← Back

Your message to the BLOGMASTER was sent

In the Barbados Advocate Business Monday of October 18, 2010 Professor Avinash Persaud was quoted as making the asinine statement, “being food self-sufficient is unobtainable and anyone who believes otherwise is not being realistic’”. Who was Persaud referring to? What BU has been hearing is the need for Barbados to develop a food security plan. In 2008 former minister of agriculture Haynesley Benn intimated such a plan would be introduced in 2010. Minister Benn has subsequently moved on to another ministry the result of a Cabinet reshuffle – the promised plan may yet be delivered by Minister of Agriculture David Estwick.

Whenever the debate what is the best strategy Barbados should adopt for agriculture surfaces, the proponents are accused by Persaud and those of his ilk as romanticizing the sector. Successive governments have allowed agriculture policy to become stymied by the indecision whether to commit to a service base economy and or develop a feasible agriculture sector. The argument as always existed if we commit to a service based economy the opportunity exist to combine a limited intensive agriculture production with the number one productive sector.

While our governments continue to vacillate on whether to subsidized the agriculture sector (many of the world’s developed countries subsidize agriculture), it should be of interest to learn of recent developments which on the surface seem to be tangential to the issue of food security. On closer examination one can reasonable conclude there is a potential threat to global food security.

How many people are aware a company which calls itself Monsanto is the world’s largest manufacturer of genetically modified seed?   It maybe ironic to some Monsanto is also the world’s leading producer of the herbicide glyphosate, marketed as Roundup.

Multiple Internet sources confirm Wikipedia’s posting:

‘”Monsanto’s development and marketing of genetically engineered seed and bovine growth hormone, as well as its aggressive litigation, political lobbying practices, seed commercialization practices and “strong-arming” of the seed industry have made the company controversial around the world and a primary target of the alter-globalization movement and environmental activists. As a result of its business strategies and licensing agreements, Monsanto came under investigation by the U.S. Justice Department in 2009.”

To validate the political lobbying capability of Monsanto it was reported last week 10 out of 15 candidates funded by them in the recent mid-term election in the USA made it all the way to the US Congress and Senate.  More scary is Monsanto’s willingness to hire “an arm of Xe (the mercenary company formerly known as Blackwater) to dig up dirt on anti-GMO activists.”

Against the foregoing BU is asking Barbadians and our policymakers alike to connect the dots. Yes we cannot be self sufficient in food but shouldn’t we implement an agriculture policy which seeks to mitigate our vulnerability?


Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.

93 responses to “Food Security Not A National Priority”


  1. We must develop a drastic approach, my suggestion, close one of the sugar factories, reduce the production of sugar to local use and interational export under the bajan brand. Plant alternative crops e.g. English pototoes,cassava and sweet pototes etcplus the vegies. We would be benfitting more from this than wasting time with sugar, what we need to get back to with the excess canes we would then have is produce molasses both raw and fancy.


  2. @The Scout

    Right On!!!!!


  3. Barbados can made more foreign exchange by exporting the alternative crops than exporting sugar. Plus it is uneconomical to produce sugar for the british market, why should we sell a product cheaper than it is to produce, that is madness. English potatoes are grown in other countries in the region, yet the country that consume the most potatoes (barbados) import theirs; grow our own and save much foreign exchange. This doesn’t take a rocket scientist to work that out.


  4. @Mr George Reid
    “My question, still, is can a very small vulnerable country like Barbados ever be secure in anything?”

    My aim here is to prove you wrong. You see, in the 1960s up to the mid 1970s, there was a man called Edward Cumberbatch who worked with the Barrow Government to develop a strategic plan for food security. He had worked out the amount of land needed to provide fresh vegetables to a population of 250,000 people and he properly located this land in the Scotland District, which is east of the escarpment running from north to south.

    In this plan, government provided extension services to all farmers, veg, poultry, dairy, etc. He worked out cultivation services for those without heavy equipment. He was also instrumental in moving the Ministry of Agriculture into specialisation. For example the Vetinary Unit which started a programme of insemination (sperm bank for sheep, goats and cows) in the Pine and the Scotland District project in Haggatts, St. Andrew.

    The Haggatts Project introduced the technology to stop land slippage in the Scotland District as well as grafted trees. He organised irrigation separate from domestic water supply. He encouraged farmers to make and use organic manure and had a programme where he taught farmers how to use all the materials produced on their farms; down to the grass.

    In the process, he identified St. Philip as having the best land for growing aloes. I remember we grew several crops of aloe for a Canadian company. Maybe by now the Canadian company took our aloe and reproduced it out there.

    Notwithstanding all that, Mr. Cumberbatch worked with Carmeta Fraser to develop preserved food; jams, jellies, syrups, spices, etc. Those who were around in those times would have known of her instant yam and creamed potato, which hit the market running. All the consumer had to do was add water and stir.

    Sadly, all that went through the eddoes when the Tom Adams government got in and it was replaced with economic theory and financial wizardry.

    It is therefore my intention to gather all this information for you Mr. Reid, so that you can see that what you are saying is not only false but a position that has great potential to hurt our people in the long run; and is hurting our people today, because we taking any crap from anybody as we do not have these things anymore.

    I put it to you, that Barbadians have the potential to not only outshine the world in education, but in the use of technology to enhance the economy. Do you know of the days of the foundry which used to forge all the parts for our sugar factories and related farm/cultivation equipment? We never imported parts for factories and my grandfather was one of those men who repaired and maintained the furnaces at all the factories in Barbados; preparing them to function at full capacity during the crop.

