Caricom leaders move forward with the case for reparations ...for the transatlantic trade in enslaved Africans in the Caribbean ...from Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark

The case for reparations from slavery

 

By CLAUDE ROBINSON

The case for reparations for the transatlantic trade in enslaved Africans inched forward last week when Caricom leaders accepted a 10-point plan for negotiations with the European nations which planned, executed and profited immensely from this crime against humanity, a crime that cannot be allowed to disappear without settlement.

At their inter-sessional meeting in St Vincent and the Grenadines, leaders of the 15-member grouping of Caribbean states embraced the plan. Among other things, it seeks a formal apology, debt forgiveness, greater development aid for public health, educational and cultural institutions as well as unspecified financial damages for the persisting "psychological trauma" from the days of plantation slavery.

Also, it calls for the creation of a "repatriation programme" to help resettle members of the Rastafarian movement in Africa. Repatriation to Africa has long been a central belief of Jamaican Rastafarians and they have been pressing Britain to foot the bill, a claim the British have rejected.

The targeted countries are Britain, France, Spain, Portugal, The Netherlands, Norway, Sweden and Denmark which participated, to varying degrees, in the slave trade that took place from the 16th through to the 19th centuries.

Meanwhile, at a press conference in Barbados Thursday, following the St Vincent summit, the chairman of Caricom's Reparations Commission (CRC), Professor Sir Hilary Beckles, said the region expects to host a major conference on reparations and reparatory justice shortly, and various European government delegations are expected to participate.

Professor Beckles said the conference would address "...this matter of continuing harm and continuing suffering within the tradition of international diplomacy. The diplomatic initiative is designed... to ensure that there is reconciliation, to ensure that there is truth and justice, and to put an end to this terrible history so that the world may move on in the 21st century as a more harmonious place".

Also endorsing a "non-confrontational" approach, Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller says Caricom was seeking to engage a "process of reconciliation and dialogue, free from animosity".

But litigation should not be ruled out if diplomacy and negotiation failed. That's why the region has engaged the British law firm, Leigh Day, to push the claim under international law, should that be necessary.

Not so long ago, Leigh Day secured a £20-million compensation award for Kenyans who were tortured by colonial authorities during the Mau Mau rebellion in the 1950s. The financial settlement, though relatively small, confirms that remedies are possible.

In various media statements, Martin Day, a principal of the firm, has been arguing that there is a case for adjudication in the international court of justice in The Hague. The United Kingdom accepts the jurisdiction of the court, but only in cases relating to disputes arising since 1974 and those that do not involve Commonwealth or former Commonwealth countries. Day does not see this as an insurmountable hurdle.

With a huge footprint from its slaving imperial and colonial past, Britain's objection to litigating its past conduct is understandable, as cases could arise from the often violent exercise of authority in the vast empire once under its control. Accepting a case for slavery could open a floodgate of claims for other human rights abuses.

Recently, a British junior minister, while on a visit to Jamaica to drum up business for his country, told us flatly to forget it and move on. Slavery happened. It wasn't pretty; but we should just get over it! I don't think so.

Slave owners compensated for loss of their 'property'

The enslavement of millions of Africans and subsequent abuse for more than 400 years did not occur by happenstance. Africans were classified in law as non-human, chattel, property and real estate. They were denied recognition as members of the human family by laws and practices derived from the parliaments and policies of Europe.

British traders shipped more than three million men, women and children from Africa to slave markets in the Americas in what has been acknowledged to be the largest forced migration in human history.

In a compelling argument of the case for reparations, historian Professor Beckles argues in his recent book, Britain's Black Debt: Reparation for Caribbean Slavery and Native Genocide, that international law provides that chattel slavery, as practised by Britain, was a crime against humanity.

He documents that slavery was invested in by the royal family, the Government, the established church, most elite families, and large public institutions in the private and public sectors. Citing the legal principles of unjust and criminal enrichment, he argues that Britain must pay up on the black debt owed to subsequent generations of Caribbean peoples.

Slavery ended throughout the Caribbean in the 1800s in the wake of slave revolts, and the realisation in Europe that the huge profits from the region's plantation economies were becoming unsustainable.

Since the abolition of slavery, numerous groups have been calling for reparations on the basis of social justice, equity, civil and human rights, education, and cultural identity.

However, that demand remains a divided issue. Britain has steadfastly refused to apologise or consider financial compensation. The closest positive response was in 2007 when Tony Blair, the then prime minister, expressed "deep sorrow and regret" for the "unbearable suffering" caused by Britain's role in slavery.

Some would wish that the campaigners for reparations would shut up. Forget about slavery and move on to more practical issues of human and economic development. The Europeans will neither pay nor apologise, they say.

Also, cynics suggest that our regional political leaders are using the reparations issue as a diversion from their inability to properly manage governmental institutions and natural resources for the advancement of Caribbean peoples.

No one can dispute that many of our administrations perform below expectations; examples of corruption, lack of adherence to good governance and accountability abound; and too many pressing social issues are not being seriously addressed.

But this does not undermine the case for reparations, which is likely to be a defining issue of the 21st century as peoples all over the world demand the righting of historical wrongs of enslavement and native genocide, whose negative effects are still clearly visible for all who care to see.

But as UWI historian Professor Verene Shepherd, chairman of Jamaica's reparations committee, told Britain's The Daily Telegraph in an interview last month, British colonisers had "disfigured the Caribbean", and their descendants should now pay to repair the damage.

"If you commit a crime against humanity, you are bound to make amends," she said. "The planters were given compensation, but not one cent went to the freed Jamaicans." The same countries that deny culpability for their misdeeds are now busy trying African and other leaders for crimes against humanity. Justice demands that all wrongs be righted.

— kcr@cwjamaica.com

March 16, 2014

Jamaica Observer

Lessons from PM Bruce Golding for CARICOM leaders

By Dr Isaac Newton


I was surprised, but not disappointed, when Jamaica PM Bruce Golding announced his plans not to seek re-election. He did not give the impression of being afraid of his people’s verdict at the polls. He appeared calm and uncomplaining.

