Those following the United States presidential elections would be impressed with the role of the independent analysts. These specialists in a variety of disciplines seek to give Americans a factual insight on issues based on the empirical evidence and statistics available.
In doing so, they separate fact from fiction, show how either political party has exaggerated, misinterpreted or just conveniently ignored the facts of an issue. These independent analysts are therefore essential in seeking to keep politicians grounded in reality.
Here at home, where we love to boast about our democratic traditions, the voices of independent analysts are few to non-existent. There are primarily two reasons for this. The first is the non-availability and/or limited access to facts and statistics about most aspects which drive our economy. Getting even basic information on certain indices is a challenge. It’s as if information, however mundane, should be the preserve of only a privileged few. Without such relevant information, thorough analysis is near impossible.
The second is the propensity to label and/or vilify people to neutralize and/or negate the impact of their message. I have touched on this before so I would not dwell on it. However, it must be said that the strategy to shut down people who genuinely care about this society and want to make a contribution can be so aggressive that many individuals give up trying. They usually can’t take the venomous remarks and/or character assassination from either side of the political divide – so they retreat. Our democracy and governance are the weaker for this!
These thoughts flooded my mind when I heard the latest rhetoric on the health of the local economy. On Sunday, the Opposition spokesman on finance, Clyde Mascoll, said that Government is flat broke. So broke that if it was a private company, it would be declared insolvent and forced to file for bankruptcy.
Minister of Finance Chris Sinckler in swift response on Starcom Network branded Mascoll’s statement as “irresponsible”, but said he was not surprised by it given who it came from.
What I found particularly interesting about this was that a week earlier Sinckler, in another section of the media, charged that Opposition Leader Owen Arthur held secret meetings with Mascoll and two other economists on a plan that would aid the Barbados economy by retrenching 10 000 public servants.
Last weekend Mascoll denied the charged saying he was in London on a three-week holiday, so it was impossible for him to attend any meeting.
On Sunday, Arthur did not hide his irritation about the accusation. He told the Grantley Adams Memorial School town hall meeting he was addressing that he was contemplating taking legal action against Sinckler.
“This [Sinckler’s claim] is the most abominable act in the history of Barbadian politics. It is too big a lie,” said Arthur.
Such charges and counter charges are, unfortunately, part and parcel of electioneering. Another strategy in this mix is accusing your opponent of intending to use an obvious option which you examined but is so negative that it’s best to lay it on them before they can do it to you.
Whether the Government spokespersons’ consistent statements suggesting that the opposition Barbados Labour Party (BLP) will lay off people if they are returned to office is such a ploy is anyone’s guess. But, as stated in an earlier column, Government has yet to reveal how they will restructure the public service to save money. And this is over and above the efforts of their Medium-Term Fiscal Plan.
This is more than an academic point. In the run-up to the January 22, 1991 general elections, then Prime Minister Erskine Sandiford (now Sir Lloyd) linked the BLP and then Opposition National Democratic Party of Dr Richie Haynes (now Sir Richard) with trying to scare voters.
Sandiford said: “Now they are holding up some threat about 4,000 persons may lose their jobs in the Civil Service trying to scare the civil servants away.
“I want to reject categorically any suggestion or any imputation or any hint that there is any proposal on the part of the Democratic Labour Party (DLP) to dismiss 4 000 civil servants or any such number after we win the general Elections on January 22.
“It is a downright untruth and it is a scare tactic and we must put an end to this kind of political behaviour,” he said.
Within months of winning that election, Government laid off close to 3 000 public servants and imposed an eight per cent cut on those remaining.
I hope you now see the need for independent analysts.
• Sanka Price is the SATURDAY SUN editor.