RBSC

Collapse

Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Bruce's stimulus and Jamaica's crisis

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Bruce's stimulus and Jamaica's crisis

    Published: Sunday | December 21, 2008



    Ian Boyne, Contributor
    The Opposition People's National Party (PNP) had taunted him and his ministers for weeks about living in fantasyland and not facing up to Jamaica's crisis in light of the global economic meltdown. Last week Sunday night, Bruce Golding answered and on Monday morning the PNP did not know quite how to respond.

    Golding responded with a set of goodies which, if not a "stimulus" to the economy, was certainly a stimulus to his party, which had been battered by criticisms from all sides that it had been failing on its election promises. Golding calmed many in the manufacturing and small-business sectors by giving them concessions for which they had long fought and lobbied - from the time of the former 18-year-old PNP administration.

    The Small Business Association president Edward Chin Mook told CVM's Garfield Burford on Direct Wednesday night that he remembered being brought near to tears at one meeting with PNP Industry Minister Philip Paulwell some years ago when he was told firmly by bureaucrats that "there is no way" that the proposal to allocate 15 per cent of government procurement to small business and micro-enterprises could be accommodated. On Sunday night Golding flew the gate for the small-business and micro sectors.

    Also, Golding has instructed that government procurement officers now provide a 10 per cent margin of preference for Jamaican-owned companies so that once the bid is not more than 10 per cent above foreign competition, Jamaican workers would be given preference over foreign workers.

    Entrepreneurial dynamism

    He was not through with the goodies for the small business sector, which many acknowledge holds the key to entrepreneurial dynamism in the Jamaican economy. Some $350 million will be provided by the Development Bank of Jamaica through Jamaica National Small Business Loans Ltd to provide additional funding for small and micro-business. In addition, $150 million will be provided to the Jamaica Business Development Centre for on-lending at 10 per cent to micro-enterprises unable to meet full collateral requirements for conventional loans.

    This is one of the most fundamental and far-reaching moves ever made by any government for the small-business sector. Another $150 million will be provided through credit unions. All businesses with annual sales above $1 million are required to register under GCT and submit monthly returns. That upper limit has been pushed to $3 million, freeing up an estimated 2,800 small businesses operators.

    The Small Business Association president could not conceal his joy in interviews with the media the next day and onwards.

    The larger manufacturers were happy, too. The president of the Jamaica Manufacturers Association (JMA) was happy about the fact that as of January 1 customs user fees payable on capital goods were being removed. On that date, too, the time allowed for depreciating the cost of capital equipment will be reduced from two years to one year. The tax on dividends for all locally owned companies will be abolished "to help them to keep going, to protect the jobs of the workers and to encourage them to invest in even difficult times".

    The presidency of the JMA which can be quite strident and can be a pain in the neck for any government will not be making a lot of noise this Christmas. Some of the big hoteliers wanted more - as they usually do - but smaller hoteliers seem generally happy over the concessions given in terms of GCT reductions and the injection of a special loan facility of $500 million for working capital at an interest rate of just 10 per cent.

    Then there were goodies for citizens who wanted to transfer their property and those many Jamaicans getting Christmas packages. Bruce Golding apparently heard that Santa had got stuck in the global economic slump and would not be passing through Jamaica so he volunteered to be the shoe-in. He seems to be a highly appreciated Santa. Except by the PNP, of course, which would be doubly concerned about the $2.4 billion road works announcement.

    Last Monday, the PNP issued its release, for in politics, as in religion, certain rituals have to be followed, such as obligatory responses to statements by the Government, even when there is not much to criticise. The Opposition charged that the PM's statement came belatedly. Then it said it was struck by "the absence of a central focus to the measures particularly in terms of the sectors over which we have the greatest control". You can sense when someone is grasping for something coherent to say. Then the Opposition said the package of measures merely represented an effort to appease "those sectoral interests who have shouted the loudest and enjoy ready access to the prime minister". I find these political games rather interesting, in a perverse way.

    If the prime minister had not responded to the interests of the manufacturers, the PNP would have drawn attention to that and point to "the legitimate claims of our manufacturing sector", no doubt pointing out how many jobs of Jamaican workers would be jeopardised if their calls were ignored. Besides, the PNP failed to take into consideration the substantial announcements with regard to small business people and the micro sector.

    The Opposition complained that the package provided "little for the vulnerable and voiceless in the society". The PNP scoffed at the two-week window of relief for Christmas packages, but the many small people who will pay less and hence have some money for January school fees would not sniff at the relief. (You should hear PNP activist Dunstan Whittingham of the Vendors Association on the Breakfast Club in absolute elation over the robustness of the Christmas season as a result of Golding's relief measures).

