Greek tragedy, Caricom, economic lessons for Jamaica

By Franklin Johnston



It is time for a mature discussion on Caricom and Jamaica and the EU/Greece crisis can guide us. Caricom is Jamaica's most costly overseas project. What do you know about it? Federation morphed into CARIFTA, now Caricom/CSME. I am "Carisceptic", as it hasn't delivered economic growth and I don't think it can. Jamaica is a global brand. Caricom is not, and for growth we must help our own first!

T&T is right to favour its industry and not give away its LNG. If we give away our bauxite, so be it. We need to chart our own growth path as they do. The Cabinet, PSOJ, UWI, Opposition must come clean. If Caricom is a device to draw down EU and other benefits, fine, but we need more to grow. Caricom has no traction here; most don't know it, the new HQ in Guyana does not affect us and as we are all "British" it is culture neutral.

Caricom is secretive. Where are its accounts? We work, sell and go on vacation north, so an oil spill off Louisiana concerns us, not in the Eastern Caribbean (EC). Caricom is of the cognoscenti; an elite club, those who make up the glitterati at its cocktail parties and banquets; workers have no part in it.

We need an independent inquiry. What can Caricom do for our economy? It went from common market to "single economy". What does this mean? Cabinet must publish full Caricom accounts, staff, expenditure, source of funds, etc. It cost us "a bag" since 1968 - for what? Now, with the shift from regionalisation to globalisation and WTO, is it relevant to our economic growth? No more speculation, we need answers!

What does Greece/EU teach us about Jamaica/CSME? We love Britain and our ex-slave, ex-colonial English-speaking brethren, but Caricom cannot just idolise "Britishness". The EC is not a destination of choice for us and the hostility at Air Jamaica's sale to T&T speaks volumes! Love at long distance is doomed as we are intimate with those close by! Notice, even our men go to Cuba, not the EC, to find wives and mistresses? Very French!

Caricom is our intergenerational project, but it does not work for us. The reason?

The preconditions to economic union are not met in our case. Consider the following:

*The EC is far from us and thousands of sea miles form a barrier to trade, travel, intimacy as they did for the Caribs and Columbus. English heritage is our only link with the EC.

*The union of several small, poor, distant island states with no major natural resource or intellectual property base cannot benefit our economy. CSME is politics, not economics!

*Our large population relative to the size of Caricom (ours is equal to the combined islands), our chronic poverty and failure to be sustainable in our heyday of bauxite and export preferences give our partners no confidence, and though rich, they are too small to support us. Let's now compare some common EU and CSME goals:

*Free movement for work, play and study. This works for Greece but not for us. Greeks can travel in the EU cheaply by air, car or on foot. Only UWI, government officials and the rich can travel in Caricom. Workers from poor members go to rich EU states to find jobs. Our workers are not allowed into the EC to seek employment.

*Common currency. If CSME had a common "cari" our debt would hurt all members. The euro is inflexible, so Greece can't devalue to help itself as it would hurt the eurozone. But the EU has mobilised US$1 trillion to help it. What does Caricom do to help us? Nada! One euro buys little in the north, but a lot in the south, so UK citizens live or work in Greece for the good weather and cheap living. Life is cheaper in the EC but we are not allowed to live there. Britain is not in the euro, but gives billions of pounds to save it as Greece's demand keeps UK factories open. Does T&T, our "trade gorgon", do this for us? No siree!

*Free trade. Caricom trade just makes us owe the EC more. Greece gets subsidy for farms and industry from the EU. In our distress do we get Caricom subsidy? No!

*Integration, fiscal, monetary discipline. The EU rides its members hard. They have to be prudent and balance their budgets. In the EU crackdown on Greece, they require cuts in spending, wages; higher taxes and oversight - it's done; budgets may soon be sent to the EU for approval and banks to pay a levy to fund bailouts. Germans cuss Greece as "lazy freeloaders" and Greeks cuss the EU and Germany as "Nazi", but Greece submits as the subsidies are good! Would we send our budget to Guyana for approval? No way!

The non-economic benefits of Caricom are modest and not unique. Check this:

*Our knowledge-based goals as CCJ can be had without union, some from "English" Canada, or India. We can get weather, legal services etc, based on treaty or payment.

*We all need new friends. EU masons, waiters, etc, work in Greece, the UK, and make friends - this is not so in Caricom. Only our officials and the rich have friends in Caricom!

