“It is interesting that Moody’s challenges the role of the Social Partnership by asserting that “the social partnership which supports this consensus may also be contributing to a climate of political inertia, which is inhibiting the implementation of the structural reforms necessary to improve competitiveness and address the government’s fiscal challenges.”” – David/BU – taken from the above blog.

Here is a portion of much of what we had edited out from the article that was finally submitted as this week’s instalment – and which you have so kindly published. Indeed this portion is very pertinent, and that makes great sense, given what Moody’s has said: “It is debatable whether/ if it (the Social Partnership) had come about just before or at the time of the DLP Government/IMF led implementation of the 1991 structural and stabilization program, if indeed Barbados would have succeeded in bringing about a great measure of stabilization and structural adjustment in the country. Notwithstanding the verbal licks and lashes Mr. Erskine Sandiford (now Sir Lloyd) got then, he was clearly very decisive and tough in certain cases, and very deliberate in helping to bring about compromises where necessary, in order to make sure that that program succeeded.”

David, we have even gone somewhat beyond what Moody’s has said though.

The fact is that the Social Partnership is creating significant political and other problems for this country.

It has become like an old automechanic workshop that is being used by an “old school” mechanic for the sending and storing of many disused unused old parts – which he uses whenever a few people would be looking for some hard to get parts for especially older vechicles. But the truth would be that this workshop has got in so many old metals that it really serves no great purpose in today’s quick moving auto-mechanical world – where parts shops, in Barbados and elsewhere, simply specialize in bringing in a great deal of modern day vehicle parts, and selling such parts at reasonable or extravagant costs to owners of those vehicles, for those said vehicles to be quickly fitted with those parts (repairs??).

PDC

@Bajee

The report is not all negative.

@PDC

The social partnership is a sacred cow, to offer a critique about it is like criticizing Rihanna.

@Brudah-Bim

We can’t give up bruddah!

Keep on keep on.

@ac

You make your comment because yours might be the one which is responsible for generating conversation.

Brudah-Bim,

There are many people in Barbados that do take these types of posts somewhat seriously.

We can call the names of many people who tell us that they are tuned into these posts and by extension this blog.

But, the very sad thing about it is, even though many of them do read these types of posts they dont themselves post or blog anything.

Some of these persons even pretend to us that they are revolutionaries/revolutionists, esp of the Pan-Africanist/militant/radical mould.

Some of them would even after not posting, would later engage us, in various places in Barbados, in conversations about what should or not be done politically democratically in Barbados to presumably better the country.

Such persons we are wary of though. They are pure talkers anyhow, and not political action-oriented people

So dont give up Brudah-Bim, as David encouraged earlier.

David,

You said that the Social Partnership is a sacred cow. We hold no such opinion. We see it as a big stumbling block in the way of much progress for the people of Barbados. It must be removed!!!

ac,

Realize/recognize the pattern and style of posted comments by BU posters to what Brudah-Bim has said above, and to those persons who post intelligently on here from time to time.

Such centers around responding to the particular comments, and responding with friviology, or embittered comment, or sheer personal opinion.

There is hardly anything to add many times, and nothing to add some times – scientifically, philosophically, politically,etc.

It is clear that such people hardly read, hardly write or hardly research on anything out of the ordinary.

PDC

@PDC

What obstacles might be in the way of preventing social patnership from being the best it was set out to do.

the voting public was told that there would be a Review of the VAT not a removal and until unemployment has risen to a level where the government can collect a substantial amount of taxes the VAT would remain the same and that is REALITY! Not enough people Working! means not enough taxes the government is accessible to and the bills still must be paid. The govt is making a step in the right direction by having a international medical centre which will bring in much needed foreign exchange ,this idea is not new and is done in most major international markets

i am not an alarmist like some people who live and breath politics. however i am a realist , but the vat is not going down to levels where was before under BLP or DLP. Mascoll all but confirmed that on Sunday.

“While it is true that the Partnership would have been a stabilizing factor and influence throughout the 90s and into the mid 2000s, it has, throughout its existence, remained true to form – it has been one hell of a methodology in political corporatist engineering that was designed only for a particular time, and to suit a particular purpose. Hence, many people will remember that it emerged out of the very tumultuous 1991 structural adjustment and stabilization period in Barbados. And, too, will remember that both its historical emergence and its social function denoted a desire by a few people within the major political government business and labor components of the country, to devise a common and stabilizing approach to some aspects of national problem solving, at what was then a very critical juncture in the country’s history.

Moreover, it was founded on a political compact to advance and protect – in a backhanded manner – the fundamental, and sometimes interlocking, personal political professional financial interests of the MAJOR actors involved in each of these social segments that happen to be so fundamentally and diametrically opposite to each other within the Barbadian society.

So, the truth is that the Social Partnership was never designed to protect the fundamental political class interests of the broad masses and middle classes of Barbados, but was designed to ensure that the majority of the latter classes continue to be severely politically exploited and socially marginalized by those private sector, governmental and trade union oligarchs that have used the bailiwick of the Social Partnership as another process through which they would advance or protect their fundamental interests, whatever their color or religious or gender backgrounds.”

ac, those three paragraphs in our last article tell the story.

The Social Partnership was designed for a particular time and to suit a particular purpose. Otherwise then it was a response to a particular set of circumstances which no longer exist today.

And it was a subterfuge by the above mentioned oligarchs to put in place a mechanism to further emasculate those who were of a lower class and of lower work statuses than they were.

Hence, in order to do so they had to first plan to preserve their own various social political financial positions at a time of political economic crisis vis-a-vis only doing just enough to protect as many of the social political and financial positions of those workers as the circumstances would have allowed for then, and then to execute the plan – which was helped put in place via the Social Partnership. Only by weakening the workers were they able to remain stronger in their positions than the workers were in their own positions in the economic crisis in 1991. So it had helped to tremendously secure the relevant positions of the oligarchs via-a-vis the relevant ones of the workers. That was the main purpose of the Social Partnership.