    I will also advise you to check with CARDI and Technologist in Agriculture on the work done to develop the best strain of sugar cane for maximum sugar production.

    If we can be self-sufficient in agriculture and avoid the food bill, we can do it for other things. Contrary to your conclusion, I would say that Barbados can be self-sufficient in several things.


  5. BTW Mr. Reid, I forgot the solar technology which we now exporting through water heating, not to mention the fact that solar represents an energy saving to us. Are we importing solar water heaters?


  6. RDK
    I remember those days, the B’dos foundry in White Park road on the spot where the now judicial building is, plus the Central foundry in Cavans Lane that used to service theinter-island vessels. I went to the B’dos foundry many a night/ early morning with by dad, who was a truck driver at one of the many sugar factories on the island, to have a broken wheel or some other part either repaired or a new one built. This was usually done with speed and accuracy since the factory could not function without the part and cane would spoil if left unground for too long> tHESE GUYS WERE GOOOOOD.


  7. Now surely you grasp the significance of erecting that Glorious Imposing non-functional edifice on the site which was used to be the epicenter of our productive agenda. When Lawyers rule the roost, what the fcuk do you expect …?


  8. ROK

    You trying to tell me that the FTC has determined that Douglas Skeete and Clyde Mascoll worth more than the rest of wunna combined? You and Chris ain’ experts of some kind? How much did my friend Rolland Clarke get ? At least Malcolm did not ask fah a squat so he can’ feel to disappointed


  9. Roland admitted that he was not aware that he could have submitted for expenses. However, as an intervenor himself, he would not have gotten costs since he is not a lawyer. It seems that he would have had to let somebody intervene and hire him as the expert.

    Read the decision: http://www.ftc.gov.bb/library/2010-11-17_commission_decision_in_the_application_for_costs_by_intervenors.pdf


  10. @ROK | November 18, 2010 at 1:34 AM |

    You are right on the ball! We need passionate people like the Edward Cumberbatch’s to restart programmes like what you have mentioned. Sadly there are too many hoops and tunnels to go through that has taken the passion out of Agriculture. I reckon Hanesley Benn had it at some point. It is very difficult almost impossible to revive passion when it has died; although I believe that all is not lost if there is some injection of willingness to restart what Edward had started.


  11. @ROK: “…However, as an intervenor himself, he would not have gotten costs since he is not a lawyer. It seems that he would have had to let somebody intervene and hire him as the expert.

    You know the country is run by lawyers when only lawyers are considered worthy of compensation. “Laymen” are not welcome to represent the “people”, regardless of how much real-world experience they may have.

    This has actually turned out exactly as I expected. The Chairman, IMHO, had his mind made up even before the hearing started. But it’s amusing that it took the FTC over a year (and god knows how many tax dollars) to make this simple decision.

    Oh well — at least ROK and I were able to keep the public informed (via the live internet video streaming, the daily audio recordings, and access to the transcripts (as they finally became available) in electronic form.


  12. Man de same way a facebook conversation get start to voice an anti Owen Arthur sentiment I feel it appropriate to have A similar one fah dis FTC batch ah jackasses … I hear one ah de commissioners a few nights ago in a big up lecture at the Grand Salle criticizing Cuba over human rights to the boos of many in the public … Tah t’ink that I at one time t’ought dat dis Hazzard fella was a needed bref ah fresh air … My God …!


  13. @Chris

    This has actually turned out exactly as I expected. The Chairman, IMHO, had his mind made up even before the hearing started. But it’s amusing that it took the FTC over a year (and god knows how many tax dollars) to make this simple decision.

    In your above you seem to have made the assumption the other Commissioners did not have a voice?


  14. To compound the issue of food security recent forecasts point to the price of grain on the world market moving up!


  15. @David,

    Did you not see that coming? You let the Europeans grab all the arable land in Africa which previously grew food crops to grow crops for bio-fuels. This withdrawal of land in production, will ultimately lead to a scarcity of food and hence the staples like rice, wheat and corn will go up as people resort to more of this to supplement for the loss.

    Now, when something as sinister as this can be so glaring, it give legitimacy to conspiracy theory. When you reduce the food, it means that there will be more people than food. You think you can figure out the outcome?


  16. Hit the button too quickly, but just to end off that by saying that even land use policy is part of food security.


  17. @ David,
    “@Chris: … In your above you seem to have made the assumption the other Commissioners did not have a voice?”

    I would tend to concur with Chris.


  18. @ROK

    Have a look at this report. The author is suggesting the shortage will benefit US farmers.


  19. Mr. Reid, your silence is deafening. Two questions to you though:

    1. How long do you think you can continue with the tinkering before it all comes crashing down?

    2. Is it not reasonable to assume that any advisor who advises that the country should pull its production bases to depend on others to produce for it, has actually advised on the inevitable demise of the economy of that country/nation/people?


  20. @David,

    “The author is suggesting the shortage will benefit US farmers.”

    That is the point. The world will now depend on wheat as the alternative staple because it is the only staple with such an abundant supply and who produces wheat large scale?

    Take a look back at Egyptian society and see how in times of drought, it was the stores of wheat that kept the people from starving. These are the lessons. Therefore the USA spent the last 50 years genetically modifying so that its production burst at the seams. So now you have all this wheat you create a crisis so your wheat will sell. A very typical capitalist, profiteering strategy; with no regard for human life.

    At this point, they believe that the earth is over-populated and these strategies are to reduce the population, spiced with pockets where the war machines operate to kill us out.