Yet, he strikes me as a leader who could face down the roars of opposition voices with openness and resolve. In reciprocity with others, and in an attempt to transcend limits, he says farewell.

Golding stands in contrast to most CARICOM leaders, who act as if they have a divine right to lead. They hold on to power even after the people have rejected them at general elections. In an age of social media where society is increasingly democratized, CARICOM leaders must know when to quit. The recent events in Libya are a case in point. Paradoxically, with all the sacrifices made to acquire power, power is mesmerizing -- when you get it, you want to keep it for life.

Perhaps Golding is a fallen giant who collapsed under weight of his own undoing. But his early retirement could be seen as a tribute to mature leadership that slows down the opposition without hurting the Jamaican people.

“The challenges of the last four years have taken their toll and it was appropriate now to make way for new leadership to continue the programmes of economic recovery and transformation while mobilizing the party for victory in the next general elections.” (Caribbean News Now, Sept 26, 2011).

Taken at face value, these sobering words dramatized the PM’s critical moment. They portrayed him as a thoughtful navigator capable of adjusting to the changing political landscape. As I reflect on the unspoken issues that forced the shift from wanting to retire two years into a second term, to giving up prime ministerial power, I surrendered to speculation.

The pursuit of power contains mixed motives. I know that dismounting from it unleashes even more turbulence. Let me tease out possible causes and practical lessons from Golding’s farewell.

Possible Causes

Option One. The PM both perfectly read the affection of his people and deeply discerned their resilient temperament for new wine in new wineskin. He decided that he cannot serve two masters -- the people and the position. He bowed to his love for the people over his desire for the position.

Option Two. He considered the facts beyond anecdotes and polls and strategically set the Jamaica Labour Party on the best winning pathway. After he examined the internal processes that play a critical role in shaping eventual outcomes, he resorted to the wisdom of an intelligent and ethical leader.

Option Three. Golding might have surveyed the bruising political reality on the ground that threatens to unravel positive gains. He decided that departure would memorialize his legacy on the one hand, while on the other hand, it may increase his chances to fight another day.

Option Four. The PM accepted the constraints that age, health, emotions, and quality of life issues have on leadership effectiveness. He also believes that democracy is refreshed when new leaders are given leeway to sprout. Consequently, he renewed his vow to put God ahead of country, country before party, and party in front of self.

Option Five. His decision combined two or more of the above options, tied to a host of unknowns, which may be left for the frankness of a vivid prime ministerial autobiography.

Practical Lessons

Lesson One. In politics, timing is everything. Most leaders have a better grasp of when to enter the scene than leave the place. If leaders hesitate to go because they feel that others are incapable of continuing the dream they worked so hard to execute, they are self-absorbed. But overstaying is a much greater risk. It kills goodwill, stifles internal talent, tarnishes accomplishments, and hinders the growth of the party. In sum, “the fullest of time” is more about establishing an exit strategy than sticking it out.

Lesson Two. Intelligent leaders focus on retirement legacy. Through mastering deliverables, they empower the next generation to reach toward their vision of the possible. Such leaders consciously support subordinates to do greater things that they could ever do in their tenure. They know that success cannot be gained by individual effort alone. Therefore, they reward responsibility and increase talent. The core of their leadership competency is to ensure that their parties thrive after their exodus.

Lesson Three. Transformational leaders create healthy party structures. This is vital for continued success. Golding’s decision to step aside will be punctuated by several possibilities. He is leaving behind a stable culture of innovation and confidence. His departure will create a power struggle vacuum that will haunt the party. The next leader will emerge from a transparent meritocracy or through a set of bureaucratic hurdles.

Lesson Four. Performance, not popularity, should be the judge of leadership tenure. When leaders are self aware, they are motivated by excellence instead of ego. Regardless of Golding’s motives and motivations, some critics may argue that he is too addicted to power to leave without a just cause. Others may claim that the reality facing him was quite surmountable. If Jamaicans are better off now than when he first arrived, and they can imagine the future in the superlative, the PM would have partially fulfilled his mandate.

I am not aware of any scientific polls that showed that Golding would have lost had he chosen to run again. He was the right fit for Jamaica during times of fiscal pressures and social stresses. Some Jamaicans feel he has done the country damage with dark scandals. Others believe he is a miracle worker, given the challenges he faced. Despite divided loyalties, a great CARICOM leader takes nation-building initiatives, and chooses a dignified exit instead of a dishonorable existence.

September 29, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Were OECS voices heard at the CARICOM heads of government summit in Jamaica?

By Ian Francis



It is approximately eight months since the summit of CARICOM heads was held in Montego Bay, Jamaica. Since then, Jamaica’s Bruce Golding has passed the torch to a struggling Tillman Thomas of Grenada, who might soon have to face a revolt of his National Democratic Congress (NDC).

Since assuming the chairmanship, Thomas has showed some interest in the organization and it will be interesting to watch how he handles the appointment of the new Secretary General for the Secretariat; appointment of a new Chief Justice for the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ) and of course his own personal challenge of taking Grenada into the CCJ. These are interesting times and the region is watching closely.

The 56th Organization of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) meeting recently held in Grenada seemed to have had great success. The only grumbling is that Antigua’s Baldwin spent too much time gazing in the skies hoping that the breakfast invitation from Barack and Michelle would arrive after a long pigeon journey from Washington to Mt Obama and then to the Botanical Gardens in Grenada. The pigeon arrived empty handed and a disappointed Baldwin lost interest in the Assembly.

With the growing popular uprisings in the Middle East, North Africa and Iran’s misguided decision to send naval ships through the waters of the Suez Canal, one can only assume that Washington is so engaged and concerned with these fast evolving events that the White House invitation will not arrive in the immediate future.

As Prime Minister Denzil Douglas of St Kitts and Nevis has stated, the leaders at the CARICOM inter sessional meeting that ended in Grenada recently needed to address their time in a process of careful analysis, deep discussions and the development of a strategic plan to guide the organization in future years. As Douglas lamented, he was hopeful that at the inter sessional meeting CARICOM leaders would channel their energy on the many issues facing the region.

