IT IS TRUE THAT Barbados has progressed since Independence, but it is equally true that there have been some structural setbacks in recent times. The question is: are these setbacks purely of an economic nature or can they be attributed to issues of management and/or leadership? The answers to this two-part question are no and yes.
While the attainment of Independence will always be an outstanding landmark for Barbados, the achievements in the period 1937 to 1966 laid the foundation. It may be argued that apart from technological advancement, the biggest change in Barbados came with greater access to education. It is therefore unfortunate that the current political leaders did not understand that education remains the single most important factor in leading Barbados to its next phase of development.
It is impossible to justify not making tertiary education accessible to Barbadians because a Government wanted to save a mere $35 million out of a budget that was heading towards the $3 billion mark. Not to see total education as an indispensable investment shows a lack of vision and a betrayal of the mission upon which the country embarked in the post-1937 period.
The major difference in education today is that the emphasis is not only on the acquisition of knowledge but even more so on the application of it. In this world of technology, acquisition is literally at the press of a button. The challenge comes in understanding the knowledge sufficiently well to apply it to some situation in search of a solution or to provide a recommendation.
Therefore, not to appreciate the link between education and the new world environment is indicative of leaders who live only for today and not tomorrow. In this sense, the fundamental difference between a technocrat and a leader is that the former is obsessed with achieving his/her targets while the latter targets achievement. In essence, targets are all about today and therefore static, whereas achievements are ongoing and dynamic.
The other major hallmark in this country’s progress may be recognised in the change in the quality of its housing stock. In this regard, the legal system has to take some significant credit for permitting Barbadians to convert, especially land, into collateral for the purpose of accessing finance. As a result, there is visible evidence in the rural parishes to demonstrate the point that ownership of land is a very valuable asset.
In fact, there is some evidence that indicates two of the rural parishes to be among poorest based on the indicators used in the survey. But, notwithstanding these indicators, the same two parishes have the highest ownership of land and houses by the same individuals who are supposed to be the poorest. In many respects, rural Barbados is now Barbadians’ gold coast.
It is therefore very backward thinking when a government completely removes all of the tax incentives for home ownership. There is nothing like owning “a piece of the rock”, which in most cases happens to be the biggest investment for several persons. What is wrong with a government using tax policy to encourage such an investment? The answer is nothing.
On the other hand, the same government encouraged an international shopkeeper to invest here through the granting of substantial incentives. Then it gave a hotel chain the most generous of concessions to unfairly compete with existing hotels. How could the use of tax initiatives be wrong in encouraging the most basic and necessary investment for Barbadians, and right for some who do not even earn foreign exchange but rather use it in abundance?
This brings me to the issue of economic enfranchisement that is yet to be properly addressed notwithstanding the progress made since Independence. There is an ongoing charade about small business being the engine of growth and indeed hope in this country. Anything that is small has to join forces with others to make a significant impression. The greatest force that small business yearns for is a justifiable sustained increase in the purchasing power of Barbadians. In its absence, the talk about small business is farcical.
The setbacks in education, housing and business are examples of the damage done to progress that will last much longer than the period over which it was done, unless there is a willingness to reverse the wrongs and/or prepare a new path. But if the current leadership is prepared only to manage numbers without reference to priorities, then the future that we long for will be compromised.
• Dr Clyde Mascoll is an economist and Opposition Barbados Labour Party adviser on the economy. Email: [email protected]