    Well, give me a better explanation?????


  21. @David

    Having read the report, USA have also done a lot of GM on soyabeans too. Remember also that during all this time government was subsidising these crops. I suppose it is now payback time.


  22. We truly need to ‘educate’ our people.

    Please ignore the impostor.


  23. Figured.


  24. ROK, re your post @ November 18, 2010 at 1:34 AM
    I thought that I knew the Ministry of Agriculture and its past Officers and their accomplishments quite well but I must admit that I have learnt a lot of new facts from your post.

    Edward Cumberbatch contributed significantly to Agriculture in the Island in a number of areas related to Soil Conservation and Agricultural Extension. Indeed, I think that he was arguably the best hands-on Extension Officer this Island has ever seen but I didn’t know of the details of his contributions which you listed.
    I didn’t know that he had worked with the Barrow Government to develop a strategic plan for food security and that when the Tom Adams Government came in all the good work that he had done went to waste and was replaced by economic theory and financial wizardy.

    My memory is now waning but I seem to recall that the initial modern work on food security in Barbados, which actually demonstrably worked, was by people like Sir John Saint who developed the integrated systems that actually fed the Island during the second world war when supply ships couldn’t get into the Island. I seem to recall that the slide in food security started with the first Errol Barrow Government which set the ball rolling for our current debacle by cutting up good Agricultural Lands for large house lots. Remember Rowans. Since then every successive Government talked food security but tried to outdo the previous one in sanctioning the cutting up of good Agricultural land. As far as I recall also the final say in that rape of the land rested with successive Ministers of Finance from Barrow, to Adams, to Bree to Barrow to Thompson to Arthur to Thompson. All of them contributed to the situation we now have which makes it well nigh impossible for Barbados to be truly Food Secure.

    Land is the major factor in food security in a small country such as Barbados as was proven by the experience in the war years. Any unwritten policy that allows significant portions of that land to be split off to provide housing for elites, hotels, etc. etc. eventually leads to insufficient land being available for agricultural pursuits and loss of potential for true food security in small bites, day after day.

    Edward Cumberbatch did a yeoman job for food security in Barbados during the 60’s and early 70’s and he is still making a good contribution to Agriculture particularly in his work on the Board of the Scotland District authority. When he left the Ministry of Agriculture in the early seventies, I think, he changed careers and became a highly successful Real Estate agent and farmer in his own right.

    Agricultural production depends on at least 4 factors; Land, Labour, Capital and Information. Political policies or lack thereof have whittled away at the quantum of Land available for agriculture. In addition the cost of Agricultural land has skyrocketed to the extent that it is now well nigh impossible for a new farmer to break even, especially in the face of the well known susceptibility of agricultural production to the vagaries of abnormal weather. The best agricultural land is probably now being populated by hotels, houses and golf courses.
    Political policies, inter alia, have also acted, along with other societal constraints, to ensure that Agricultural Labour has become scarcer and more expensive almost with each passing day.
    Capital, despite the lip service paid to Agriculture, has not been generally forthcoming or has been avoided by some farmers. The various services provided to agriculture by various Government agencies over the years might be considered as an aspect of Capital that has not been optimally delivered to the farming community.
    Information is a resource that is essential to ensure that a farmer does the right things using an optimal recipe to produce food of various types for the country. The Extension services that Edward Cumberbatch so admirably graced in the 1960’s and 70’s was the provider of the Information resource of that day but that service is, of course, no more. It has been replaced by a slimmer model, with much less resources, than existed in those times. I think the emphasis is now on webpages, research on the web, development and dissemination of Techical Packages, etc. etc. The approach has been modernized but there are still calls for its practitioners to go back to the methods of the sixties. There are no resources to do so.

    Of course there are exceptions to the somewhat bleak picture I have painted and some farmers have done very well financially. The economic reports over the past several years, however, paint a dismal picture of the actual overall production of food in Barbados. But it is possible that that picture may not have been completely accurate always because of the methodology of collecting the statistics as some workers have been pointing out over the years.

    True food security in Barbados is impacted by all of the factors above. By true food security I mean that actual or potential capability for the country to feed itself and its visitors for a definable protracted period if disaster hits. (The Egyptians in Joseph’s time were food secure, the Israelites were’nt).

    I think Barbados loss its potential for true food security some years ago. The new version of food security replaces actual food by foreign exchange and suggests that we are food secure if we have the foreign exchange to purchase our food needs for x number of weeks. With the decline in foreign reserves we are probably getting near to not being food secure according to this definition also.

    The title of this discussion is “food security not a national priority”. I think the title is accurate and that it has been so for quite a long time. Can we become truly food secure in the relatively near future? I think so but it will involve work on a variety of fronts. I could probably touch on these in another post. This one is getting too long. Essentially we will have to retool in a number of areas, totally revamp a number of institutions which currently serve agriculture and carefully design strategic and operational plans to get us to where we can realistically and objectively go, given where we are now.


  25. Barbados can grow all the food it needs.

    There is no shortage of land. The golf courses are primed and ready to convert to agriculture if needed.


  26. Watch video ‘What’s driving food prices?’

    3:07 PM Javier Blas, commodities editor, explains why the UN’s Food and Agriculture Organisation are giving the global food market ‘critical’ status, and considers what must be done to stave off a repeat of the 2007/2008 crisis. (6m 37sec)

    What is interesting is the forecast for rising price of sugar.