While not dismissing Antigua’s concern about the popular uprising in Libya, the Republic of Haiti’s pending return by former president Aristide, who was kidnapped and forced into exile in South Africa, must be addressed by the region’s leaders. The despicable and vulgar action by the United States of America, which resulted in the abandonment of Aristide in a notorious and corrupt nation known as the Central African Republic, should have been strongly criticized by the CARICOM leadership.

Unfortunately, they went into mute mode and, like roosters, it took courage and principled leadership by former Jamaican prime minister; P.J.
Patterson to rescue Aristide from the corrupt African nation until South Africa was able to complete all logistical arrangements to welcome their new guest. PJ, Randy Robinson, Congresswoman Maxine Walters and others must be commended for rescuing Aristide from the Central African Republic.

The CARICOM leadership has no other alternative but to support Aristide’s pending return to his native Haiti. This is not the time to echo or repeat the voice of the United States State Department media frontline man P.J Crowley as to whether Aristide’s return will be helpful. Was Duvalier’s recent return to Haiti helpful? PJ Crawley should also give us a one liner about the State Department’s position on this notorious and repressive dictator whom the United States supported for many years. Aristide’s welcome must be hailed by our leaders to his native birth land and should even go further to ensure that the region becomes part of his security detail. This is the time to show the courage and leadership that Douglas called for and there should be no retreat. Aristide requires the region’s full support.

Since the rigged and shameless elections in Haiti. There are four frequent questions being asked about CARICOM’s Mission in Haiti. These are: (1) what is the specific role and purpose of the CARICOM Mission in Haiti? (2) What specific and concrete outcomes have been achieved by its presence and what specifically has the Georgetown Secretariat benefitted by virtue of their presence in Haiti? (3) Who is funding the CARICOM Mission in Haiti? (4) When will the Mission come to an end? What is the reporting mechanism? Who reports to whom and how are CARICOM governments engaged in this Mission? These questions need to be answered.

As the CARICOM inter sessional assembly became a reality in Grenada last weekend, there are still cries from OECS leaders expressing their concerns about uncontrollable crime and lawlessness in their jurisdiction.

At the Jamaica summit, Skerrit of Dominica and Spencer of Antigua suggested that Jamaica might be in a position to assist, given the nation’s experience with gangs and garrison control. Unfortunately, the suggestion fell on deaf ears. Many of the OECS have since retreated to their old colonial tactics of recruiting foreign sideline retired police officers to manage national security initiatives. The OECS region requires the active assistance and intervention of the More Developed Countries on crime and lawlessness in their jurisdiction.

In conclusion, drug interdiction and the presence of foreign fleets in our waters are important security measures; however, leaders need to identify other mechanisms that will rebuild capacities in our police forces and other security agencies. With a credible vision on crime, our leaders are also urged not to shy away from examining other key and important strategic security issues which include:

-- The role and function of IMPACS. Can this organization seriously contribute to the containment of crime and lawlessness in the CARICOM region or is it just another CARICOM regional organ that has found favour from foreign multilateral friends?

-- What can the Barbados based CEDERA contribute to crime containment and other national security issues? What direct and specific impact will the recent CARICOM agreement generate on crime and lawlessness in the region?

-- What is the current status of the Regional Security Service? Should this organization be re-examined or purged so thus resulting in a new and progressive organizational model that reflects global reality?

-- Can Jamaica assist in the restructuring of the Regional Security Service? How about Jamaica giving a secondment to the region by one of its capable national security team? Someone like Novelette Grant or Glenmore Hinds?

Crime and lawlessness need to be seriously tackled in the region.

Ian Francis resides in Toronto and writes frequently on Caribbean Commonwealth Affairs .He is a former Assistant Secretary in the Ministry of Foreign Affairs, Grenada. He can be reached at info@vismincommunications.org

March 2, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Caricom or Cari-gone?

By Sir Ronald Sanders


The New Year started with a great deal of frustration being publicly expressed over the Caribbean regional integration project which, this year, will have been in construction for forty-three years. Other integration efforts, such as the European Union (EU), which began after the Caribbean Community and Common market (CARICOM), have moved ahead much faster and much more effectively for the benefit of the people of their member countries.

It is understandable, therefore, that, in an editorial, one of the Caribbean oldest newspapers observed that a majority of people believe that “any official attempt to unite the region as envisaged in the CARICOM Single Market and Economy (CSME) is nothing but reverie and doomed to failure”. To be fair the editorial did not trumpet this observation with glee or satisfaction. It said that “as we enter the second decade of this century, we hold fast, nevertheless, to the idea of one region”.

So, on the one hand, this editorial, reflecting the views of many, still believes in the notion of a deeply integrated Caribbean – “one region”, but it expresses no faith that, after forty-three years, we will see a CSME anytime soon. The editorial identified four contemporary reasons for its lack of faith in any “official” attempt to unite the region.

These reasons were: an unfortunate statement last year by the Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister that her government would no longer be “an ATM” machine for other countries of CARICOM; an injudicious remark by the same Prime Minister that, in the provision by her government of assistance to the islands of St Lucia and St Vincent and the Grenadines she would expect some benefit for the construction industry of Trinidad and Tobago; the more recent suggestion by Prime Minister Bruce Golding of Jamaica that his government favoured setting up its own national final Court of Appeal rather than acceding to the Caribbean Court of Justice (CCJ); and that CARICOM heads of government are yet to establish “any executive machinery to enforce” their own policy decisions.

All of these points are valid. There are many more besides. Among them are that instead of getting on with fashioning CARICOM into an effective vehicle to help with the improvement of their people’s lives and progressing development in their countries, some governments are busily trying to cultivate relations with other larger countries far beyond the region to try to get what they can while they can. The latter strategy is, of course, unsustainable. And, as has happened in the past, the governments now flirting, on their own, with bigger countries not on their doorstep will return to the regional fold which is not only their natural home, but also their best hope.

