Ian Boyne
THE JAMAICA Labour Party's (JLP) election strategy has emerged. You did not have to listen to Bruce Golding long to see the strategy unveiled with all its resonance.
Facing an immensely popular and charismatic People's National Party (PNP) leader and Prime Minister, whom many take for granted will whip him at the next general elections, Golding in his Budget presentation on Thursday struck back with the finest blow he could deliver : "She was there!"
POWERFUL RHETORIC
Sharply cutting into her image as detached and aloof from the PNP politics and economics which some see as wreaking havoc on the country, Golding sought to place her securely as not just an inheritor but an active participant in the 'debacle'.
It was brilliant political strategy and a rhetorical delight.
In his well-written, well-delivered and tightly argued presentation, the Opposition Leader spoke about a number of emotionally explosive issues in which Portia Simpson Miller was no mere spectator.
"She didn't inherit the highest murder rate in the world. While it was climbing from 414 in 1988 to 1,674 last year, she was there! Over the last 17 years when 15,250 people were murdered equivalent to the entire population of Black River and Santa Cruz she was there."
Now, that is good polemics!
"She didn't inherit a government that has been plagued by scandal after scandal, involving billions of dollars of cost overruns, waste nepotism and corruption. She was there!"
He has taken the fight to Sista P in a rhetorically powerful but tasteful and dignified way.
Perhaps the United States political strategists have started working already!
Those who say that Golding cannot relate to the masses do not know what they are talking about.
Of course, he is not a Portia Simpson Miller or a Pearnel Charles. But he has an ability to break down high finance and highfalutin' economics and social policy in simple terms that any ordinary person can understand.
One of the emotional high points of his Budget presentation was when he highlighted how poor people were being denied medical services even in emergencies because they cannot afford it; dramatically passing the paperwork on one actual case across the floor to the Prime Minister, who looked glum and deeply concerned.
His defence of the poor and defenceless was as admirable as it was poignant, and I applaud him for blowing the whistle on the neo-liberal state concerned about cost-recovery at the expense of the poor.
INCISIVE THINKING
But Golding's presentation was not just long on political strategy and histrionics. It contained much substance and showed incisive thinking.
Openly challenging Don Robotham without mentioning his name, he dismissed Robotham's alarm about the Prime Minister's 'notorious' statement about balancing people's lives while balancing the books.
Robotham, who has stoutly maintained a one-man campaign in defence of the much-criticised Finance Minister Omar Davies, has been screaming about not rocking the boat economically, while keeping the neo-liberal ship afloat.
But Golding made the insightful point that "we make a mistake if we think that it is a choice between balancing books and balancing lives. We must balance the books in order to balance the lives, but painful experience has shown that balancing the books does not of itself balance people's lives. And there is no purpose in balancing the books if, in the process, we destroy people's lives."
You can't imagine the awesome sense of irony for this journalist, a keen observer of the politics of the 1970s, to see a 'reactionary' Labourite like Bruce Golding reminding the former fiery Marxist-Leninist about the importance of protecting the people's interest!
Golding went on to lecture Robotham and the neo-liberals: "To put it another way, while tough fiscal policies are necessary they are not sufficient for creating economic development and generating economic growth".
Indeed, both Golding and Opposition Spokesman on Finance Audley Shaw were balanced in their comments on economic strategy. They made it clear that do support what is called 'the Omar model' of fiscal prudence and macroeconomic stability (It's really the Washington Consensus).
SHAW'S CONCERNS
While Golding needled Robotham on his apparent runaway enthusiasm for neo-liberalism, Shaw shared Robotham's concerns about the dangers of populism, warning the country, rightly, of its disastrous consequences if it were adopted by the Portia Simpson Miller administration.
Clearly expressing support for macroeconomic stability, Shaw cautioned in his presentation on Tuesday that Jamaica could abandon "what little prudent macroeconomic policy it has and squander the tough sacrifices of the Jamaican people ... and embark on a populist campaign".
He said, correctly, that this path would be "reckless, simplistic, deceptive and irresponsible. This is a policy of less pain now, more pain later and no gain at all".
It might have been missed by other commentators, but at long last our two main parties have agreed on the economic fundamentals and have said so clearly in a budget debate. Foreign investors rating agencies would be pleased with the presentations of both sides of the House this year.
Significantly, also, both reject the pegging of the exchange rate. That the JLP has rejected the very policy being pushed aggressively by its former Leader speaks volumes.
Shaw tried to cushion the blow on Seaga by discreetly talking about not fixing the exchange rate 'at this time' and by showing that some countries have used the fixed exchange rate successfully, but the rejection of what Seaga has seen as a major recommendation for a way out of our crisis now is stinging. But, I believe the JLP is right that the Government's policy of maintaining a competitive, market-driven exchange rate is the correct course.
Lost in all the big words and finely crafted phraseologies, though, is the fact that the JLP has said openly it does not support massive social spending now and that it believes the painful path has to be maintained now. They will be tempted to change their tune on the campaign trail.
The people don't want to hear that. They want the populist programmes-what Shaw calls the crash programmes. The journalists and the interviewers need to pull Shaw and Golding's tongues so they can speak clearly to the electorate and make them know that there is, as Robotham rightly maintains, no painless, free-ride alternative to 'Omar's policies'.
For too long, the crazy propaganda has been out there that all our suffering has been through Omar's bad policies and corruption. That is a lie and a dangerous piece of propaganda.
Government can't be absolved of its responsibilities, but there is very little policy space for maneuver today, and tough, unpopular decisions would have to be taken by any elected JLP Government, too. This we in the media must point out, for Shaw and Golding will be reluctant to speak so clearly outside of Parliament.
ACTIVIST, DEVELOPMENTALIST STATE
What is clear, though, from both the Shaw and Golding presentations is that the JLP believes in a more activist, developmentalist state, and not the minimalist state favoured by neo-liberalism. The projects suggested by them would have to have state involvement. The JLP believes in a targetted industrial policy, rather than the neo-liberal way of getting the prices and fundamentals right with economic development following. I believe, like the JLP, that that approach is flawed.
Shaw's call for the establishment of enterprise development zones is bang on target and is supported by the empirical research as a viable strategy for developing countries (See, for example, the paper issued by the International Labour Organisation last December titled The New Offshoring of Jobs and Global Development).
His suggestion for using PetroCaribe funds to deal with our debt is excellent and I await the Finance Minister's rejoinder to what seems an eminently sensible use of the funds. (It would certainly help to balance the books, Omar!).
As the IMF paper on Jamaica issued last week shows, Jamaica's high public debt is a major constraint on economic development, so whatever is done to deal with the debt effectively is the best anti-poverty strategy.
Golding was absolutely right in bringing constitutional reform and governance issues to the fore in his budget presentation. Every single one of his suggestions for reform should be supported by the Jamaican people.
As I advised in a previous column, only when Golding comes with these constitutional reform ideas and shows that he is fundamentally different from the PNP-and this his difference would positively impact the quality of everyday life in Jamaica-would he be taken seriously.
His suggestions for the reform of garrisons represent a masterstroke for a garrison MP, as was his making the call to the Prime Minister to walk with him through these troubled communities.
The Opposition has played a fine, masterly and decisive set. It is left to see how the Government will reply.
Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist. Email him at ianboyne1@yahoo.com.
