A statute of limitation on government policy.
A key Caribbean jurist was quick to remind a friend recently “there is no statute of limitation” for certain serious offences.
The purpose and effect of statutes of limitation going back to the 19th century are to protect defendants against foot-dragging by prosecutors, poor memory of witnesses and other ineffective investigations in both criminal and civil cases.
Obviously, there is no statute of limitations restriction when it comes to public policy that doesn’t break civil or criminal codes and that’s true even when government action has damaged people’s lives. But in the court of public opinion, there isn’t a limitation on voters choosing their leaders at election time.
As Barbados inches to a financial crisis which is manifesting itself in threatened layoffs of thousands of public workers; hundreds of millions of government debt going unpaid; state enterprises being rationalized and possibly closed; and a fixed exchange rate under threat, should the principle of a statute apply when it comes to public accountability?
The answer is an emphatic “yes!”
When the Rev. Dr Marcus Lashley, an Anglican priest and psychologist, delivered a sermon in Brooklyn last month at an independence service he zeroed in on holding the government in Bridgetown responsible.
“I am not sure about you, but I am actually quite sick of the term ‘global recession’ and the other, ‘forces external to our economy which are bigger and more powerful than we are,’ he told hundreds of worshippers at St Paul’s Episcopal Church in the Village of Flatbush. “Somehow, they have become excuses for mediocrity, complacency and a lack of industry, but we must be driven by a determination to not just overcome but to succeed.”
The priest was probably aiming his remarks at Chris Sinckler, Minister of Finance, who routinely refers to the global crisis to explain what has gone wrong in Barbados. In a ministerial statement in December, less than two weeks after the Rev. Lashley’s scolding, Sinckler cited the global financial and economic collapse, “the continued depressed international demand for our goods and services” over a prolonged period that had taken “a heavy toll on our fiscal, debt and now external current account positions.”
The trouble is that Sinckler didn’t refer to any of his policies as contributors to the serious problem. Invariably, it is somebody else’s fault and in this case it is the “global recession” or the worldwide financial crisis.” Almost six years after assuming the reins of office, the Government insists the problems we face must be placed almost exclusively at the doorsteps of the rest of the world.
But some interesting developments may force a change in the rhetoric. High on the list is the revitalization of the United States economy as seen in the record highs of the stock market, a fall in unemployment and sky high profits of many major corporations. In Britain and Canada growth is a fact of life; and in Europe, there is an easing of financial pressure. Yes, it’s true that a return to robust prosperity of the early years of the 21st century remains elusive.
That’s not all, the Bank of Canada said the other day that annualized GDP (gross domestic product) in the fourth quarter would be 2.3 per cent. Ireland, which was often compared with Barbados during the height of the global crisis, has emerged from the economic doldrums but not Barbados.
Little wonder then that Dr Lashley felt compelled to tell the Bajans in the diaspora that it was “painful to hear the economists predict that of all of the countries in the Caribbean region, Barbados is the only country whose economy is not slated to have any real growth in the coming year”.
That’s why the Minister of Finance should no longer point to the troubles outside of Barbados as the reason for his birthplace’s dismal economic performance. He knows he will be asked: why isn’t Barbados recording a turnaround too?
After all, if those nations caused our problems then why aren’t we the beneficiaries of their changing fortunes? The answer of course is quite straightforward: the difference in economic policies pursued abroad and those emanating from Barbados. Ireland bit the proverbial bullet in 2011 and 2012 but because of a pending election in 2013, there was indecision in Bridgetown.
With an election around the corner tough austerity measures to rein in galloping Government spending, extensive borrowing and the imposition of financial discipline were considered a plague.
That brings us back to the statute of limitations. Legally, it doesn’t apply but it remains relevant to the discussion about Barbados’ finances. The government must accept some of the responsibility for it and stop blaming others, including the previous government which left office in 2008. Pointing accusing fingers at the global recession exclusively will not cut it. In other words, the statute of limitations has run out on excuses and the blaming of others.
After all, some people stand to lose their homes, students at the University of the West Indies may have to drop out, life savings of parents and grandparents are at stake and the financial security blankets of the elderly would be lost, if things get worse. Bajans will not be interested in finger pointing.
• Tony Best is a veteran journalist and NATION New York corespondent.
