PROLONGED ECONOMIC STAGNATION could significantly alter the calculus of the Barbadian welfare state constructed since 1937.
Before 1966, but particularly since then, Barbados has developed a social welfare network that would be the envy of most developing states and some developed ones. The foundation of a Barbadian welfare polity was laid under Grantley Adams and significantly enhanced after 1961 under Errol Barrow. Mr Barrow liked to consider himself a socialist, but as Neville Duncan pointed out in a perspective shortly after his passing he was more of a traditional liberal democrat, somewhat left of the ideological centre. These positions – left, centre, right or socialist, centrist, conservative – are not concrete categories and perceptions vary from culture to culture.
Since Mr Barrow, there has been much populist posturing, mostly at election time, but little approaching a consistent ideological narrative. Tom Adams’ career did not run the full trajectory, but he seemed a pragmatist concerned more with economic growth and development than with ideological obsessions. Recently leaders have busied themselves with the practicalities of management rather than grand narratives.
Today, there is no semblance of narrative, only a long silent movie. However, no administration has retreated from the imperatives of the progressive welfare state. Often, however, entitlements have followed more out of a desire to win an election than from any broad-based developmental strategy. Election promises have put a strain on the public purse at times when the taxpayers, private and corporate, were hard-pressed to underwrite the costs. A school uniform subsidy and free bus fares after the 2008 election are cases in point. It is one thing to construct grandiose social policies, it is another to find the financial resources to support them. Untutored opinion might be excused for believing that there is some entity called government that has inexhaustible resources to provide whatever the electorate wants. It is more ridiculous when the ideologues who an Economist correspondent called, “pedlars of clichés and plausible sounding simplifiers”, fail to grasp that the social infrastructure can only be maintained if the revenues function to enhance it. The DLP is accused of seeking to dismantle the provisions of our social system. Politicians may not believe in much, but one thing they believe in, is being re-elected. Why would the DLP ostensibly dismantle a system knowing the price it will be called to pay at the next poll? Running a high fiscal deficit on the current account requires austerity, no matter who governs.
As Minister Sinckler has indicated, not only are costs rising, but Government revenues are increasingly inadequate in meeting mounting costs. Quantitative social gains are always predicated on sound economic performance. The expansive welfare provisions of the immediate post-Independence period were enabled by a growing tourism sector, modest but prosperous manufacturing, and sugar exports that enjoyed protectionist, preferential markets. The traditional foundations of the Barbadian welfare state are beginning to crumble. Much of the ostensible prosperity of the 1990s was illusory, founded on a dangerous accumulation of private and public debt based on easy credit, mobility of capital, and the questionable sale of national assets.
There are certain critical areas of Barbados’ polity that must be preserved. One such is its health and sanitation services which are central to our social and economic well-being. With an ageing population, this becomes even more vital. Thus the QEH must be put on a sound financial and administrative footing to guarantee quality service for all and not just those who can afford. Social justice demands it.
Another key area of social service that must be preserved is education at the nursery, primary secondary and tertiary levels. It is unlikely that Barbados can afford free university across the board, desirable as that might be. It would, however, be a retrograde step damaging to our developmental thrust and an admission of failure, if we were ever to retreat from free secondary and tertiary schooling. However, the real challenges to Barbadian education are mostly qualitative, concerns about higher outcomes and greater socio-economic relevance. Education is doing best in those countries where the culture is propitious for real in-depth learning as in the Far East.
How can we finance the existing welfare infrastructure within current means? We must get back on the path of real economic growth, but it appears unlikely that Barbados will experience robust economic gains any time soon. Means testing is an option fraught with difficulties of implementation. The global economy reflecting what Harvard economist Larry Summers calls “secular stagnation”, remains a confining factor. It is up to us to do the best with what we have. The inefficiencies within the revenue collection system must be eradicated and the imperatives of individual responsibility reasserted. Let’s get serious.
Ralph Jemmott is a retired educator and social commentator. Email rajemmott@caribsurf.com