Andrew Holness displays a previous Jamaica Labour Party manifesto.
March 23, 2025
No more ‘puss inna bag’ manifestos
General election campaigns in this country have long been monopolised by sweet-sounding words, lofty promises, bait-and-switch tactics, well-choreographed political pyrotechnics, and related razzle-dazzle, plus the blatant telling of lies. We have paid dearly for our inattention in the past.
We are nearing the holding of another general election. It will be our 19th since universal adult suffrage in 1944. Well-thinking Jamaicans must be careful, extremely careful that we don’t fall prey to the elaborate tricks of merchants of tomfoolery, the snares of individuals who suffer with “vaulting ambitions” (Williams Shakespeare’s
Macbeth), the traps of individuals who are buried deep in status depravity, the deceptions of those whose commitment to this country is highly questionable, and the poisonous webs of those who would want us to believe that they can simply shout Abracadabra, wave a magic wand, and all Jamaica’s problems will disappear, instantaneously.
Business
March 23, 2025
What began as a childhood lesson in kindness has evolved into a full-fledged business that now serves countless individuals across Jamaica. For Veneis...
Superman is not real. No super hero is coming to save us. We were near the edge of a giant precipice in 2013. Today, we are far, far away from that abyss. We must never look back.
Letters
March 25, 2025
Dear Editor, On Monday, March 20, 2025, while at work, I received a call from my neighbour that literally made me leap for joy. The news came that roa...
FOCUS ON THE FUNDING
In my The Agenda piece last Sunday I made the case for the institution of a constitutional debt brake, changeable only by a two-thirds majority in both houses of Parliament. This to further protect our macroeconomic gains and simultaneously further help steer Jamaica along the present trajectory, so as to improve the long-term economic and social viability of this country.
Sports
Bennett confident Jamaica’s cricket will thrive under Shallow’s CWI leadership
March 24, 2025
JAMAICA Cricket Association (JCA) President Dr Donovan Bennett believes Dr Kishore Shallow’s commitment to the growth of the sport in Jamaica is a tes...
Without money, no policy idea can ever become reality. Former Prime Minister Edward Seaga told us years ago that, “It takes cash to care.” He was right! And Dr Peter Phillips, former finance and public service minister, Opposition leader, and PNP president, told the country some time ago, that “It nuh mek nuh sense yuh try and bruk empty shop.” He was absolutely right!
The fact is, without funding all sweet-sounding general election and/or related announcements and plans, whether they are from the incumbent or the Opposition, are dead in the water.
Margaret Thatcher, former prime minister of the United Kingdom, just over four decades ago, said: “Let us never forget this fundamental truth: The State has no source of money other than money which people earn themselves. If the State wishes to spend more it can do so only by borrowing your savings or by taxing you more. It is no good thinking that someone else will pay — that someone else is you. There is no such thing as public money; there is only taxpayers’ money.” (UK Conservative Party Conference, 1983) She was right!
Last Sunday I noted here that the: “The Independent Fiscal Commission (IFC) is responsible for providing the public with an informed and independent opinion on the soundness and sustainability of Jamaica’s fiscal positions and policies, and the Fiscal Advisory Committee (FAC), which is headed by the former Economic Programme Oversight Committee (EPOC) Chairman Keith Duncan, oversee the operations of the IFC. Again, neither the IFC nor the FAC has the power to switch on a constitutional debt brake on a future Government.”
The absence of this vital switch is not good for the long-term economic viability of this country. I remain convinced that we cannot simply rely on the goodness of people given our history.
We have been relying on the good graces and related virtues of individuals when it comes to the fulfilling of promises made especially during general election campaigns for decades. We have been tricked, time and time again. How might we escape this noose?
I think the IFC’s functions should be expanded to include the responsibility to cost the manifestos of our two major political parties and the findings should be released to the public no later than a fortnight before we cast our ballots in a parliamentary election. Why? Well-thinking Jamaicans, especially, need to be assured that the announcements, plans and forecasts of the incumbent and the Opposition are rooted in the reality of ‘fundability’.
Pie in the sky ambition “cyah nyam”. We must halt the madness of being bamboozled by grand announcements, which require massive indebtedness, the kind which almost destroyed this country in the 1970s and 90s, and/or suffocating taxation, which has been the go-to tactic of the People’s National Party (PNP) whenever it takes control of Jamaica House.
