Tweet
<TABLE cellSpacing=0 cellPadding=1 width="100%" border=0><TBODY><TR><TD><SPAN class=TopStory>Crash Programme reborn?</SPAN>
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>
Friday, September 29, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P class=StoryText align=justify>Not unusually, Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller's announcement of a $635-million social project commanded the headlines this week.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In making the announcement, the PM was at pains to say that the proposed programme - intended to clean up the city in time for World Cup Cricket and, no doubt beyond - was not supposed to be viewed as any crash programme activity reminiscent of the 1970s .<P class=StoryText align=justify>Again, not surprisingly, the public debate to date has largely developed in this context and the Government is hardly blameless in this regard, we believe.<P class=StoryText align=justify>At a post-PNP conference press briefing held earlier this week, the prime minister admitted that the details of the announced programme were not yet worked out.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Clearly, the Government was setting itself up for the chorus of criticisms that the programme has so far received. With general elections pending, how could the Government not see that outcome, especially when Mrs Simpson Miller did not spell out important details such as: who will administer the fund, how will participants be selected, and how will the new programme be integrated into similar social projects such as Lift Up Jamaica?<P class=StoryText align=justify>To be fair, however, in its present construct, the programme has the potential to confer short-term benefits to the economy as the injection of these funds will no doubt have multiplier impact.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In this regard, the promised project would definitely provide relief for thousands of unemployed inner-city youths, especially women, many of them with children whose fathers cannot be found.<P class=StoryText align=justify>What is impatient of debate, however, is whether the nation will be best served using the PetroCaribe Funds in the anticipated manner and whether this programme can be sustained. We have the so-called Emergency Employment Programme, better known as the Crash Programme, as hard experience upon which we can draw for important lessons.
In any event, we were under the impression that there were clear guidelines governing the use of these funds that restricted the funding of such types of social programmes.<P class=StoryText align=justify>We have heard the argument that given the shared consensus on the need to increase spending on education, especially on the youth, the relatively substantive $635 million could be used to set up functional computer centres in all parishes that would be available to youth with creative talents.<P class=StoryText align=justify>We support such a recommendation as this would facilitate their exploitation of our advantage in new areas relating to music, fashion design and general cultural activities - areas where we enjoy a competitive advantage and there is unquestionable demand.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In our view, this type of focus would be on sustainable medium-term development. We believe that this type of out-of-the box thinking is what is needed to shift our short-term focus that continues to constrain our attempts at promoting meaningful employment, especially for the youth.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Such a shift may take much time - a commodity that is admittedly scarce, given the pace of change in the global economy. Nonetheless, it is a challenge from which we must never resile.
<SPAN class=Subheadline></SPAN></TD></TR><TR><TD>
Friday, September 29, 2006
</TD></TR></TBODY></TABLE>
<P class=StoryText align=justify>Not unusually, Prime Minister Portia Simpson Miller's announcement of a $635-million social project commanded the headlines this week.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In making the announcement, the PM was at pains to say that the proposed programme - intended to clean up the city in time for World Cup Cricket and, no doubt beyond - was not supposed to be viewed as any crash programme activity reminiscent of the 1970s .<P class=StoryText align=justify>Again, not surprisingly, the public debate to date has largely developed in this context and the Government is hardly blameless in this regard, we believe.<P class=StoryText align=justify>At a post-PNP conference press briefing held earlier this week, the prime minister admitted that the details of the announced programme were not yet worked out.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Clearly, the Government was setting itself up for the chorus of criticisms that the programme has so far received. With general elections pending, how could the Government not see that outcome, especially when Mrs Simpson Miller did not spell out important details such as: who will administer the fund, how will participants be selected, and how will the new programme be integrated into similar social projects such as Lift Up Jamaica?<P class=StoryText align=justify>To be fair, however, in its present construct, the programme has the potential to confer short-term benefits to the economy as the injection of these funds will no doubt have multiplier impact.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In this regard, the promised project would definitely provide relief for thousands of unemployed inner-city youths, especially women, many of them with children whose fathers cannot be found.<P class=StoryText align=justify>What is impatient of debate, however, is whether the nation will be best served using the PetroCaribe Funds in the anticipated manner and whether this programme can be sustained. We have the so-called Emergency Employment Programme, better known as the Crash Programme, as hard experience upon which we can draw for important lessons.
In any event, we were under the impression that there were clear guidelines governing the use of these funds that restricted the funding of such types of social programmes.<P class=StoryText align=justify>We have heard the argument that given the shared consensus on the need to increase spending on education, especially on the youth, the relatively substantive $635 million could be used to set up functional computer centres in all parishes that would be available to youth with creative talents.<P class=StoryText align=justify>We support such a recommendation as this would facilitate their exploitation of our advantage in new areas relating to music, fashion design and general cultural activities - areas where we enjoy a competitive advantage and there is unquestionable demand.<P class=StoryText align=justify>In our view, this type of focus would be on sustainable medium-term development. We believe that this type of out-of-the box thinking is what is needed to shift our short-term focus that continues to constrain our attempts at promoting meaningful employment, especially for the youth.<P class=StoryText align=justify>Such a shift may take much time - a commodity that is admittedly scarce, given the pace of change in the global economy. Nonetheless, it is a challenge from which we must never resile.
Comment