Fortunately, the statements by the Prime Minister of Trinidad and Tobago, while indicative of an attitude to CARICOM held by many in that country, were made in the early flush of government. In the past, other heads of government have made equally hurtful (and not fully informed) comments in other contexts. The truth is that Trinidad and Tobago is the principal beneficiary of trade in goods and services to CARICOM – benefits are not a one-way street. This is the message that the government in Port-of-Spain should be delivering to its people. Also, to those who say that Trinidad and Tobago does not need the CARICOM market, they should be challenged to identify the alternative markets, how quickly could they be developed if they could be developed at all, and at what cost.

With regard to the statement that Mr Golding has made about establishing Jamaica’s own national, final court of appeal instead of joining the CCJ for this purpose, it really is time that someone bells the cat on this as well. As I pointed out in my last commentary (“Time to make up your mind”), by April this year Jamaicans will head five extremely important CARICOM-wide institutions. These are positions for which the Jamaica government fought and other CARICOM countries agreed. What is the message that is being sent to the people of CARICOM by Jamaica? Is it that all is well when Jamaica holds the reins, but it isn’t well when other CARICOM nationals are involved? This cannot be so, and Mr Golding is far too intelligent a man and too well informed to hold such a position. The time has come for Jamaica’s leadership to cease pandering to the false notion of some special Jamaican capacity, and, instead, spread the true message that this region is one – and one to which Jamaica’s contribution has been highly regarded by its Caribbean brothers and sisters.

The quicker that the CARICOM Secretariat, as part of an overall reform of all its activities, is given the resources and empowered to mount a sustained, multi-media campaign throughout the region on how membership of the Caribbean Community has benefitted, and can continue to benefit, the people of each CARICOM country the better. And, every government should regard it as its responsibility and obligation to carry out its own domestic programme of education and information.

Of the four points made in the Editorial to which this commentary refers, the most crucial is its observation that “the decade closed without the establishment of any executive machinery to enforce the implementation of policy decisions by heads of government”. This is – and has been for decades – the fundamental problem with the lack of progress of CARICOM in establishing the CSME and even in carrying out a range of activities that are routine in organisations similar to CARICOM.

In his New Year’s address as Chairman of CARICOM until July 2011, the Prime Minister of Grenada, Tillman Thomas, said that “the cry for the ‘quickening of the pace’ was heard” and “active consideration of new governance structures” was given by CARICOM leaders. He offered that “one of the main ideas in taking the necessary steps will be tested in this coming year with the establishment of the Permanent Committee of CARICOM Ambassadors” which, he said, “heralds a new dawn for our Community”.

Mr Thomas is right to hold out hope, but it is difficult to see how another layer of national representatives will implement policy decisions of Heads, when ministers and the Secretariat were not able to do so.

The CARICOM vehicle needs an urgent overhaul, or it really will be a case of ‘CARICOM and gone’.

January 7, 2011

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Cool Heads and no Crowns: The Caribbean in a storm

By Sir Ronald Sanders


Not for the first time in the history of the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM), Heads of Government are conveying mixed signals to the people of the region about how they feel about the CARICOM relationship and, indeed, about themselves.

Two incidents brought this reality into sharp focus over the last few days. The first was an inflammatory statement attributed to Trinidad and Tobago’s Prime Minister, Kamla Persad-Bissessar, that she did not make, and the other was the almost complete turn out of CARICOM Heads of Government to the funeral of David Thompson, the late Prime Minister of Barbados, and the genuine sense of “family” that they showed.

The statement that Persad-Bissessar is alleged to have made is, “No free help” for the islands of St Vincent and St Lucia that have been severely battered by Hurricane Tomas with St Lucia getting the worst of it. Earlier, as a tropical storm, Tomas had also sallied through Barbados uprooting trees, dislodging utility poles and wires, and damaging hundreds of mostly low-cost houses throughout the island.

“No free help” were not Persad-Bissessar’s words. They were the headline in the Trinidad Express newspaper on November 1, which did report what the Trinidad and Tobago Prime Minister actually said. According to the story and other newspaper reports, the Prime Minister was speaking at a press conference about a request that she had received from the Prime Minister of St Vincent and the Grenadines, Ralph Gonsalves, for assistance after his country was ravaged by the brutal Tomas.

What all the Trinidad and Tobago media reported her to say, was: "We will have to look at ways in which we would be able to assist. But you would recall my comments earlier this year, when I said there must some way in which Trinidad and Tobago would also benefit. So if we are giving assistance with housing for example, and that is one of the areas that we (Prime Minister of St Vincent and myself ) spoke about, ... then we may be able to use Trinidad and Tobago builders and companies, so that whatever money or assistance is given, redounds back in some measure to the people of Trinidad and Tobago."

She did not say that the Trinidad and Tobago government would not help. Indeed, she is reported as actually saying that her government had already mobilised two containers of foodstuff, and a decision would be made about where to send them but "certainly to St Vincent".

The issue here is not that she refused to provide assistance. If she had done so, I would have joined the chorus of voices that are now condemning her. When she talked earlier this year of Trinidad and Tobago not being “an ATM machine” for the Caribbean, I was one of the first to criticise that statement drawing attention to the fact that Trinidad and Tobago enjoys almost a monopoly market in the Caribbean for its cheaper oil-subsidised goods because of the CARICOM Treaty and that the Petroleum Fund (badly managed though it is) is as much in Trinidad and Tobago’s interest as the rest of the CARICOM countries since it helps to keep those countries as markets for Trinidad and Tobago’s goods.

The real issue with those who now condemn her is the link she drew between her government’s assistance and the use of “builders and companies” from Trinidad and Tobago.

Heat over that issue should be tempered by two realities. First, other countries (not only the former imperialists) link their assistance to their own materials and people. As examples, Cuban projects in many CARICOM countries use Cuban material and Cuban labour, as do several Venezuelan-funded projects. And, China not only insists upon the use of its material and people in aid projects, it does so for commercial projects too. And, it has long been the condition of many donors – either directly or through the agencies they use to finance aid projects – that their money be used for materials and workers from their countries exclusively.

