This being my first column since the general election, I must congratulate Prime Minister Freundel Stuart and the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) on a sensational victory.
The DLP won because their strategy was better targetted, easily digestible, and resonated more with the average voter.
A general election is usually a referendum on the performance of the governing party, but the DLP campaign was aimed at saying why the Barbados Labour Party (BLP) and, in particular, its leader Owen Arthur could not be trusted. This was backed by a consistent message delivered on point by each speaker.
That message was that the DLP had kept Barbados safe in a global sea of economic turmoil despite having very few resources to work with; they did not lay off a single public servant, and maintained essential social services; they would not play loose with our foreign reserves to endanger the value of our dollar; and they would not privatize state institutions to put people out of work and disadvantage citizens.
Taken together with print, audio and television ads which reinforced this message, it proved to be the right inducement to woo voters.
The Prime Minister’s role in delivering this victory was critical too. Gone was the hesitant Stuart the public had been seeing and judging.
Instead, we saw a fiery political warrior delivering devastating verbal blows on his opponents.
The BLP failed because they consumed themselves with providing specific policy details, which in a fast-paced election campaign are difficult, if not impossible, for the electorate to properly digest.
And they inflicted serious wounds to themselves by some loose statements, the most unfortunate being Arthur’s praising of deputy BLP leader Dale Marshall’s assistance when the party was going through turmoil.
That was interpreted as Arthur congratulating Marshall for helping to get rid of then BLP leader Mia Mottley, and paving the way for his return. The Dems used this to confirm their message of disunity in the Bees and that Arthur was just power hungry, and could not be trusted.
Primarily because of this successful strategy, the DLP were able to keep the focus on the BLP and avoid giving details on what citizens could expect from them should they be re-elected, except for the statement from Stuart that there would be no privatization of money-losing state corporations.
We therefore look forward to this evening’s Throne Speech by Governor General Sir Elliott Belgrave for details on Government’s priorities for the next five years.
We’re particularly interested in hearing how Government intends to deal with the huge fiscal deficit it has built up through the monthly borrowing of money to pay public servants’ salaries, and transfers and subsidies to badly haemorrhaging state corporations.
This burgeoning fiscal deficit has been cited by the International Monetary Fund, credit agencies Standards & Poor’s and Moody’s, the Caribbean Development Bank and others as an urgent problem which needs to be immediately addressed.
Since announcing his new Cabinet, Stuart was quoted as saying that the economy would be a top priority.
Interestingly, he hinted to journalists last Friday that Government would be coming with a stimulus programme – an idea previously dismissed (prior to and during the elections) when it was broached by both the BLP and the Barbados Chamber of Commerce and Industry (BCCI).
Stuart said: “We have to take some initiatives here which do not imperil our foreign exchange position but, at the same time, give a little life to what is going on locally at the business level and put consumers in a position where, by their spending, they can stimulate business activity and so on.”
The BLP outlined how such a stimulus could be achieved without imperilling the foreign reserves, while the BCCI suggested how it could be effective. For sure, such a move would help to save private sector businesses and jobs. Thankfully, Government now recognizes this.
If the stimulus move is any indication, Government may seek to effectively deal with the loss-making state corporations too.
They may call their action restructuring rather than the dreaded privatization word, but the intentions are sure to be the same.
The reality is that Government cannot avoid this matter; to do so would worsen the problem. Here, the salary increases for public servants will be a major factor.
The trade unions have already submitted their position and are waiting for negotiations to start.
If the administration is borrowing monthly to pay existing salaries, how would they finance an increase payroll and keep all of these people employed?
Given these and other concerns, Government is literally caught between a rock and a hard place, and have a tough job ahead.
? Sanka Price is an editor at THE NATION.
