ANOTHER P.M.: Hope for the future

www.nationnews.com Thursday 23, January-2003 by PETER MORGAN

When canvassing house-to-house one occasionally meets a citizen who declares forthrightly: “I en votin’.” He asserts that all political parties are the same and goes onto express some very uncomplimentary remarks about politicians in general.

Well, that’s the price of free speech! In general terms there can be no argument – all the candidates are men and women of good intent offering services to their fellow citizens even though, being human, some live up to their promises and some don’t. Where the comparison is not so true is in the comparative policies and programmes offered by each party most of which, unfortunately, have to wait for the publication of manifestoes which are usually held back until a couple of weeks before polling for fear of back-raising – the present Government has been very adept at pinching some of the progressive ideas of the NDP, for example: Team For The Times was Richie’s slogan!

But there are some very apparent differences in policy which don’t have to be held back. One is in tourism. The reasons for opposition to present ineffective policies are legion and have been aired but more instances keep popping up.

The Prime Minister and Minister of Finance is adamant about continuing the GEMS project and quite determined to throw good money after bad. He was recently quoted in the Press as declaring:”We cannot afford to have lands at Dover, Eastry House, Needham’s Point and Paradise Beach idle.”

That is a contention with which we all agree – the difference is whether those developments are going to be undertaken by private enterprise or Government since the first three listed are Government-owned properties. Prime Minister, Government has no business in business – not any government in any country – not any type of business. The whole ethos of people working for a government-owned enterprise and that of a private business is the difference between chalk and cheese.

One example should suffice. Which privately run business approximately the same size as GEMS and with the same financial problems would have paid $75 000 per annum for a box at Kensington? One would have thought that if anyone understood this it would be Mr Arthur, not only because of his academic qualifications but because of his Jamaican experience.

In Mr Michael Manley’s early term in office a number of Jamaican hotels were in financial trouble. The government took them over to keep people employed. They were not expected to make a profit – just try and break even.

Consequently, they chopped prices to get customers and so undermined neighbouring hotels which had mortgages and other financial obligations to meet. So they, too, collapsed. In fairness, perhaps that was before Mr Arthur’s time.

The other policy difference would be in the organisation of the administration of tourism. There is no difference today from that of the first Tourist Board in 1958 except for some big titles and Lotto salaries. The top management has no more qualifications or experience in the business of tourism than the first manager had at the time and, consequently, is given no more authority.

We need to organise for the 21st century. It is hoped, for instance, that the new marketing committee will bring some logical planning to that subject.

Another example. In addition to the major markets of the United States, Canada and Britain, there are secondary markets which offer good prospects from time to time dependent upon air services, the state of their economy and other factors. One such is Venezuela which, at one time, was a very important summer season market.

Quite obviously, it would be a waste of time and money to promote in that country under present circumstances. Another is Continental Europe offering various options. However, there is no scheduled airline service from the continent to Barbados – just occasional charters or a change of planes in London.

The sick man of Europe at this time is Germany with high unemployment and a seriously ailing economy. Yet the chairman of the Barbados Tourism Authority (BTA), has stated that the BTA “is looking forward to a recovery in 2003 in arrivals from Germany”. That must mean substantial promotional expenditure.

This will likely bring some additional visitors but the question arises as to whether that investment might not bring far better returns in many another market. Again, the difference in thinking between a government representative and that of a businessman in weighing options.

So, while the selection of candidates is the present focus of attention, a thoughtful person would want to take the proposed policies and programmes into account when the time comes.