Caricom's management change overdue

Analysis
Rickey Singh



ARRANGEMENTS have been finalised for a special meeting in Grenada of seven Caribbean Community Heads of Government to discuss the critical matter of "governance" on Tuesday, August 17.

But the big question remains: how seriously committed are the leaders of our 37-year-old economic integration movement to grappling with the elusive but very vital issue of governance?

They have been doing the ritual political merry-go-round on this governance challenge ever since the 1992 Time for Action report was issued by The West Indian Commission.

A new governance system, relevant to the challenges of our time, has been on and off the Caricom leaders' work agenda for at least 14 years, dating back to the West Indian Commission's 1992 report, followed by a series of other reports from technocrats and, lastly, that of 2006 from a Technical Working Group (TWG) on "matured regional governance".

A litany of deferred decisions on governance has been the norm. Then it came as a surprise when this prickly topic surfaced again at last month's 31st regular annual Caricom Heads of Government Conference in Montego Bay.

It occurred against the backdrop of spreading discontent and cynicism over the evident lack of progress in completion of the single market arrangements — not to mention the related major project of inauguration of the much-touted common regional economic space.

In the process, two significant developments occurred behind closed doors in Montego Bay.

Conceding that there can no longer be a business-as-usual approach in the face of declining faith in effective governance of the community's wide-ranging policies and programmes, there was a caucus session that focused both on Edwin Carrington's future with Caricom as well as the way forward for the community in all major areas of operation.

By the time the July 4-7 Montego Bay summit concluded, we were learning that consensus had emerged to treat with urgency the business of governance of the community, and particularly in relation to its flagship CSME project.

It was agreed that a special meeting of the Caricom Bureau, plus some other leaders of the 15-member community, would take place in Grenada and that they would be assisted by members of the TWG on "matured regional governance" that was chaired by Dr Vaughn Lewis.

Sitting on hands

It is of relevance to note here that Caricom leaders have been sitting on their hands on the TWG's recommendations for more than three years. The centrepiece of recommendations submitted was the creation of a high-level commission, or similar mechanism, with executive authority and functioning under the direct supervision of Heads of Government.

This specific recommendation was to serve as a reminder of the idea that had originated with the 1992 West Indian Commission, under Sir Shridath Ramphal's chairmanship. The commission had proposed an empowered three-member Caricom Commission to help deal with the challenges of effective governance.

The intention now is for the outcome of this Tuesday's meeting in St George's to be forwarded for decision at a special meeting of Caricom Heads late next month in Jamaica, whose prime minister is the current chairman of the community.

However, while the committee of Caricom leaders was preparing for the meeting in St George's, there came the breaking news from Secretary General Carrington that he had informed Heads of Government of his decision to retire from his post, effective December 31, 2010.

Consequently, a core feature of next week's meeting in Grenada will be the focus on finding a new secretary general to be on board from January 1, 2011.

Prime Minister Golding has been quick to deny suggestions that Carrington may have been "pushed" into advancing his retirement — almost two years before the conclusion of his current fourth term contract.

On the other hand, by his own statement of August 4, Carrington had declared: "The last 18 years have been the pinnacle of my public service career. I have, despite the odds, done all I could to help create a viable and secure community for all..."

Strong voice

Whatever his detractors may now say, Carrington, as head of the Secretariat in Georgetown, has been — warts and all — a strong, regular public voice, via the region's media, in support and defence of Caricom.

There has undoubtedly been progress over the years to applaud, particularly in areas of functional co-operaton, trade and external relations. But there is also blame to be shared between the Secretariat's management and the political directorate of Caricom, in terms of implementation of approved major policies and programmes. Think, for example, the mounting frustration to realise the full CSME.

Carrington was perhaps the equivalent of a chief executive officer functioning in co-operation with the Heads of Government as the regional political directorate with ultimate responsibility.

Now that the community leaders appear willing to take new initiatives in the direction of a management structure relevant to effective "governance for the 21st century", it is to be hoped that the recommendations to emerge from Tuesday's meeting in St George's will prove helpful for hard decisions at the special meeting of Heads planned for late next month in Jamaica.

In accordance with the sentiment of the West Indian Commission's seminal report, it is most certainly "time for action" by Caricom to achieve a quality of governance to make a reality policies and programmes seriously hampered by lack of implementation processes -- whatever the contributing factors.

The CSME project, too long in the making (following the historic Grand Anse Declaration of 1989), as well as the comparatively recent Economic Partnership Agreement with Europe (June 2009i), are outstanding examples of the need for an envisaged new architecture of governance to ensure systematic and timely implementation of decisions.


August 15, 2010


jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Owen Arthur - the Caribbean Commissioner the region should have

By Sir Ronald Sanders:


Owen Arthur, the former Prime Minister of Barbados, is probably one of the best Commissioners of a Caribbean Commission that the region does not have but ought to have.

Indeed, had Caribbean Community and Common market (CARICOM) governments implemented the recommendation of the 1992 West Indian Commission to establish a Caribbean Commission, we may today have as its President, PJ Patterson the former Prime Minister of Jamaica, Owen Arthur as one of its Commissioners and someone from the OECS of the regional calibre of say, Ralph Gonsalves the present Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, or Vaughan Lewis former Prime Minister of St Lucia, as the third Commissioner.