*Our neighbours offer richer cultures than Anglocentric Caricom. Why not embrace all - French, British and Spanish? Let's unite with our close neighbours and enjoy their opera and ballet, then save up for that costly once-in-a-lifetime trip to T&T carnival!

*We share an ocean, geology, tectonic, climatic, security and air space with Haiti, DR, Puerto Rico, Cuba and our growth, environment and security future is with them. Will Caricom protect us from thousands of miles away? UWI has the EC and UTech must build joint campuses in Cuba, Haiti, DR; exchange students; train multilingual technologists, professionals, managers for job opportunities in the global economy.

We have Usain, Asafa and Bob but the EC states have Kim, Viv, Ato, Rihanna, Armatrading, some Nobel laureates and surpluses - Caricom works for them. Only growth and jobs can save us, so we need to do things differently. Do we focus on a distant market of 3m in Caricom or the 30m market of our close neighbours? A "no-brainer!" Stay conscious!

Alert: To raise standards, top UK universities may no longer admit students who resit A-levels and qualifying exams. One-one coco won't do, so if you got the subjects, but not at the first sitting, then apply to a second-rate university. UWI and UTech, please note!

Dr Franklin Johnston is an international project manager with Teape-Johnston Consultants, currently on assignment in the UK

franklinjohnston@hotmail.com

June 04, 2010

jamaicaobserver

Bahamas Blog International

Commonwealth in danger: Action needed in Trinidad

By Sir Ronald Sanders:

As the Commonwealth Heads of Government meeting is about to take place in Port-of-Spain, Trinidad and Tobago’s capital, there is not much hope among its member states that it will achieve anything more than declarations without the means to implement them.

Indeed, even more worryingly, there is a mood in some of the developed Commonwealth countries that the organisation no longer has relevance in the international community.

Sadly, even though the Commonwealth Summit is being held on the eve of the Copenhagen Conference on Climate Change, there is strong resistance from major capitals to any notion of a Commonwealth initiative on this issue.

I hope my information is incorrect, but it is being said in circles that should know that Canada is one of the countries that is opposed to any initiative being taken on climate change outside of what could be achieved in Copenhagen. And, the world now knows that already diluted declarations have been prepared for the Copenhagen conference and they are non-binding anyway.

If the information about Canada is true, it is much to be regretted, for small states, particularly those in the Caribbean, have long looked to Canada to champion their causes and to stand with them in the Commonwealth especially. In the past, Canada has not shirked this role, and it has not been to Canada’s disadvantage. By championing small states, Canada has been able to count small states in the legions of its support.

No other plurilateral organisation has served the interests of small states better than the Commonwealth over the last four decades. Of the now 52 member states, 32 are small with 12 of them from the Caribbean. Certainly, the G20, despite the membership of five Commonwealth countries – Australia, Britain, Canada, India and South Africa – can not purport to serve small states since not one small state is represented at the table, and, so far, no machinery has been put in place to formally ascertain their views, in advance of G20 meetings, on the global issues that affect them.

As the world has moved increasingly to globalisation and trade liberalisation, the majority of small states, which were from the very outset only marginally capable of economic survival, have found themselves overwhelmed by new challenges such as sea-level rise, drug trafficking and attendant high rates of crime, high migration of their best educated people, and a lack of capacity for negotiating the integration of their societies into larger trading blocs and the new global trading system. While bigger countries have similar problems, they have the resources and flexibility to address these problems, unlike the small states.

This is the context in which this CHOGM is being held. It suggests that the Commonwealth in tandem with the small states themselves should explore ways in which the imperilled societies of the majority of small states could become more viable and so serve their particular interests as well as those of the wider Commonwealth.

What should be the crucial issues? A priority should be Climate Change. The escalation of adverse weather related conditions, especially sea-level rise, challenge the very existence of several Commonwealth countries such as the Maldives, Kiribati, Marshall Islands, Tokelau and Tuvalu. In other cases, sea-level rise and flooding threaten agricultural production and trade for many states such as Guyana, Belize, Ghana, Tanzania and Bangladesh. Both stronger hurricanes and steady beach erosion also threaten tourism and agricultural production in several Caribbean islands. And, for all of the affected countries, the high costs involved in adaptation are simply unattainable on their own.

