PRIME MINISTER FREUNDEL STUART says tertiary education in Barbados will remain free across the board, dismissing suggestions that only the “less well off” should receive state subsidies. And, he insists that reintroducing tuition fees would be a step backwards in the country’s development.
– nationnews.com. Monday, November 14, 2011.
CLEARLY, WE can argue over the fact that a lot has changed since 2011 but please at least give the public enough respect to admit that it represents a fundamental policy shift and, dare I say, a shift in what we understand about the character of the Democratic Labour Party (DLP).
This is not about people being unappreciative of the fact that difficult choices have to be made or that the public is unprepared to carry its weight as the country goes through this difficult period. We have been carrying the weight of this debt for quiet some time, and without any major demonstration of disquiet.
Rather, I believe that the public outcry, as much as it is about the practical hardship that the measure will bring to bear, is also about something more intangible and perhaps more important. I believe that there are certain fundamental things which define people as individuals and define societies.
Sometimes it is hard to touch or even call by name. For Barbados it was free education generally and from this the significance which emanated from access to free tertiary education.
Having passed through all of the inequalities inherently bound up in the 11-Plus Exam, the University of the West Indies was an equalizer. Invariable, the Springer girl and the Garrison boy would meet the Harrisonian and the Combermerian and we could come out of this with just one identifier – UWI graduate. There is an intangible public value in this, especially for a society which was founded and perhaps in some sense still is based on social inequality.
So, while it is true that the Government will cover the economic costs of entrance to the University of the West Indies, the very tampering with the provision of free tertiary education feels as if they have dismantled a fundamental piece of the very character of this society.
I take no heart in the outrage of the opposition on this issue as I am unsure what their policy would have looked like. Less draconian perhaps but I would guess it would have had the same intent.
I believe that systemically we have bought into a philosophical viewpoint which says that all things have the same the value and therefore should be looked at through a generic and dispassionate lens. It allows one to push aside normative discussions in favour of more rationale arguments. The economy is in trouble, let’s look at what we can cut – we can cut free tertiary education because it’s costly and really we have propped people up too long who are wasting it, anyway.
There is an explicit value judgment in the choices we make about things like this. Tourism is the sector which will deliver the promised land – despite budget after budget, administration after administration throwing millions of dollars into a model which continues not to deliver. My beef is not with the tourism sector per se. I am convinced that the model we have is just wrong for the economic context we find ourselves in now.
However, we continue to invest and tell the public to stop bellyaching over the dismantling of free tertiary education and buckle up and bear the brunt of the cost of adjustment. No pledges from the private sector to increase the provision of scholarships or the establishment of a special education fund. No caveat that the high net worth people who will be granted special permits (in other jurisdictions – it is called economic citizenship) will have to contribute to a special development fund.
We throw money into Invest Barbados because their operations thus far have delivered . . . what again exactly? We do not send home public workers because that is an election promise we value enough to keep but we cut transfers to all of the major statutory entities which provide critical public services and where the mass of workers that will mostly be affected represent a large pool of the unskilled and under qualified – case in point the Barbados Water Authority (BWA) and the 30 temporary debushers who were laid off within two days of the budget pronouncements. The QEH will invariable raise user fees to offset the deficit and who are the people that can ill afford to go anywhere but the QEH again?
I do not think that any of the government officials are heartless people devoid of appreciation of the implications of the budget. I know that hard choices had to be made. I believe that these caused countless sleeplessness nights and I am sure that there is a keen awareness that the measures announced will define this second term DLP administration for a long time.
However, we all ought to reflect on the implicit value judgments that have underpinned the budget and pray that the benefits will outweigh the long-term social costs to this country.
• Shantal Munro-Knight is a development specialist and executive coordinator at the Caribbean Policy Development Centre; email shantalmunro@gmail.com