    Useful suggestion

    The Opposition did raise one issue worth putting again on the table and that is the rollback in National Housing Trust mortgage rates. The prime minister presented arguments to show the insolvency of the NHT and we have to reckon with the financials in assessing the merits of the PNP's recommendation, but it was a useful suggestion and should be debated.

    The PNP would certainly have wished that the prime minister had not scored as well as he did in his broadcast on Sunday night. (Even Mark Wignall in his Thursday column seems to have been appeased!)

    In that initial PNP statement, apparently searching for things to say, they raised the issue of the financing of the package, but by the next day the finance minister had put that to trust by giving the figure.

    The response of the PNP showed why our politics is so infantile and insipid. It manifested our political culture's inability to make rationality trump expedience, surrendering to the notion that it is the unpardonable sin to commend the opponent in any significant way.

    But make no mistake about it, Golding's "stimulus" package - which is more like a mitigation package in my view - is no panacea. Indeed, it is a set of stop-gap measures to deal with the country's fundamental problems. It is, regrettably, a "faith-based" package.

    Like previous administrations in doling out concessions and incentives to the private sector, the Government has no set of performance criteria attached.

    It gives out these concessions and incentives with the faith that the private sector will make the investment in plant and machinery to keep workers in their jobs, employ new workers and exercise creativity, etc.

    Capitalists>

    This was not what was done in the Far East. There, the capitalists had to meet targets and had performance criteria attached to their benefits received. Our capitalists bawl and we give them what they want without asking anything concrete and measurable in return. This is because of their enormous class influence on all governments in Jamaica, with Michael Manley making a gallant effort to be exceptional.

    The private sector has received incentives and concession in the past and the country has not had much to show for it. This country - and its governments - must start making demands on the private sector, not just responding to its demands.

    We can't continue to accept this trickle-down theory that once the private sector is okay, the Jamaican workers and consumers will be okay. We have enough experience to prove otherwise. It is these kinds of criticisms that a progressive PNP should be making rather than the superficial and trite statement which came from Omar Davies (surprisingly) and Mark Golding. But then perhaps they are not on the progressive wing of the party.

    In my view, for Jamaica to advance economically we need more capitalists with the kind of creative and transformational thinking like Michael Lee Chin. (Just a pity he is not channelling some of that energy into the real goods economy) He is not alone, but we don't have enough.

    Karl Marx talked about the necessity of a creative and revolutionary capitalist class. Our capitalist class is backward, timid and parasitic. Business people should read an article published on Lee Chin in the Jamaica Observer of Friday December 12("Crisis Presents Opportunities for Jamaican Businesses - Lee Chin")

    In that interview with Al Edwards, Lee Chin says, "In Jamaica we need to have a transformation goal. Therefore, we must have self-imposed voluntary strictures so that we don don't pay the consequences for being indisciplined."

    Apparently, Lee Chin understands what's happening for rather than howling about the interest rate hike, as others, he notes perceptively, "Today we are in the situation because we have denuded ourselves of options. That's the reason why the Bank of Jamaica had to jack up interest rates when they should be moving them down". They should be moving them down if we had not done such a good job of exhausting viable alternatives, I take him to be saying.

    Don Robotham put it well in his intervention on the Caribbean Dialogues forum run by some Marxists (Yes that species still exists!): "Don't analyse our situation too politically, in terms of what the PNP did or what the JLP did not do. Both have merits and our problems do not care about election cycles and Jammy (Jamaican) party politics".

    As I said last week, our economic problems are deeply structural and are impatient of the kind of shallow analysis and political theatrics to which we are given.

    Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist who may be contacted at ianboyne1@yahoo.com or columns@gleanerjm.com

    http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/glean...us/focus1.html
    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

  • #2
    The global financial crisis
    Published: Sunday | December 21, 2008


    Edward Seaga, Contributor

    The world is in a deep financial recession. Some of the ripples of this mega recession are beginning to hit Jamaica. But these are only ripples. No major corporation so far has collapsed. Yet, there is an inordinate panic in the private sector of Jamaica that the country has been hit by this catastrophe. It has not - not yet.

    In the absence of the full force of the collapse taking place elsewhere, it is sheer nonsense to categorise the package announced by Prime Minister Bruce Golding on December 15 as a "bail-out" of businesses and personal catastrophes.

    What is bail-out like?

    Jamaicans should know what a bail-out is like. There was a massive bail-out in the mid-1990s for all savers, pensioners and insurance holders with accounts in the banking system numbering 2,124,000 accounts. When the melt-down of the financial sector occurred at that time, the cost to the Government was $140 billion, a staggering amount representing 44 per cent of the GDP. This event was ignominously the third largest bail-out in world history, with Argentina 55 per cent in 1980 and Indonesia 50 per cent in 1997 being the two highest.

    However, the bail-out now taking place in the United States economy has become the new leader, with an expectation to cost $8 trillion, which is an awesome 57 per cent of the American GDP.