    *************************

  27. George Reid, PhD Avatar

    ROK | November 18, 2010 at 1:34 AM |

    “My aim here is to prove you wrong. You see, in the 1960s up to the mid 1970s, there was a man called Edward Cumberbatch who worked with the Barrow Government to develop a strategic plan for food security. He had worked out the amount of land needed to provide fresh vegetables to a population of 250,000 people and he properly located this land in the Scotland District, which is east of the escarpment running from north to south.

    In this plan, government provided extension services to all farmers, veg, poultry, dairy, etc. He worked out cultivation services for those without heavy equipment. He was also instrumental in moving the Ministry of Agriculture into specialisation. For example the Vetinary Unit which started a programme of insemination (sperm bank for sheep, goats and cows) in the Pine and the Scotland District project in Haggatts, St. Andrew.”

    Rokkie boy, you have completely missed the point of my intervention. I have no desire, in this discussion, to prove that I am right about anything. I simply asked for clarity in defining what we were stating as an objective. BU’s caption Food Security Not A National Priority quoted the statement attributed to Prof. Avanish Persaud: “being food self-sufficient is unobtainable and anyone who believes otherwise is not being realistic’”. I suggested, initially, that if we wish to discuss “food self-sufficiency” or “food security” as a realistic objective of national policy for Barbados we should try to be clear about the meaning that we are applying to this idea.

    You attempted to demonstrate, by referring to examples of what YOU considered to be documented succesful efforts at implementing “food security” programmes, in the past, that the objective was achievable. And yet, you had to provide explanations why those programmes failed.

    checkit-out | November 18, 2010 at 10:09 PM | has made a commenendable effort to get the discussion back to the fundamental issue. He has offered a workable definition as a starting point by suggesting that: “True food security in Barbados is impacted by all of the factors above. By true food security I mean that actual or potential capability for the country to feed itself and its visitors for a definable protracted period if disaster hits. (The Egyptians in Joseph’s time were food secure, the Israelites were’nt).”

    By recognising the impact of “all the factors above” Checkit-out has directed attention to the problem of our analytical framework. Since no country should base its national policies on a single objective, efforts to achieve one objective will have consequences for others. This is what economists call “trade-off”. [Sorry for attempting to give you a lesson in Economics 101].

    BTW, ROK, since it is not possible to determine whether a particular contribution is a true expression of a blogger’s underlying belief system it may not be helpful to draw conclusions about his/her intellectual capability. I admit, though, that you may feel that my way of thinking differs fundamentally from yours! And yours, at the end of the day, may be right!!

    OH KING, LIVE FOREVER!!


  28. So here we are again.

    Is it fair to expect commenters to have all the answers?

    Here is what we know. A strategy to promote food security has been abandoned in Barbados under successive governments.

    People like Persaud, Mascoll, Arthur and others believe a service based economy is the way to go at the expense of a viable agriculture sector to drive food security it seems.

    Here we are again all tangled and mired in analysis leading to the inevitable paralysis.

    Will we ever learn? Hell food security is not even on the radar of our policymakers. A people will always get what they deserve.


  29. “A people will always get what they deserve.”

    I do NOT deserve Persaud, Mascoll, Arthur and others… I ain’ people too …?

    Somebody cussing me on the Blog and I hear that you know who it is… Tell mah nah?


  30. @BAFBFP

    Sometimes we have to ignore some things.

    You can do a Google for a site called bajanblogwatch. It seems Dave ‘no balls’ Speller jacks off on BU activity.


  31. Earlier he posted as a regular joe-blow i.e. now he has returned as a Ph di.k as if that gives him authority. When ‘some’ of our fore-parents were securing food, thank God they didn’t have any Phd..ks around that time otherwise Bajans would have been history. They relied on Mother Wisdom. They knew intuitively that they had to provide and secure food for their families.

    One of the main reasons why Barbados would not be a food secure nation is because she was fooled into believing that she is truly a part of ‘some’ global community and that the ‘powers’ that be will always have her interest at heart and provide, hence steer the youth away from agriculture into the direction of servitude and all other self-absorbed NON-PRODUCTIVE parasitic areas like Law and other Phds. Useless! The society can thrive and PROSPER without them. Who benefits from the importation of so much garbage into the island? Who is laughing all the way to the bank? The whole idea of steering people away from the land was a sinister plan, conceptualised way beyond the borders of Barbados and sadly the people fell for it, believing that they were becoming ‘highly educated’ only now to realise that they are mere highly educated serfs.

    When the s.it does hit the fan watch and see that all the impediments being spouted about will amount nothing more than excuses. Just watch every household return to the cultivation of every sq ft of land they have. That’s when necessity will again become the mother of invention and throw all these pathetic academic arguments out the window.


  32. @Mr. Reid

    I am not sure that your last post deals with salient issues. First I did not question your intellectual capacity. I may have alluded to my observation that the intellectual capacity of our economists may very well be misplaced and that your “grund norms” are based on a fallacy perpetrated by a system designed to enhance foreign interests.

    Caribbean economists have embraced western thinking. They have not sat down to analyse the dynamics of Caribbean people given cultural norms and nuances which make us a unique people.

    Economists have ignored the international skirmishes we have had as an island dating back from the Oistins treaty down to the day that Sandi told the IMF to go take a hike and the fact that we prospered in the face of the might of the opposing forces. Take the IMF lessons of Jamaica, Guyana and to a lesser extent, Trinidad and compare them with Barbados, at least three conclusions can be drawn:

    1. Acceptance of western economic thinking leads to total disaster;
    2. Resistance to western economic thinking leads to prosperity;
    3. Caribbean economies need to be unique to its people and need careful study and analysis for it to be relevant to us.