Why then not a Commonwealth initiative to do something tangible for the most vulnerable regardless of what happens at Copenhagen? Surely, the Commonwealth could resolve to mobilise resources from the World Bank and other organisations to put in place a programme for the countries whose very existence is threatened? If not, what do the leaders of these countries tell their people? What does the Commonwealth tell them? Is it that they must quite literally paddle their own canoe?

A second priority should be the impact of the global crisis on all Commonwealth countries and particularly what should be done for the smallest and most vulnerable economies. It was a welcome development to see the Secretary-General of the Caribbean Community and Common Market (CARICOM) Secretariat make the statement that CARICOM countries “have not seen any significant inflow for that (the US$1 trillion pledged to the IMF by the G20 countries), we have not heard or seen any significant changes in policies of the IMF as an example”. It is time for that kind of frank talk.

The Global crisis produced the G20 countries to replace the G7, which has controlled the world economy over the last sixty years, to stimulate global demand and supply, but there has been no accompanying measures for the smallest, most vulnerable countries for debt relief, new aid, and sustainable capital flows. It is right that these governments must devise policies that address these issues themselves, but it is also right that the international community should act to provide help.

Essentially small states have been left out in the cold with the IMF still the only mechanism to which they can turn – and no change, despite all the rhetoric, in the prescriptions of the IMF itself.

Yet, the capacity of governments of small Commonwealth countries to service debt that the IMF places as a priority is extremely difficult in conditions in which their main sources of trade and tourism revenues are in decline. The ratio of debt to GDP in several small Commonwealth countries paints the picture: St Kitts-Nevis 178%, Seychelles 151%, Jamaica 128%, Antigua and Barbuda 107%, Barbados 106%, Grenada 87%, Dominica 86%, Belize 80%, St Lucia 70%, Marshall islands 70% and St Vincent and the Grenadines 67%.

The Commonwealth should, at the very least, be considering how it can advance change in the World Bank and other financial institutions for helping small countries to restructure and repay both official and commercial debt on easy terms over the next decade.

Absent practical decisions of this kind, this CHOGM does run the risk of making the Commonwealth irrelevant even to the small states that place such tremendous importance in it. That would be sad for an organisation that retains great potential for serving the world’s interest for economic development, peace and democracy.

caribbeannetnews

Bahamas Blog Bahamas

'CSME not answer for region'

Denyse Renne drenne@trinidadexpress.com:





Former Barbadian prime minister Owen Arthur says the rise of trade liberalisation and globalisation was making a massive impact in the world, and less developed countries within the Caribbean are forced to face more challenges.

Arthur was one of many speakers who addressed the final session of the inaugural symposium on ’Current Developments in Caribbean Community Law’ at the Hyatt Regency hotel, Port of Spain, on Wednesday.

Arthur said the cost of restructuring an economy as a result of the information age can have its challenges, especially in terms of security.

Stating no Caribbean country is in a position to look at Caricom or the Caribbean Single Market Economy (CSME) for immediate solutions for several matters, Arthur said the CSME does not offer governments ample opportunities to deal with fiscal issues.

He advised that issues such as the Caribbean Single Economy should be forgotten for the time being, and the issue of sovereignty should be dealt with through a single market, and emphasis should be placed on getting rid of restrictions.

’The CSME has always been conceived with the intention of a well-integrated system for global economy. We must go forward in the Caribbean. We must see the CSME for what it is, it will not yield over solutions. There must be political commitments to allow it to yield the course,’ Arthur said.

Noting the power of advocacy can bring about change in the Caribbean, Arthur said the concept of the CSME needs reviewing and, also, countries need to ask themselves where they stand. ’Are we seen as Caribbean people or are we seen as individuals?’

St Lucian Opposition Leader Dr Kenny Anthony also addressed the function, saying the collapse of Clico and the revamping of British American Insurance Company saw governments scrambling and relying on other resources.

’I think we are in very dangerous times. There is an economic crisis facing nations...,’ he said

He said there needs to be clarity among countries and their purposes known, as well as a display of political courage and as far as he is concerned, ’I am yet to see any evidence of this.’

Declaring that the leadership of the region needs to resolve issues of movement of nationals across countries, Anthony said the fear of Haiti becoming involved in Caricom integration is a sore point for countries since there is the fear of the Haitian invasion of nationals.


November 13th 2009

trinidadexpress

Bahamas Blog Bahamas