you, with a genuine basis for protest - do not be tricked by mercenaries. Do not become "a pawn in their game". || Previous | Table of Contents | Next ||
|