    Finally, you cannot define food security without first taking into account all the parameters which could possibly affect the certain supply of nutritious food and not just picking out a few main characteristics of food security to say that we will stay within that box and call it food security.

    Food security should therefore take into consideration such aspects as land use, taxation, trade policy, fiscal policies, consumer education, the integration of agriculture into the education system, technology (including labs and genetic stock) and, among other factors, a production strategy.

    You need not respond sir, as if you continue in your vein, I will have no further responses for you as you continue to move the goals posts and introduce extraneous matter in an attempt to keep your tie and jacket on.


  33. @ROK | November 19, 2010 at 10:59 AM |

    “Finally, you cannot define food security without first taking into account all the parameters which could possibly affect the certain supply of nutritious food and not just picking out a few main characteristics of food security to say that we will stay within that box and call it food security.”

    ROK, if you feel that I have proposed a definition of “food security” and that I have used it to sustain an argument that it is unattainable, I suggest that you should read my contributions again and try to understand them. My sole intention was to try to draw the attention of readers of/contributors to the discussion that a sensible conclusion on the issue at hand could not be reached in the absence of clarity about the concept.

    I will admit that my suggestion that for a very small country preoccupation with the idea of “security” in the widest meaning that can be applied to the term evokes a “chicken little” [the sky is falling!] mentality. But, I was trying to stimulate a discussion in which “security” is seen as freedom from fear or anxiety over the perception of a particular threat. In that sense, “security” is an emotional condition that is dependent on the ability to perceive/identify “threats to well-being” from a range of sources.

    Within that context I can dispute none of your affirmations, nor question the sources of your perceptions. Nor can you question my inability to identify with yours. Indeed, you may be correct in your statement that: “Caribbean economists have embraced western thinking. They have not sat down to analyse the dynamics of Caribbean people given cultural norms and nuances which make us a unique people.”. However, I think that you must concede that the threats against which we would like to feel secure through our ability to achieve “the certain supply of nutritious food” all arise from the functioning of the global economy, and our inability to opt out of it.

    Your recognition that “(F)ood security should therefore take into consideration such aspects as land use, taxation, trade policy, fiscal policies, consumer education, the integration of agriculture into the education system, technology (including labs and genetic stock) and, among other factors, a production strategy.” seems to indicate that your frame of reference is not a “Robinson Crusoe” type of economic system. AND THERIN LIES THE PROBLEM.

    Indeed, it is not that I am moving the goal post of the discussion. Rather, it is that we have been trying to play a game without any goal posts at all!!

    Please be assured that this is my final response [at least on your contributions], since the process of converting the dross of this blog into precious metal is exhausting my skills as an alchemist!


  34. Well what a shyster! A true alchemist would definitely know how to convert dross to precious metal. So much for its alchemical skills, but true to form some of us will maintain viscousity.


  35. Land is an important resource in fulfilling a nation’s ability to feed itself but if land is scarce then intensive scientific agriculture is the way to go.
    Take for example the Pine basin which is a land for the landless project. All of that area could be cleared and farmers supported with shade house production of vegetables. That is only a small area but if this is replicated all over the island where rab land is available then the food import bill can be cut and some level of food security assured.
    With the use of technology farmers would be able to make a dent in the importation of crops like tomatoes, sweet peppers, lettuce, cabbage and many more.
    The Springhall land lease project should be made to concentrate on extensive farming in the production of animals.
    Why are all those doctors at the Ministry of Agriculture not making any progress in moving Barbados agriculture into the twenty first century?


  36. Charlie re. your | November 19, 2010 at 5:52 PM | post;

    You make some excellent points in your post above. Of course your suggestions, amongst others, can go some way to assist in achieving food security. But remember, land is not the only factor. There are several others that have to be brought to bear on the problem. I would guess that in the present fiscal environment where there have reportedly been drastic cutbacks in Government expenditure, especially in the Ministry of Agriculture, the kinds of projects you mention are not the ones in the forefront of the thinking of the people who hold the purse strings despite all the rhetoric on Agriculture that they might spout. So Capital resources might well be a serious terminal problem to getting such projects accepted and implemented. Similarly, Labour and getting suitable trained and properly oriented farmers to do the work might be another suite of problems.

    You snuck in the usual snide comment “Why are all those doctors at the Ministry of Agriculture not making any progress in moving Barbados agriculture into the twenty first century?”

    I suspect that many of those doctors in the Ministry of Agriculture have minimal influence on moving Agriculture in Barbados into the 21st century in any significant way. I suspect that most if not all of the doctors in agriculture are technicians whose expertise might be more directly related to solving technical problems related to agronomy, plant or livestock diseases and pests and such like, than to identifying and putting in place the management systems that would significantly improve agriculture here. They can and do identify and work out methods for the control of new animal pests and diseases; run diagnostic labs that are at the forefront of regional capabilities; and carry out the experiments to improve our major crops, etc. Barbados’ agriculture needs their expertise. but other kinds of expertise and resources are needed to ensure that the overarching weaknesses and threats in our agriculture are identified and combatted and proper systems put in place to develop a better way to make agriculture contribute to the economy at the level that it can optimally do.

