THIS PAST WEEK former Prime Minister Owen Arthur produced what was a provocative, thoughtful and quite frankly disturbing assessment of where this country now stands. He also gave his views on the way forward.
Ironically, not much over two years ago another former prime minister in a telephone interview with this paper asked a question which must today be on the lips of all thinking Barbadians.
Sir Lloyd Sandiford in reflective mood asked, “How did we get back here?”
He is reported as saying that: “Everything is out of control . . .” and it did not happen yesterday . . . .” The retired prime minister, who also studied economics at graduate level, said it would now be necessary to put even more drastic measures in place to correct something that had been corrected before.
We do not believe that either of these distinguished gentlemen was motivated by anything except the highest regard and loyalty for a country to which they have jointly given almost 85 years of public service, 21 of which they were charged with the duty, honour and responsibility of being Prime Minister.
Mr Arthur’s speech concentrated on solutions and prescriptions for the future well-being of this small country, with its open economy starved as usual of foreign direct investment. But as important as that is, we are focused on Prime Minister Sandiford’s question.
He pointed out in the said interview that way back in the 1990s his administration had corrected most of the areas that again needed correcting, “from productivity through removing the twin deficits in the budgets to the foreign exchange-earning sector”.
His question is an important one which must be answered as we are about to move towards our country’s 51st anniversary. We cannot afford to fall into this ditch ever again. The body of high-class economic expertise available to the Ministry of Finance and the Government has not changed for the worse; indeed it has become enhanced by personal professional achievement and attachments overseas. Our experts are capable of avoiding the economic potholes, and would have advised accordingly.
The accusing finger points inevitably to a failure of policy of the Ministry of Finance, and a refusal to accept that a stitch in time saves nine. No economy can grow if there is a constant infliction of taxation, whether indirect or direct, but if this truth has been accepted and the government finds itself between the rock and a hard place of raising taxes or printing money, then the rocks at Gadarene may be up ahead.
To his eternal credit, as Prime Minister, Sir Lloyd, when faced with such a crisis of even graver proportions spoke to the country approached the International Monetary Fund and asked for assistance. He looked that institution in the face, did not buckle at the knee, and made it clear that there would be no devaluation.
It was an act of sterling statesmanship of a high order in which at this country’s gravest moment, party paramountcy and other political considerations were placed on the back-burner in favour of this country’s welfare.
Prime ministerial advice, or any advice for that matter, will mean nothing unless the example of Mr Sandiford is replicated at this time. Faced with the situation, he asserted his role as Prime Minister and Minister of Finance and led from the front in a heroic battle.
As we urge Prime Minister Stuart to consider the views of two of his predecessors, we believe that the nation-saving action of former prime minister Sandiford is a clear precedent.