Tweet
Time for a change
Time for a change
Ken Chaplin
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
The campaign slogan of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) is " time for a change", meaning that it is time to change the People's National Party (PNP) government which has been in power for more than 18 years. However, it is not wise to change a government just for the sake of changing.
Ken Chaplin
The question is: What new can Bruce Golding and the JLP bring to the table, if indeed there is a change? His budget presentatation has impressed many people. The programmes he outlined indicate economic development and some level of prosperity.
The second question is: Are Jamaicans satisfied with the governance of the PNP over its 18 years in power? In a poll, the majority said no, but I do not believe in polls. Too much attention is being given to polls in Jamaica and some of the pollsters have their own axe to grind.
The other question is: Can a new PNP government end the misery which many poor Jamaicans have been experiencing over the period of 18 years? It failed to do this over the period, but yes, if it can get rid of corruption and irregularities in its ranks. The misery has been brought about by poor management, squandering of public funds, irregularities, corruption, partisan distribution of jobs and discrimination in the award of some contracts. No other government, perhaps, has been so corrupt in the history of Jamaica.
Simpson Miller was a Cabinet minister for many years and she and her supporters are pressing for her own mandate. They are also distancing her from the mismanagement of past leadership. But she bears equal responsibility under the principle of collective responsibility which governs Cabinet. Portia is immensely popular, but popularity alone cannot take Jamaica out of the unenviable position it has been in for 18 years. She has come on strongly. However, her leadership ability is rather weak.
This writer will not go back to the period 1972-1980 to have an in-depth look at the performance of the PNP. Suffice it to say that there was considerable social progress made at little cost by the Michael Manley regime, but there was also economic stagnation. Yet it is my belief that Manley did not lose the general elections of 1980 on the basis of poor economic performance. He lost because he had moved or attempted to move into the communist circle.
The performance of the PNP government has to be considered from a perspective of the period 1989-2007. First, the macro-economic programme has begun to bear fruit. For example, inflation and interest rates are down, and the net international reserves (NIR) is at a record high. The primary objective of such a programme, as finance and planning minister Dr Omar Davies said, is to expand growth and raise the living tandards of those at the bottom of the economic ladder.
However, after many years, not much benefit from the programme has seeped down to the poor. There is still too much poverty and unemployment. It could be that some of the results from the programme were consumed by corruption and irregularities.
The tourist industry has made considerable strides for which the government must be given some credit. The expansion of the port of Kingston has been significant and the two international airports have been vastly expanded to the extent that it makes me feel proud. Highway 2000 has moved goods, services and people quickly, a critical factor in economic development and so too will the Northcoast Highway when completed. Because of the high toll, many commercial vehicles are not using Highway 2000.
The information technology and telecommunication industries are moving at top pace. The Programme for Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH) and the National Health Fund are providing well-needed assistance to a large number of people. The expansion of Early Childhood Education has been given priority. Housing benefits have increased and small business development has been given more support, and people's investment greater protection.
On the other hand, the government has failed to provide the people with adequate common basic facilities, despite the high taxes that citizens have to pay. Most parochial and farm roads and some main roads are in an intolerable condition. Motor vehicles cannot traverse many of the parochial and farm roads to get the sick to hospital, and farmers cannot get their produce to market.
Most communities lack adequate domestic water supplies, or there is none at all. Many villagers move to go to springs to share drinking water with animals in this the 21st century. The education system is backward at the primary level with overcrowded classrooms, and many children leaving school are unable to read and write. Some are not attending school because their parents cannot afford to send them. Poor sanitation is a problem in the country, especially in inner-city communities.
The health service is inadequate and it costs a lot of money to go to private doctors and hospitals. Golding said his government would abolish hospital charges. Simpson Miller followed and said fees for children under 18 would be abolished at government hospitals and clinics, except at the University Hospital of the West Indies.
Crime, violence and unemployment are the main concerns of citizens. The government has not done enough to deal with crime and violence. After 18 years the justice system is still in a terrible state, but is being examined with a view to improvement. Human rights violations and abuse by the police, especially against the poor continued.
The government was short of bringing in the necessary investment to fuel significant growth. Finally, and most seriously, the government has created a massive debt burden of nearly $1 trillion and the repayment has affected every Jamaican. Simpson Miller is by far the most popular leader in Jamaica while Bruce Golding is the strongest and most solid all-round leader. It is up to voters to decide which leader they want to run the country.