    Agriculture has developed exponentially from the basic systems that we had in the early 20th century. In the 1940’s the Agriculture Secretary had significant power. Sir John Saint even acted as the Governor of the Island on occasion. That power came from the British Colonial Office and was translated to provide immediate decision making and interventions in then existing agriculture such as designing and swiftly implementing the food security system to combat the serious dangers of the second world war. The colonial system (The Barbados Agricultural Department was even then part of the Colonial Department of Agriculture), the extremely great importance of agriculture to the overall production of the Island and the demographics of agricultural land ownership in the Island, all worked towards relatively easy planning and implementation of major changes.

    In 2010 we have an in-house Cabinet Government system in an independent Barbados. Since independance the various Governments have presided over a situation in which the contribution of Agriculture to the economy has progressively dwindled and the Government Ministers recognize this clearly; sugar has become a basket case; agricultural land is selling at a similar price to land for housing; the power of the administrators in the Ministry of Agriculture has declined to the point where they have practically no say on serious staff matters, (eg. hiring, firing, discipline, promotions, etc.), little say in the finances of their ministry (the Ministry of Finance controls that) and minimal opportunity to make any changes to the monolithic public service machine.

    PhD’s in technical areas can’t make a dent in sorting out the inherent problems in such a system. Drastic changes are needed.

    Other countries have combated similar situations by total reorganization of their Ministries of Agriculture through assisted and subsidized privatization of Research and Development functions, enhancement of regulatory and extension functions, etc. The outcomes have been mixed but there are nevertheless good examples that we can adapt and adopt.

  37. Ravin' Craven Raven Avatar
    Ravin’ Craven Raven

    @checkit-out | November 19, 2010 at 7:37 PM |
    Wow, dah is sum powful comments! Yuh like yuh no a ting or two, but yuh mus tell we wuh we kin do now!


  38. Avinash persad is an economist? who has probably never grown a tomato in his life.

    I’d rather listern to the female FAO rep who was qouted on the radio this morning encouraging families to grow more of their own food.

    I never take medical advice from my lawyer even though she is the most brilliant lawyer on the face of the earth. But she knows not one shite about medicine. For my medical needs I consult a bonafide expert in the field.

    So we need not take agricultural advice from Avi as I suspect he knows not one shite about agriculture.

    I hold a full time job, I am currently raising a child and have raised anothers yet I am one of those weekend farmers.

    I don’t spend my weekend liming, drinking, or watching silly imported DVD’s.

    I spend my weekends in PRODUCTIVE activities.

    On 10,000 square feet with a couple of sister/buddies I grow much of my own starch and green/red and yellow vegatables.

    Between the 3 of us we grow enough cassava, bananas, figs, carrots, spinach, tomatoes, okras, avacadoes, tomatoes, golden apples, and coconuts to healthily supplement the diets of 5 households, 12 people in all.

    What Avi did not tell you was what can happen when a catergory 3, or 4, or 5 hurricane hits as will surely happen.

    If push come to shove the British government can evacuate its citizens who live in Barbados or can fly/ship food in to them.

    In an emergency the British quite sensibly will look after their own (including Avi first) and when he is eating a full share of food in the U.K where will you be?

    When Tomas hit this year I had enoughfood in the ground to keep me and mine for weeks. What about you?

    Like many families in Barbados I have another 2 acres of and that is not being cultivated.

    Right now in Barbados we have thousands (or perhaps tens of thousands) of acres of perfectly good agricultutal land that is not being used for agriculture nor for ANY EOCNOMIC ACTIVITY either. So why don’t we grow food on ALL of it?

    I hear people talking about the rise in the cost of living and I wonder what they are talking about. My supermarket bill has gone DOWN since I started WORKING HARDER.

    Also what Avi did not tell wunna is that agriculture is not called agriCULTURE for nothing.

    When you start to grow food you get hooked into a CULTURE of other food growers, these other food growers GIVE YOU FOOD.

    I for example cook and eat breadfruit hundreds of times a year, but I’ve only bought breadfruit twice in my whole ife. People give me FREE breadfruit all the time, so that for example I rarely have to buy “English potatoes”

    So yes while it may be possible that highly educatated, highly mobile, international citizen professionals like Avi Persaud can give up on agriculture, the rest of us shouldn’t.

    There is a saying “a merchant has no country” Avi can sell his BRAINpower in a 100 different marketplaces in the world, he is not dependent on Barbados for survival.

    The rest of us who have nowherre else to go should ensure that we can produce as much of our own food as possible.

    Because in truth if push comes to shove the rest of the world has no alligence nor love for us.

    The rest of the world DOES NOT CARE WHETHER WE LIVE OR WHETHER WE DIE OF STARVATION (and in case you doubt this remember that people in other places starve to death every day)

    So let Avi talk he talk, a lot more of us need to get our hands dirty.

    Bajans used to understand the saying “brek’ fa yaself”

    We should not let well intentioned foreigners however sweet tongued mislead us.

    A few years ago as I was working my ground a Chinese man (yes a real Chinese man from China) walked into the ground and asked me to sell the land to him.

    China is a bigable economic power. I tell myself that if a Chinese man wants to buy my land my land must therefore be valuable.

    So if it is valuable to China, I have to keep that value for Barbados and for my family.

    Two questions to Avi and the blog family.

    Why would a Chinese man want to buy my land?

    And should I cease growing food and sell my land to the man from China?


  39. Good contribution Random thoughts.

    BU has been trying behind the scenes to get our home grown economists/technocrats to come public and challenge/agree with people like Persaud who obviously brings a Eurocentric world view to understanding our problems. It is not that he is always wrong but it is important for the local academics to challenge and or deposit an ontheground view. Only then by allowing all the views to contend can we have meaningful discussion which could inform the best solution.