The second reality is that Kamla Persad-Bissessar is the leader of a political party and Prime Minister of a country that, like many others, has become sceptical of CARICOM. It is up to her and her Ministers to demonstrate to a large section of the Trinidad and Tobago population that there is benefit in CARICOM for them.

Of course, they need to demonstrate CARICOM’s benefit to them over a very wide range of issues which includes the fact that CARICOM is a very lucrative market for Trinidad and Tobago’s products and services keeping thousands of its people employed; the country needs the support of CARICOM in fighting drug trafficking and crime, and maintaining security; it needs CARICOM in international bargaining in trade against larger entities such as the European Union; and it would not fulfil its international aspirations in the international system without the full backing of CARICOM.

Trinidad and Tobago, too, must realise that it alone does not wear a crown and it is not an island (not even two) unto itself.

But Persad-Bissessar should not be lynched for what she did not say, or for linking her government’s assistance to use of her country’s material and work force. At no time did she say no help would be forthcoming.

The entire Caribbean is going through what Professor Norman Girvan recently described as “existential threats”. This is a time for cool heads. It is not a time for tit-for-tat statements or for statements whose content sound like “something will not be given for nothing”.

Much of this present controversy is unnecessary and would not happen if CARICOM governments talk to each other on a platform of interdependence and common problems, and with a resolve to solve them collectively, recognising that none of them can go it alone and the task at hand is urgent and huge.

It was significant that at the well-organised and dignified funeral of Barbados David Thompson in the same week of this incident, CARICOM leaders turned out in full force to honour their fallen brother, and CARICOM was given an important role in the proceedings through its Chairman, Jamaica’s Prime Minister Bruce Golding. It is on that sense of CARICOM “family” that the region needs to go forward in its own vital interest.

November 5, 2010

caribbeannewsnow

Bahamas Blog International

Caricom's 'buck-passing' culture

ANALYSIS
RICKEY SINGH




THE latest example of amusing buck-passing, or how to avoid taking political responsibility as leaders for advancing the goals of the Caribbean Community, emerged from a meeting in Grenada last Wednesday of five Caricom prime ministers and two foreign ministers.

Comprising a committee mandated to deal with the critical issue of improving governance of the affairs of the 37-year-old community, the participants were mindful to reflect customary caution in decisions taken for expected endorsement next month by the wider body of Heads of Government.

The committee's mandate flowed from last month's 31st Caricom summit in Montego Bay where the Heads of Government of the 15-member community had once again shied away from any consideration to introduce an empowered management structure that could have the effect of diluting, in some aspects, their domestic political authority.

This, even if such a course could result in satisfying, to some extent, their own often claimed commitment to achieving what's good for the regional economic integration movement as a whole, and knowing that it would require a sharing of some defined measures on sovereignty.

It is the reluctance to manage national sovereignty in the interest of the declared concept of 'One Community' that surfaced in Montego Bay last month.

The customary rhetoric about "commitment to Caricom" (read CSME; functional co-operation; integrated foreign and economic policies, etc), gave way to mild initiatives for tinkering with the community's prevailing governance status quo.

Consequently, the decision came from last Wednesday's meeting in Grenada on governance, plus another on a large nine-member "search committee" to help find a new secretary-general for Caricom with the retirement from year end of Edwin Carrington.

Two decisions

Participating in the meeting were the prime ministers of Jamaica (Bruce Golding, current Caricom chairman); Grenada (host Tilman Thomas); St Vincent and the Grenadines (Ralph Gonsalves); St Kitts and Nevis (Denzil Douglas) and Dominica's Roosevelt Skerrit. The two foreign ministers were Barbados' Maxine McLean, and Trinidad and Tobago's Surujrattan Rambachan.

First surprise was the disclosure that a nine-member "search committee", chaired by Foreign Minister McClean, would begin the process of pre-selecting candidates for the appointment of a successor to Carrington.

The committee's terms of reference, still to be formulated, will be determined by the Heads when they meet on the periphery of next month's start of the annual session of the UN General Assembly in New York.

The second surprising decision was even more baffling, in the sense that it offered neither anything new, in terms of a fundamental restructuring of the community Secretariat; nor any creative initiative for improved decision-making and implementation processes to check the snail's pace at which the CSME project continues to proceed.

The surprise came in the form of the announced decision to create a "Council of Community Ambassadors". It would operate on a permanent basis from the respective capitals to help remove barriers, at national levels, that frustrate implementation of regional decisions, and to strengthen co-operation.

If, after all the research materials and range of proposals over the years on alternative systems for improved governance of the community, Caricom leaders are to now offer a Council of Ambassadors as a standing mechanism for improving "governance", then they should not be surprised by an expected wave of cynicism and disenchantment across the region.

The Heads of Government may be scared of the politics of sharing a measure of sovereignty in the functioning of an empowered executive management structure, even though it is intended to function under their direct supervision and final authority.

How could it be explained -- if it is not a case of unintended contempt for the region's people -- the Heads' assumption of public acceptance of the proposed Council of Ambassadors as representing a creative effort for improved governance from the second decade of the 21st century?

Not flattering

For a start, the proposed Council of Ambassadors should not be confused with what obtains at the Organisation of American States (OAS), or in relation to the African Caribbean and Pacific (ACP) group. For a start, such councils function from a common location-- Washington (for the OAS) and Brussels (for the ACP).

For now, we are aware of examples of how senior cabinet ministers, and in a few cases at Heads level, have encountered difficulties in resolving sensitive bilateral matters and also failing to take advantage of the disputes settlement provisions located in the revised Treaty of Chaguaramas.

It would not be flattering for the Heads to hear criticisms of them "joking around" on the governance issue. But it is quite disappointing to note, in 2010, that ours remains a "Community of sovereign states" that has acquired a reputation for making bold, at times quite imaginative decisions, only to falter, too often, when it comes to implementation of unanimously approved decisions.

Examples abound, but a few should suffice, for now, such as failure to give legislative approval of the Charter of Civil Society -- one of the core recommendations of the West Indian Commission that was released as a document of the community since 1997.