Ken Chaplin
Tuesday, May 22, 2007
The campaign slogan of the Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) is " time for a change", meaning that it is time to change the People's National Party (PNP) government which has been in power for more than 18 years. However, it is not wise to change a government just for the sake of changing.
Ken Chaplin The question is: What new can Bruce Golding and the JLP bring to the table, if indeed there is a change? His budget presentatation has impressed many people. The programmes he outlined indicate economic development and some level of prosperity.
The second question is: Are Jamaicans satisfied with the governance of the PNP over its 18 years in power? In a poll, the majority said no, but I do not believe in polls. Too much attention is being given to polls in Jamaica and some of the pollsters have their own axe to grind.
The other question is: Can a new PNP government end the misery which many poor Jamaicans have been experiencing over the period of 18 years? It failed to do this over the period, but yes, if it can get rid of corruption and irregularities in its ranks. The misery has been brought about by poor management, squandering of public funds, irregularities, corruption, partisan distribution of jobs and discrimination in the award of some contracts. No other government, perhaps, has been so corrupt in the history of Jamaica.
Simpson Miller was a Cabinet minister for many years and she and her supporters are pressing for her own mandate. They are also distancing her from the mismanagement of past leadership. But she bears equal responsibility under the principle of collective responsibility which governs Cabinet. Portia is immensely popular, but popularity alone cannot take Jamaica out of the unenviable position it has been in for 18 years. She has come on strongly. However, her leadership ability is rather weak.
This writer will not go back to the period 1972-1980 to have an in-depth look at the performance of the PNP. Suffice it to say that there was considerable social progress made at little cost by the Michael Manley regime, but there was also economic stagnation. Yet it is my belief that Manley did not lose the general elections of 1980 on the basis of poor economic performance. He lost because he had moved or attempted to move into the communist circle.
The performance of the PNP government has to be considered from a perspective of the period 1989-2007. First, the macro-economic programme has begun to bear fruit. For example, inflation and interest rates are down, and the net international reserves (NIR) is at a record high. The primary objective of such a programme, as finance and planning minister Dr Omar Davies said, is to expand growth and raise the living tandards of those at the bottom of the economic ladder.
However, after many years, not much benefit from the programme has seeped down to the poor. There is still too much poverty and unemployment. It could be that some of the results from the programme were consumed by corruption and irregularities.
The tourist industry has made considerable strides for which the government must be given some credit. The expansion of the port of Kingston has been significant and the two international airports have been vastly expanded to the extent that it makes me feel proud. Highway 2000 has moved goods, services and people quickly, a critical factor in economic development and so too will the Northcoast Highway when completed. Because of the high toll, many commercial vehicles are not using Highway 2000.
The information technology and telecommunication industries are moving at top pace. The Programme for Advancement Through Health and Education (PATH) and the National Health Fund are providing well-needed assistance to a large number of people. The expansion of Early Childhood Education has been given priority. Housing benefits have increased and small business development has been given more support, and people's investment greater protection.
On the other hand, the government has failed to provide the people with adequate common basic facilities, despite the high taxes that citizens have to pay. Most parochial and farm roads and some main roads are in an intolerable condition. Motor vehicles cannot traverse many of the parochial and farm roads to get the sick to hospital, and farmers cannot get their produce to market.
Most communities lack adequate domestic water supplies, or there is none at all. Many villagers move to go to springs to share drinking water with animals in this the 21st century. The education system is backward at the primary level with overcrowded classrooms, and many children leaving school are unable to read and write. Some are not attending school because their parents cannot afford to send them. Poor sanitation is a problem in the country, especially in inner-city communities.
The health service is inadequate and it costs a lot of money to go to private doctors and hospitals. Golding said his government would abolish hospital charges. Simpson Miller followed and said fees for children under 18 would be abolished at government hospitals and clinics, except at the University Hospital of the West Indies.
Crime, violence and unemployment are the main concerns of citizens. The government has not done enough to deal with crime and violence. After 18 years the justice system is still in a terrible state, but is being examined with a view to improvement. Human rights violations and abuse by the police, especially against the poor continued.
The government was short of bringing in the necessary investment to fuel significant growth. Finally, and most seriously, the government has created a massive debt burden of nearly $1 trillion and the repayment has affected every Jamaican. Simpson Miller is by far the most popular leader in Jamaica while Bruce Golding is the strongest and most solid all-round leader. It is up to voters to decide which leader they want to run the country.
Comment