  40. Random thoughts re. your | November 20, 2010 at 10:25 AM |

    I also think it was an excellent contribution on this topic.

    We should never forget that it is not only the Government that can make a contribution to food security but that all citizens who have the requisite inputs can also make a very significant input. Backyard gardening by persons in their thousands can do this and also provide great personal benefits as well as show the Persauds of this world that they might have left out one important element of the equation.

    Perhaps someone in the Ministry of Agriculture’s planning unit can do the maths and tell us how many and what total size of backyards we need, along with progressive Government projects, to ensure real food security in this Island.

    But I recall Owen Arthur being derided on this blog for making similar suggestions some years ago and he was even photographed actually getting into the dirt.

    The food security issue needs everyone on deck and not only Government.

    Ravin’ Thanks for the apparent kudos on my effort above. I may try to put together some prescriptions later on how I think the Government could make food security and its agricultural policy work.


  41. In Barbados when most people were labourers we used to talk abour using “our hoe and basket” to ensure our survival and the survival of our families.

    Avinash Persad is an economist. He is using his economic “hoe and basket” that is his training as an economist to ensure his survial and that of his family.

    The rest of us who are NOT brilliant economists, that is 99.999999% of the world must not give up our survival assets and tools just because an economist says so.

    When Barbados no longer serves the brilliant economist’s needs or the needs of his family he will make a sensible economic decision and take up his economic hoe and basket and depart for better economic climes.

    We Bajans have to be prepared to brek’ fa weself too using ALL assetts that we have, can acquire, or can hold on to, and that includes, land, tourism and services, people, creativity, AND YES AGRICULTURE. After all we did not give up our battery powered radios when we got flat screen tv’s did we?


  42. Reasons why imports from the US should be carefully monitored re content before allowing them to kill our people. Reasons why we need our agricultural sector to flourish. Reasons why in order to have it flourish farmers need far more protection in terms of imports and concessions, help in proper management, farm to table contracts with hotels/restaurants (i.e. adopt a farmer and pay him on delivery of goods or not more than one week credit), tough legislation on praedial larceny, banning of chemicals insecticides & pesticides. Barbados can reduce its huge food import bill…we just need our agriculture/processors to be more organized…i.e. not everyone growing peppers and making peppersauce for instance! Diversification is the key. so here goes…remember that we import a lot from the U.S. And this is what has been found out about what we import! Want your children to grow up riddled with all manner of disease?…feed them processed foods from the US. Want them to be healthy?…buy local!

    FDA Senate Bill 510 Food Safety? The FDA has killed far more people than contaminated eggs or lettuce
    Saturday, November 20, 2010
    by Mike Adams, the Health Ranger
    Editor of NaturalNews.com (See all articles…) NaturalNews)

    Proponents of Senate Bill 510 — the Food Safety and Modernization Act — keep trying to claim that we need the FDA to protect us from tainted eggs, lettuce, onions and spinach. On the surface, it seems like a reasonable argument: No one should ever die from unsafe food in America, right?

    But to accomplish a net reduction in deaths, you’d need to grant power over the food supply to some organization that actually respects human life… and the FDA is not that organization. In fact, as we have documented here on NaturalNews over the last seven years, the FDA is responsible for far more deaths of Americans than all the terrorist events in the history of the world — combined!

    How is that so?

    How the FDA has killed millions of Americans
    Well, for starters, the FDA has a long and rather dubious history of keeping dangerous, deadly drugs on the market even after it knows those drugs are killing people. The FDA has even gone out of its way to ignore critical evidence about dangerous drugs in order to appease its Big Pharma clients and keep those high-profit drugs selling while people are dying.

    To see one example of this, look at the history of Vioxx — a drug the FDA kept on the market while it racked up well over 60,000 deaths according to the FDA’s own scientists! (http://www.naturalnews.com/011401_D…)

    As Dr David Graham said in an interview, “The FDA is responsible for 140,000 heart attacks and 60,000 dead Americans. That’s as many people as were killed in the Vietnam War. Yet the FDA points the finger at me and says, Well, this guy’s a rat, you can’t trust him,’ but nobody is calling them to account. Congress isn’t calling them to account.”

    If you want more evidence of the FDA’s outrageous disregard for human life, look at the agency’s handling of the drug Ketek (http://www.naturalnews.com/019698.html). Or check out how the FDA kept the liver-damaging drug Rezulin on the market while diabetic Americans were dropping dead.

    The FDA’s own scientists have repeatedly accused the agency of engaging in routine intimidation of scientists who try to call attention to dangerous products (http://www.naturalnews.com/025298_t…).

    The FDA censors natural remedies that could save lives
    On top of all that corruption and fraud leading to negligent deaths caused by the FDA, this agency also censors the scientific truth about natural remedies and nutritional supplements that could save millions of lives each year. The FDA won’t, for example, allow vitamin D supplement companies to tell the truth about how vitamin D prevents cancer or how vitamin D prevents the flu and makes seasonal flu vaccines obsolete (http://www.naturalnews.com/029760_v…).

    The FDA also won’t allow any supplement companies to tell the truth about their natural remedies for preventing or even reversing diabetes, heart disease, breast cancer and more.

    In doing this, the FDA is complicit in the deaths of at least 250,000 Americans each year. According to the groundbreaking 2003 medical report Death by Medicine, by Drs Gary Null, Carolyn Dean, Martin Feldman, Debora Rasio and Dorothy Smith, 783,936 people in the United States die every year from conventional medicine mistakes. The FDA has a hand in at least one-third of those deaths, mostly from its willful corruption and fraud in the world of deadly pharmaceuticals, which have proven to be far more deadly than terrorists (http://www.naturalnews.com/009278.html).