(Incidentally, "good governance" is one of the Articles of the Charter that calls for establishment of a code governing the conduct of holders of public office and all those who exercise power that may affect the public interest).

Policies requiring implementation would also include the sharing of external representation; pursuing, with vision and vigour, a common policy on regional air transportation; the dismantling of barriers to free intra-regional movement of Caricom nationals (currently some states are making things worse for nationals).

The question, therefore, remains: Who among the Heads of Government of the estimated dozen countries fully participating in the policies and programmes of Caricom is now ready to call a halt to the community's governance system?

While they try to market the idea of a Council of Community Ambassadors that, in the final analysis, would be accountable to them, why this widening of a bureaucratic management system? Is it really a plausible approach for changing the prevailing buck-passing culture that has been virtually institutionalised by a model of governance our Heads of Government — past and present — seem so loath to change?

August 22, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

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

Caricom's 'Governance' Dilemma

By Rickey Singh




THE 31st annual Heads of Government Conference of the Caribbean Community (Caricom) concluded in Montego Bay, Jamaica, on Wednesday, July 7 with little hope of any progress being made by the 37-year-old regional economic integration movement in the immediate future.

Hopes raised midway the four-day event for a new approach to ensure realistic and appropriate management of today's challenges, caused by the global economic and political crises, were dashed when the leaders backed off at the close of the conference.

Not surprisingly, they have scheduled another "special meeting", for September this year, to consider likely alternative governance models for better management.

In its normally lively 'discussion forum', the BBC Caribbean Service has been encouraging responses to the provocative question: "Does Caricom have a future?"

This discussion took place while the Community's Heads of Government were still wrestling with the cynicism and disenchantment their inactions have spawned over repeated failures to implement decisions, unanimously taken, for progress towards the Caricom Single Market and Economy (CSME).

While the official communiqué was not available to the region's media at the time of writing (Thursday, July 8), the comments that flowed at an end-of-summit press conference on Wednesday made it sufficiently clear that the elusive governance issue had once again proved a barrier the leaders were still unprepared to scale.

Diminishing credibility

It is a failure that could only deepen concerns over Caricom leaders' credibility and commitment to make the Community's flagship project -- a single economic space in a region that constitutes a microcosm of the world's peoples, cultures and varying levels of social and economic development -- a reality either in this decade or the next.

Often viewed by Latin American, African and Asian blocs as a cohesive and productive experiment in regional economic integration, Caricom has done reasonably well in terms of functional cooperation and foreign policy coordination.

However, when it comes down to implementation of decisions on major issues involving critical segments of its treaty-based arrangements for inauguration of a single market and economy, therein lies the rub.

Their failures, which are rooted in a lack of collective political will to overcome parochialism and a narrow sense of nationalism in favour of a shared vision of "one people, one market, one Caribbean", continue to afflict Caricom. Consequently, a sense of alienation and defeatism, if not the "despair" alluded to in the BBC Caribbean discussion forum on "Caricom's future", has spread.

The announcement by Prime Minister Bruce Golding, in his capacity as Caricom's new chairman, that a committee of prime ministers has been identified to make proposals for the forthcoming "special meeting" of heads in September to address alternative forms of governance cannot be considered as anything of significance.

The Community has gone that way before with "Prime Ministerial Working Groups" and high-level committees of regional technocrats. The upcoming September meeting seems destined to do what Trinidadians call "spinning top in mud".

Amid the expanding "word game" on Caricom's future governance, more and more Heads of Government are pushing for more action and less talk. They are simply reprimanding themselves, but given the current circumstance, it is an appropriate rebuke.

Ironically, in rushing to announce a prime ministerial committee to consider a new 'governance' architecture, leaders present in Montego Bay seem to have forgotten to include the prime minister of Belize, Dean Barrow, who holds lead responsibility on governance and justice in Caricom's quasi-cabinet system. Or did he decline to serve?

July 11, 2010


jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Gleaner newspaper suggests disbanding CARICOM

by Oscar Ramjeet:



Caribbean Community (CARICOM) leaders are now meeting in Montego Bay in Jamaica, and the Gleaner, the leading and most widely read newspaper in the region, has come out in a blistering attack against the regional group.

The editorial was published only days after former Secretary General of the Commonwealth Secretariat, Sir Shridath Ramphal, who is a well known advocate for regional integration, spoke of the non-performance of the Georgetown-based CARICOM Secretariat.

And St Vincent and the Grenadines Prime Minister, Ralph Gonsalves, also voiced his disapproval when he said that CARICOM lacks leadership.

The Gleaner said that the leaders at their Montego Bay meeting should be honest with themselves and declare their inability to provide "serious leadership" to the integration process.

The editorial added, "Should they so decide, the next step is obvious: disband the community and allow its 15 members to find their own way in the world. Or, if they desire, form alliances with alternative trade and economic organisation."

It added, "This is not a position that this newspaper has arrived at lightly, like the conceptualisers of CARICOM, and the millions of people who have invested much hope in the institution understand the logic of integration. But the logic is one thing, its application is another. It is on the latter front, for nearly four decades we have failed.

“As a concept and treaty, CARICOM was and remains an excellent idea -- as a single market, to be transported into a seamless economy and as a functional cooperation and economic grouping. It has had some successes, mainly on the political front."

It also stated that, in 36 years, CARICOM has failed to plan, contrive, or achieve an economic breakthrough and "In those countries that have enjoyed relative success, it has had little to do with their membership of CARICOM.”

I recall Sir Shridath, in a passionate presentation, told a graduating class at the University of the West Indies at St Augustine in 1977, 33 years ago, the importance of regional integration and questioned that this region with a population of five million has the most prime ministers and overseas missions with ambassadors and high commissioners than any other country in the planet.

I have time and time again criticised the slow pace of the regional movement and one time referred to it as CARIGONE instead of CARICOM.

The Gleaner stated that if the heads of government who are gathered in Montego Bay are serious about CARICOM and wish the region's support, they must provide bankable assurances that they will mend their ways.