Had such a Commission been in place and operating, CARICOM countries may have been dealing with their current financial and economic crises in a collective and cohesive fashion, and much better than they are currently.

As it is, each country has struggled to deal on an individual basis with the walloping effects not only of the global financial crisis, but also of the consequences of the collapse of CLICO and British American.

While it is true that in mid-June, the governments of the seven small members of the Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) signed a Treaty to establish an Economic Union among themselves, that treaty is not yet operational and while, once it is operational, it will represent progress, it remains insufficient. It is the wider CARICOM region that has to deepen its integration arrangements and especially its machinery for joint decision-making and implementation.

Regrettably, Owen Arthur is not looking for a job as a Commissioner or even Head of a Caribbean Commission. Indeed, one interpretation of a comment he made recently in the Bahamas suggests that he may be interested in being Prime Minister of Barbados once again.

In a very important speech to the Institute of Chartered Accountants of the Caribbean at its annual meeting in the Bahamas on June 25, Arthur said: “You should allow me to begin by stating how very pleased I am to be able to share the same platform once again with Prime Minister Hubert Ingraham who until recently, like I do now, carried the title of Former Prime Minister. His presence fortifies my belief in the concept of the second coming”.

Whatever Arthur meant by that comment, the rest of his statement was a telling analysis of the present financial and economic condition of the Caribbean Community, and a blistering revelation of the lack of support from the International Financial Institutions (IFI’s).

It has to be said, however, that while the IFI’s have not been as responsive to the Caribbean as they could have been, and the IMF in particular has applied the usual prescriptions for providing Stand-By arrangements to Jamaica and Antigua and Barbuda, CARICOM countries failed to provide the IFI’s and major world economies with a clearly defined plan of what they need, for what, and how they plan to repay it.

It should be recalled that when the global financial crisis erupted, the world, and the Caribbean Region within it, faced an economic crisis of unprecedented proportions. Globalisation threatened to overwhelm the Caribbean with a world-wide recession, and indeed it did. Growth in every country except Guyana (according to the IMF) declined in 2008 and 2009. In some cases, there was negative growth. The ratio of debt to GDP escalated everywhere even in normally cautious Barbados. Tourism, on which the entire region (except Guyana and Trinidad and Tobago) now relies, declined everywhere if not in numbers, certainly in spending.

No State, no Government, no society within the region was immune from the economic consequences of the global financial crisis and the effects of the collapse of CLICO and British American. In that context, CARICOM societies expected their governments to come together to explore measures they could take in concert to enlarge the capacity of the region. Indeed, several regional commentators urged such action in very specific terms. As it turned out, CARICOM governments set up two separate task forces and both reported, but no joint plan was put to the IFI’s and none to the major world economies.

Owen Arthur reminded his audience in the Bahamas that “in April 2009, the G20 countries pledged provision of an additional $1.1 trillion to the IMF and the Multilateral Development Banks to enable them to carry out a programme to restore credit, growth and jobs to the world economy”, and he observed that “we have witnessed the carrying out of a rescue and recovery programme for the world’s developed economies, involving an unprecedented commitment of financial resources and the incurring of fiscal deficits on a scale that has hitherto been unimaginable”.

But, while the developed countries were bailing themselves out, they failed to deliver on the pledge “to make available an additional $850 billion of resources through the IMF and the multilateral development banks to support growth in emerging market and developing countries by helping to finance counter-cyclical spending, bank recapitalization, infrastructure, trade finance, balance of payments support, debt rollover and social support”.

Arthur pointed out that the IMF introduced a new Flexible Credit Line through which the bulk of additional IMF financing was to be channelled. As he said: “It was also especially intended to herald a fundamental change in the procedures for accessing IMF funds and meeting IMF programming tests”.

However, it could not be used by Caribbean countries and the facility into which $500 billion was pledged to support recovery in the developing world was used by countries in Latin America, Africa, Eastern Europe and Asia.

In the Caribbean, the IMF has agreed to two Stand-by Arrangements, one for $1.3 billion with Jamaica, and the other for almost $120 million with Antigua and Barbuda for which all the traditional IMF conditionalities apply.

As Arthur concludes: “It however cannot fairly be said that IMF response has or will assist in any major material way in achieving the grand overarching objectives stated on April 2nd, 2009 of fostering counter-cyclical stimulation, spurring employment creation nor attending to the needs of structural diversification in Caribbean economies”.

The space allowed in this commentary does not permit discussion of Arthur’s analysis of the lack of adequate response by other IFI’s to the Caribbean. But, his statement should be compulsory reading for all.

His conclusion is also extremely important. He said: “Where there is common threat, we must devise and pursue a common response. Should this global crisis engender such a common response to the common threats faced by the societies of the region, it will have served to usher in a better way of doing things in the Caribbean and will help to ensure that our best days are still ahead of us”.

In simple terms, Owen Arthur has made the case for a Caribbean Commission. If it were in existence, and if someone of his calibre – if not he himself – was Commissioner for the Community’s finance and trade negotiations, the region as whole might have got from the IFI’s a reasonable share of the resources it has been denied – largely because it failed to produce a clearly defined plan that could be effectively argued.

July 2, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International