    If you do the math on all this, you are forced to reach some startling mathematical conclusions:

    • The FDA is more dangerous than all the terrorists and terror events in the history of the United States.

    • The FDA has killed more Americans than the entire Vietnam War.

    • Even more than that, over the last 20 years the FDA has killed more Americans than the total number who died in World War I, World War II, the Korean War, the Vietnam War, the Gulf War and even the Civil War — combined!

    • The FDA is the single most deadly agency that has ever existed in the history of the United States. It is responsible for more body bags, more funerals, more pain and suffering than even the Department of Defense!

    • The FDA does not value human life. It has no compassion for real people. It is driven by politics and money, and it answers to the demands of powerful corporations who control its agenda (http://www.naturalnews.com/019497.html).

    So now, let me get this straight. With Senate Bill 510 we are going to hand over control over the food supply to the most nefarious, corrupt and deadly agency that has ever existed in the history of the United States of America?

    FDA could outlaw all raw vegetables
    The FDA has killed more people than the CIA, FBI, ATF and DEA combined. This agency is technically responsible for the negligent homicide of countless American men, women, children and senior citizens. It has stood by and allowed modern psychiatry to drug our children into violent behavior. It has censored the truth about nutrition and natural remedies, and it has enforced a campaign of nutritional ignorance among the American people, making sure that virtually all competition to Big Pharma’s patented drugs is completely wiped out (or criminalized).

    The FDA has criminalized your raw milk, turning farmers into felons. The FDA once ordered the burning of recipe books containing stevia recipes as part of its effort to outlaw this natural sweetener (in order to protect aspartame profits). (http://www.naturalnews.com/001552.html)

    And now the U.S. Congress wants this agency in charge of your food?

    What madness is this?

    We’re going to take the largest killer in the history of America and give it the power to control the growing of foods, the saving of seeds and even the operations of small family farms?

    Can you imagine what the FDA is going to do with that kind of power? Trust me: It won’t be pretty. It may even be fatal. I can just see this agency outlawing all vegetables unless they’re irradiated. They might outlaw raw food and require all food be pasteurized. They could ban not just raw milk but even raw broccoli.

    Sound crazy? Sure it does! But so does the idea of raw milk being criminalized in America, too. America was raised on raw milk. What do you think Thomas Jefferson drank at his farm? What do you think kept the pioneers alive in the harsh Midwest winters?

    If the FDA can outlaw raw milk, they can outlaw anything. And Senate Bill 510 would give them all the power they need to do this.

    Never give a psychopath explosives
    It’s a dangerous deal with the devil, of course. Handing the FDA power over the food supply is like giving a violent psycho access to military-grade explosives. The net result can only be catastrophic and deadly.

    I’m all for the idea of “safe food,” but not if it involves taking the most dangerous government agency in the history of America and putting it in charge of the way we grow food, store seeds, harvest crops and package food products.

    Do we need to “modernize” our food creation systems in America? Sure we do, but not at the cost of making us all victims of a dangerous, corrupt and downright disastrously managed U.S. Food and Drug Administration.

    And besides, virtually all the contamination of food we’re seeing today is due to factory animal farming runoff. That’s where e.coli comes from, by the way. E.coli is an intestinal pathogen and plants don’t have intestines. It can only be harbored in animals. (http://www.organicconsumers.org/art…)

    So the problem with our food supply is not that the FDA doesn’t yet have enough power; it’s that we have abusive, cruel and ridiculously unclean factory animal farms operating in America that are contaminating the vegetables. If you really want to clean up the food supply, just crack down on the factory animal farms and let the veggie growers get back to work doing what they do best: Growing healthful, nutrient-rich vegetables that help keep America healthy.

    Take action now to stop S.510
    Your voice needs to be heard on this issue. The vote on this bill has been delayed until after the Thanksgiving recess, so you have more time to oppose this dangerous legislation.

    Call the Capitol Switchboard and ask to be directly connected to your Senator’s office: 202-224-3121.

    You can find other contact information for your US Senator at http://senate.gov/general/contact_i

    Other petitions on the ‘net where you can voice your opposition to this bill include:

    Citizens for Health
    http://www.citizens.org/?page_id=2312

    Natural Solutions Foundation
    http://salsa.democracyinaction.org/

    Take action NOW to protect our food, seeds and crops from the deadly control of the FDA.

    Articles Related to This Article:
    • (Part I) The FDA is a clearing house for the Food and Drug Corruption

    • (Part II) The FDA is a clearing house for Food and Drug Corruption

    • Feds reject complaints of FDA misconduct in medical device approvals

    • Senate Bill 510 vote delayed until after Thanksgiving – Take action now to oppose food tyranny

    • Senate bill S 510 vote imminent – procedural vote passes 74-25

    • The FDA Exposed: An Interview With Dr. David Graham, the Vioxx Whistleblower

    Related video from NaturalNews.TV

    Your NaturalNews.TV video could be here.
    Upload your own videos at NaturalNews.TV (FREE)


  43. Thank you, I’ve recently been looking for info approximately this
    subject for a while and yours is the greatest I’ve found out
    so far. However, what about the bottom line? Are you certain concerning the supply?

The blogmaster invites you to join the discussion.

Trending

Discover more from Barbados Underground

Subscribe now to keep reading and get access to the full archive.

Continue reading