The conditions that had given rise to the execution of the purpose of the Partnership, even though such conditions have changed, must not be seen as part of those conditions that have since enabled and purposed its continuation.

The functions of the Social Partnership have therefore been circumscribed by the conditions/purposes that would have given rise to it and that have, on a fast diminishing basis, been continuing with it.

PDC

I think the Moody’s assessment is a pretty fair one. We seem past the worst of the recession and debt buildup. However, with growth levels of around 3% in favourable global conditions, growing out of the deficit in a weak global economic environment seems unrealistic.

The debate then seems to surround the pace of fiscal adjustment. The administration with its Medium Term Fiscal Strategy is opting for a slower pace than that desired by the rating agency. I see it as a difficult call. A faster pace of adjustment runs the risk of major social social costs and the of slowing economic growth which may well worsen the ratios mentioned by Moodys. Even “wasteful” government expenditure adds to GDP. If the government steps back will private sector investment fill the void? is there crowding out? However, if the investment grade rating is lost, the country loses one of its options for raising international capital in a flexible and cost effective manner.

@PDC

Maybe the intentions were good but like anything else there are those who would abuse a sytem to their advantage and it is usually the ones with the most influence or money which leaves little or no room for those the system was intended to benefit which are usually the disadvantage whose voice cannot be heard

@Justin Robinson | March 28, 2012 at 11:22 PM |

Hi Dr. Robinson!
Good luck in your stint in the hot seat.
Would it be right to say that the 2012-13 Estimates are showing a shortfall between Expenditure and Revenue in excess of $100 million? If that is the case then we need to find ways of financing this “budgeted” deficit; either by way of cutting out or dropping some large expenditure programmes, raising revenue through additional taxation or by borrowings.
Could you give the BU family an undertaking that as long a you are in the chair you would not allow the local Chancellor of the exchequer or the Minister responsible for the NIS to pressure you unduly into making the NIS funds a ‘piggy bank’ to pay the government current account bills. After all, these funds are the workers and employers contributions to make provision for ‘rainy days’ not investment or gambling chips. The Central Bank is there for any short-term accommodation or overdraft facility if government’s cash flow needs a bit of very short-term support. Would you also take into consideration the various warnings about the NIS investment portfolio? Can we be assured that any Government’s borrowings to support the 2012-13 deficit would not be primarily financed by the NIS?

^^@David (B.U.)

Much of the problem stems from the fact that much of the focus within the financial sector of Barbados, much of the focus has been heavily reliant on making “adjustments” (playing with numbers more so) to certain expenditures such as making cuts to certain spheres such as public health and consistently raising the VAT in order to leach the population of what little they make (ie. $150 pay cheque per week on Average) in order to compensate our external debt. Not to mention that our over reliance on imports increases the cost of living, subsequently leading to a higher VAT rate to being placed on everything from food to fuel and energy, and even the essentials such as food.

Yet there has been a consistent lag in implementing the appropriate measures in order to establish key industries domestically and facilitating an environment for which domestic growth would occur thus solidifying the domestic market it and enabling it to compete. The government can do this by simply making strategic measures such as issuing subsidies in key industries for essential commodities.

Instead, the incompetent fat cats have proven to be nothing more than mere pawns of the Europeans an Americans by zealously adhering to the protocols issued by D.C. that are nothing but pervasive and detrimental to our real economic growth and overall competitiveness in the global economy. By focusing on establishing Barbados as a productive market that is capable of globally competing enables us to accrue value overtime in our national reserves. There should be a re-haul in the structuring of the country’s financial sector (ahem! The Barbados Central Bank, AHEM!) that has a focus of maximizing development at a sustainable rate through strategic industries and building the value of our nation’s economy by avidly establishing our brand rather than selling it off as some “affordable” utopian commodity.

We need a new administration that is mindful of the fact that THIS IS A NATION THAT THEY’RE RUNNING, and that THEY ARE PLAYING WITH THE LIVES OF THOUSANDS by recklessly making adjustments by raising taxes on the people. We need to tell the government that IT SHOULDN’T BE THE PEOPLE WHO BAILS THE GOVERNMENT OUT, BUT RATHER IT SHOULD BE THE OTHER WAY AROUND!

Bajans need to realize that they are selling themselves short by not holding their government accountable if they do not demand for apprpriate measures to be taken in key sectors of our economy. IT IS OUR DUTY TO SCRUTINIZE OUR POLITICIANS” TO THE HIGHEST DEGREE AND DEMAND THAT THEY PRIORITIZE THE PEOPLE FIRST!

Bawl, sit, fret, shout, and cuss all yuh want! But yuh know yuh 2 dyamn lazy to go out and ACT for CHANGE. All dese dyamn bajan en’ dey e’nt got a frigging clue as to whut de nation really needs to KEEP DE WATER FROM SINKING DE ROCK! No one here is talking about de LONG TERM MEASURES NEEDED for BIM to KEEP AFLOAT!! NO ONE HERE SEEMS to notice the the crooksters in parliament are robbing the nation blid in order to pay for THEIR BILLS & DEBT.

AND YOU MEAN TO TELL ME DAT ABSOLUTELY NO ONE HERE SEES OR GIVES A RARSE-ASS ABOUT IT??! MAN, WHAT ABOSOLUTE SHITE, MAN. EF DATS DE CASE DEN BAJANS MIGHT AS WELL GO BACK TO BRITAIN AND RENUNCE HER BLOODY “INDEPENCE” AN ADMIT THE SHE IS FOREVER A COLONY OF THE CROWN!

WHAT CLOWNS WE ARE INDEED!