It also referred to Trinidad and Tobago being unfair in denying national treatment to its partners with regard to energy supplies, thus giving its own manufacturers an unfair advantage in this seamless market

It also called for leaders to finally agree on a system that gives executive authority to a supranational body to ensure implementation of decisions taken by heads. It also suggested that there should be an accommodation of shared sovereignty.

It is felt that the organisation has no effective implementation mechanism, nor are they penalties for reneging on undertakings. So, leaders attend summits, talk a lot, arrive at decisions and give undertakings which, for the most part, are never fulfilled.

This in my view should be corrected as soon as possible and I sincerely hope that the Montego Bay summit will iron out the differences of the various leaders and they work together towards a unified movement -- they should remember unity is strength.

July 5, 2010

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog International

The 'Free Movement' Quiz For Caricom

Carrington sparks questions on labour mobility and help for Haiti
RICKEY SINGH


CARICOM Secretary General Edwin Carrington last week chose to raise hopes - amid prevailing disappointments - for progress in the "free movement of Caricom nationals" of the dozen countries participating in the Caribbean Single Market and Economy (CSME) project.

The optimism expressed by the secretary general has, however, to be considered in the context of caveats that serve to underscore the recognised need for more focused, collective efforts by governments to make stated commitment on planned migration and labour mobility a reality.

Carrington, Caricom's longest chief public servant - he is now in his 18th year as secretary general - was addressing last week's three-day meeting in Guyana of the 19th Council of Human and Social Development (COSHOD), held in conjunction with the Seventh Ministerial Meeting of the International Labour Organisation (ILO).

At the meeting, which was concluded on Friday with Caricom's labour ministers in attendance, Carrington also thought it necessary to remind the Community's governments that "it is not enough for us to just be sorry" for earthquake-devastated Haiti, but to come forward with specific, "concrete pledges" to alleviate the burden of the Haitian people.

Let me address first the secretary general's assessment of what remains one of the more sensitive issues in Caricom's journey towards the laudable goal of establishing a seamless regional economy with the CSME.

While the public awaits the decisions reached at the COSHOD meeting, Carrington has stated that "free movement of labour and intra-regional migration" are "challenging" issues for deliberation.

'Movement' certificates


In recognising the anxieties of wage earners who remain excluded from the 10 approved categories for free movement within the CSME framework, Carrington pointed to the gains made which have resulted in the release of more than 6,000 Caricom skills certificates between 2006 and 2008.

A further increase is expected for 2010 because, he said, of the "expansion in the categories of wage earners who could now move across the region for economic activity".

But Secretary General Carrington would know that for all the expressed good intentions, data on the annual processing of skills certificates, as well as a number of applications yet to be addressed, are not readily forthcoming.

Additionally, frustration continues to be the name of the game in the absence of common legislation guaranteeing contingent rights for holders of approved skills certificates and members of their immediate family to access education, health and housing facilities.

Ironically, one of the governments among those failing to expedite the processes for free movement of labour and intra-regional migration is that of Dominica whose prime minister (Roosevelt Skerrit) has lead responsibility among Caricom leaders for "labour including movement of skills".

A yet unpublished 'country report' in support of full integration of Belize and the Organisation of Eastern Caribbean States (OECS) has, for instance, observed that while the government in Roseau was strongly in favour of the regional regime for labour mobility, "it needs to put in place the arrangements to facilitate accreditation and full mobility..."

Do not expect a listing of other defaulting governments from either the CSME unit dealing with this matter or the Community Secretariat itself.

But pertinent questions could be: How many of the 12 governments involved in CSME planning are at least 50 per cent ready with necessary arrangements for free movement of labour and intra-regional migration?

The reality is that while the expressed optimism by the secretary general can be appreciated, doubts and cynicism can only diminish, if not disappear, with EVIDENCE of relevant COLLECTIVE action.

Encouraging reminders


Yet, it is at least encouraging to have the Community's secretary general offering appropriate reminders on essential work agendas as he did this past week in relation to free movement of nationals within the CSME.

Also of relevance is Carrington's observation that "it is not enough for us (Caricom) to just be 'sorry' for Haiti (echoing a long-expressed sentiment of the calypsonian David Rudder).

But to tell it like it is may require raising questions about why - in the face of the destruction of Haiti by the earthquake of last January 12 - Caricom governments are yet to come forward with at least a draft plan on how to offer temporary immigrant status for a specified number of displaced Haitians.

With minor exceptions, what we seem to be facing at present is the typical scenario - prior to the earthquake disaster - of Haitians turning up illegally in a few Caricom states - Jamaica and The Bahamas in particular.

Perhaps former prime minister of Jamaica PJ Patterson, our 'Special Advocate for Haiti', should, in collaboration with the Community Secretariat, provide updates on the "concrete pledges of support" being received by the 'Special Support Unit for Haiti' established by Caricom and operating out of Jamaica.

April 18, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Caricom blocked from landing in Haiti

BY RICKEY SINGH Observer Caribbean correspondent:





BRIDGETOWN, Barbados -- The Caribbean Community's emergency aid mission to Haiti, comprising heads of government and leading technical officials, failed to secure permission Friday to land at that devastated country's airport, now under the control of the USA.

Consequently, the Caricom "assessment mission" that was to determine priority humanitarian needs resulting from the mind-boggling earthquake disaster last Tuesday had to travel back from Jamaica to their respective home destinations.

On Friday afternoon, the US State Department confirmed signing two Memoranda of Understanding with the Government of Haiti that made "official that the United States is in charge of all inbound and outbound flights and aid offloading".

Further, according to the agreements signed, US medical personnel "now have the authority to operate on Haitian citizens and otherwise render medical assistance without having to wait for licences from Haiti's Government".

Prior to the US taking control of Haiti's airport, a batch of some 30 Cuban doctors had left Havana, following the earthquake, to join more than 300 of their colleagues who have been working there for more than a year.