    Jamaica's GDP

    Last Sunday's announcement was a tiny .001 per cent of Jamaica's GDP. It was really a well-tailored and welcome political attempt to assuage fears by presenting an across-the-board package of benefits for many interest groups who are in need, but not yet in danger of going under.

    The real financial blows are yet to come as the signals are showing. The bauxite/alumina sector, earning US$1.5 billion, one of the top three foreign exchange earners of the country, is beginning to feel severe shocks with plants closing and workers being laid off in substantial numbers, while the stockpiles are full. Tourism too, the second largest foreign-exchange earner, US$2 billion, is experiencing a similar fallout. Occupancy is falling and room rates are declining correspondingly. When the full impact is felt here in respect of these two sectors, to which declining remittances, US$2.1 billion, can be added, the Jamaican economy will then face enormous problems, unless the deepening global catastrophe begins to ease, sparing us the worst of the consequences.

    Situation worsens

    If the grave situation worsens, or continues unabated, a real bail-out would be needed. In the Jamaican case as long as the financial sector is not impacted, the result would be closures of plants and hotels with massive loss of employment, loss of asset value and decline in economic growth. The Jamaican banking sector is not in that danger category as the linkages to the troubled financial institutions abroad are minimal, compared to the link of tourism to local hotels and export sales of bauxite and alumina to the export market. This lack of deep connection leaves the Jamaica government better off than in the financial meltdown more than a decade ago where the bail-out was far more costly.

    On the other hand, if these productive sectors which earn by far the greater amount of foreign exchange are faced with the type of collapse of the recession of the 1980s, the loss of revenue and foreign exchange could cripple the ability of the public sector to provide enough foreign exchange for imports of food, oil, medication and so on.

    In these circumstances it would become critical to assess what kind of bail-out would be required. Judging by the previous experiences, the impact would be awesome, much more than could be provided by government. While government salvaged the collapse of Alcoa by leasing the plant in 1984 and running it successfully. But when it had to take over failed hotels in the 1970s, it had to absorb considerable losses which continued for years.

    The multi-lateral institutions Inter-American Development Bank (IDB) and World Bank together could not restore the loss of foreign exchange in a current meltdown. Contraction of the economy would be severe, involving huge personal sacrifices.

    IDB assisting Jamaica

    Against this background, it is good to see the IDB once again active in assisting Jamaica after a six-year break. IDB lending stopped in 2002 because Jamaica failed to fund the Jamaican dollar counterpart portion of the loans. The Government, on the other hand, wished to pursue market loans which were quicker, although more expensive. This left a huge backlog of some US$1 billion in IDB lending to bring the programme for Jamaica current. This could be quickly accessed. The present government is now reaping the full benefit of this with loans in the pipeline for five major projects to be announced in January 2009. Two of these provide financing for the private sector for cash flow requirements and export financing. These two are stimulation packages, not bail-outs.

    If the recession hits the Jamaican economy hard next year there will be need to have funds available for a genuine bail-out, or risk the collapse of the major foreign exchange earning sectors, which would be a catastrophe. The Government would be wise, therefore, to leave space in the IDB programme for bail-out financing rather than stimulation of specific areas of the economy. A prudent amount for bail-out would be about 10 per cent GDP, or $90 billion.

    One other aspect of this crisis needs to be clarified. Government has the option to use the crisis to restructure the economy to deal with the fiscal deficit as was done in the first half of the 1980s with great pain and political damage. If this is to be done, then the best strategy is to work towards an early general election with the expectation of a win with sufficient margin to allow for a stabilisation programme of the economy. I mention this because if the opportunity is not used when it occurs for drastic expenditure cuts to wipe out the fiscal deficit and put the economy on a stable path for recovery, then it is unlikely that there will be any possibility of the Jamaican economy being attractive enough to meet the post-crisis demands of the bond market, which it will be necessary to access in part after the recession.

    Deeper trouble

    This was the fundamental question that confronted Jamaica in the early 1980s when the crucial decision was made to restructure the economy which was in deeper trouble then than it is now, or is likely to be at this time.

    The country cannot continue to limp along on low growth, no growth and negative growth as it has done for more than the last 18 years while its substance is drained in paying excessive debt service charges and carrying the cost of a bloated public sector leaving everything else in stagnation.

    Serious thinking out of the box must be applied to deal not only with the here-and-now, but with the daunting future.

    Edward Seaga is a former prime minister. He is now a distinguished fellow at the UWI and pro-chancellor of the University of Technology. Email: odf@uwimona.edu.jm

    http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/glean...us/focus2.html
    "Jamaica's future reflects its past, having attained only one per cent annual growth over 30 years whilst neighbours have grown at five per cent." (Article)

    Comment

    Working...
    X