Last evening, the frustration suffered by the Caricom mission to get landing permission was expected to be raised in a scheduled meeting at Jamaica's Norman Manley International Airport between Jamaica's Prime Minister Bruce Golding and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Golding, who was making arrangements for the meeting with Clinton, following her visit earlier in the day to witness the devastation of the capital Port-au-Prince, said he could not comment on details to be discussed.

He, however, told this correspondent: "I appreciate the chaos and confusion at Haiti's airport, where there is just one operational runway. But Haiti is a member of Caricom and we simply have to be facilitated and the truth is there is hardly a functioning government in Haiti."

Asked whether the difficulties encountered by the Caricom mission may be related to reports that US authorities were not anxious to facilitate landing of aircraft from Cuba and Venezuela, Prime Minister Golding said he could "only hope that there is no truth to such immature thinking in the face of the horrific scale of Haiti's tragedy".

Golding, who has lead portfolio responsibility among Caricom leaders for external economic relations, got a first-hand assessment of the damage when he flew to Haiti on Thursday.

A contingent of some 150 members of the Jamaica Defence Force has since established a camp with medical facilities in the vicinity of Haiti's airport.

Ahead of last evening's scheduled meeting with Clinton, Prime Minister Golding had discussed on Friday in Kingston some of the problems to be overcome at a meeting with the prime ministers of Barbados and Dominica and the Community's secretary general Edwin Carrington.

Carrington explained that proper use of the Norman Manley Airport would be consistent with a decision last week for Jamaica to serve as the Sub-regional Operational Focal Point for responses to the Haitian humanitarian crisis.

January 17, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Caribbean Blog International

CARICOM must adopt new economic model, says Guyana president

PORT OF SPAIN, Trinidad (GINA) -- The Caribbean Community (CARICOM) is seeking international support for a new economic model which President Bharrat Jagdeo says is needed to meet the peculiarities of the region.

Backing for the new model is being canvassed and United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon and the heads of several multilateral financial institutions are to join CARICOM leaders in Dominica in March to discuss it, President Jagdeo told reporters here.

Jagdeo, current CARICOM Chairman and head of the regional economic task force addressing the impact of the global economic crisis on the 15-member community, maintains that the model of economic development the region has been pursuing is not sustainable given its peculiarities.

The impact of the global crisis and climate change were the two major issues before Commonwealth leaders at their 20th summit here, the President told reporters late Saturday.

He said the huge debt overhang and massive sums spent to service debt have affected the community’s capacity to intervene in the crisis which has had a major impact on its members.

He noted that the two largest industries in the region – tourism and the financial sector – have been affected and capacity and fiscal space to do anti-cyclical spending has been limited because of the debt overhang.

“There is no way we are going to build a viable medium term economic strategy without a change in the model”, Jagdeo insisted.

He said that CARICOM heads Saturday advocated a deferential approach to a global economic system.

Most of the large countries were speaking about their efforts to support demand at the global level through the G20 and that’s vital for the future and for those countries to pursue free trade as a way of expanding global GDP, he acknowledged.

“But for countries like ours, many of those things would have sometimes a negative impact – the impact of reciprocity and removal of preferences which have led to the destruction of two major industries in the Caribbean – sugar and bananas.”

He said CARICOM has argued that the model that would be viable for the Caribbean would be one that sees debt relief for middle income countries; special and deferential treatment in the global trading system; dedicated instruments from the multilateral financial institutions (MFIs) to target the special vulnerabilities of the region – like a contingent line of credit to deal with hurricanes and other natural disasters which have a systemic impact on their societies.

The new economic model and climate change were the two big issues for the region, he said, adding, “It was important that we advocated for both and that we seek the support of this broad range of countries across the world because this support would be vital when we get to the WTO (World Trade Organisation) or when we take specific measures to address these issues at the boards of the multilateral financial institutions.”

Jagdeo said the President of the World Bank, the Deputy Managing Director of the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the President of the Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and the UN Secretary will be at the CARICOM intersessional meeting in Dominica in March.

“I hope that with their support plus the political support, particularly from the countries in the G20, we may be able to get some progress in this regard”, he said.

The President chaired a meeting Saturday between CARICOM and British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and said he dealt with the impact of the global financial crisis on the Caribbean.

“We asked for support of this model that we intend to pursue”, he announced.

He noted that two current British initiatives are counter to the region’s efforts to develop its crucial financial sector and tourism sectors.

The Air Passenger Duty (APD) implemented by the United Kingdom has had a discriminatory impact on the Caribbean by making it far more expensive for British tourists to visit the Caribbean while it is cheaper for them to go to Hawaii or Vancouver which are almost twice as far from London as Barbados.

Jagdeo said CARICOM asked Brown for a rebranding of the Caribbean and he advised that the community work with the British Chancellor of the Exchequer on this matter.

CARICOM states have also encountered difficulties in many parts of the world on signing the tax information exchange agreement to get off the `grey list’ and urged Brown to help get these countries to move swiftly to resolve those issues, he said.

Some CARICOM members are facing an adverse impact because of being `grey listed’ and some financial institutions have already moved from those jurisdictions.

He stressed that the continuing global crisis is not splitting CARICOM although several member states are in difficulties because of reductions in tourism flows, revenue from the financial sector and remittances from developed countries.

“These are real problems and while we have to deal with the long term structural issues – debt and its future servicing, the structure of our economies -- we also have an immediate problem of finding enough cash resources to meet the day-to-day needs of the countries.”

“We have to find a source of bilateral funding. Given what’s happening in the world and the difficulties facing many countries, the only access available is through the multilateral financial institutions and many countries did not have any recourse but to turn to these institutions”, he said.

“We have decided to act in concert and I think there’s a greater sense of urgency”, the President added.

He said CARICOM leaders at one time were too complacent and felt that the current crisis was inevitable – whether there was a global recession or not -- because some were accumulating unsustainable levels of debt and using a larger share of the recurring budget to service that debt.

Total factor productivity in the economies was also declining for several years, he said, adding that this was unsustainable in itself.

November 30, 2009

caribbeannetnews

Caribbean Blog International