National Hero Norman Manley said his generation’s objective was to secure political independence and those after were to secure economic independence. Recently, Prime Minister Dr Andrew Holness reiterated similar sentiments at a public function. I agree with both Manley and Dr Holness. But how can we seriously talk about, let alone achieve real economic independence when our political parties, 62 years after political independence, are allowed to present manifestos which are not costed, and are also allowed to release manifestos days before we cast our ballots? This is hugely untenable. We need an independent body to assure Jamaicans that the parties’ manifesto proposals are fundable. It’s our money.
The costing of all party manifestos would be a win-win for the incumbent and the Opposition. Voters would become better informed. Functioning democracies depend on citizens being properly informed. There are some among us who don’t want citizens to operate on the basis of proper information. We cannot trust those people with the creation of a brighter future for Jamaica. A brighter future means children are educationally and materially far better off than their parents.
MODELS TO PONDER
I understand some are going scream, “There you go again, Higgins, trying to push the political parties into a cul-de-sac.” Here is a reality. The costing of party manifestos is de rigueur, particularly in many developed countries. That has been so for many years. Costing has strengthened their democracies. I want Jamaica’s democracy to be stronger. Jamaica cannot play small and hope to achieve our fullest potentials. We must create our own and also adopt best practices which have been shown globally to strengthen institutional robustness.
We don’t have to reinvent the wheel, all over again. In the Netherlands, the Bureau of Economic Policy Analysis, (CPB), among other things, costs manifestos. In Ireland, political parties can ask officials in the Department of Finance to cost their manifestos. In England, top-ranking members of the three major political parties — the Conservatives, Labour and the Liberals — have publicly voiced the need for Britain’s Office of Budget Responsibility (OBR), the equivalent of our IFC, to take on the function of costing the manifestos of all parties.
Netherlands’ CPB was founded in 1945 by Jan Tinbergen, the First Nobel Laureate in economics (1969). Research at CPB is carried out on its own initiative or at the request of the Government, Parliament, individual members of Parliament, national trade unions, or employers’ federations.
The Department of Finance in Ireland is the equivalent of our Ministry of Finance and the Public Service. This means that in Ireland civil servants do the lion’s share of the work regarding the costing of manifestos. Think tanks usually do independent verifications, etc.
I anticipate that some will say, “Higgins, the IFC does not have the staff to take on the additional function of costing the parties’ manifestos.” The safeguarding of our democracy is worth the hiring of additional staff. Anyway, here is another consideration. The Caribbean Policy Research Institute (CaPRI) is a first-rate outfit. To further safeguard the public good of free and fair elections, our private sector could redirect a portion of its hefty donations to political parties to fund the costing of manifestos by contracting CaPRI.
FEEDBACK
My piece last Sunday evidently stirred up some of my readers, in particular some who nail their colours to the mast. Incidentally, I have no challenge with that approach, once verified data, not fiction, are the foundations of their platforms.
Anyway, I think I know why those readers were so hugely agitated, and in some instances greatly angered. I believe discerning readers know too. Some of those readers ranted that my trying to influence the adoption of a constitutional debt brake locally was foolhardy because it had failed in Germany, so much so that the Germans were about to discard their constitutional debt brake.
I sincerely hope the mentioned readers would simply replace some of their apparent boiling anger with a bit of more careful research. I recommend verified sources for a start.
Local reportage of happenings in the German Bundestag (Parliament) last week might have caused some members of the public to conclude that the German Parliament, via a majority vote, had abandoned their constitutional debt brake. This was absolutely not the case.
Last week the German Parliament voted for an “easing”, or an exemption, so that the country can borrow beyond the limits of the debt brake. That move was in the making for some weeks.
Consider this headline: ‘Germany to ease government debt limits in major step aimed at boosting economy, defence spending’.
The Associated Press, on March 5, 2025, reported among other things: “The two political parties expected to form the next German Government have agreed to loosen the country’s constitution restrictions on borrowing, enabling 1 trillion euros (US$1.08 trillion) or more in spending on defence and infrastructure.
“It’s a major change in Germany’s debt-averse political culture, rejecting conventional economic wisdom that long dominated Europe’s biggest economy and one of the world’s wealthiest countries.”
This was not the first time that an easing was being approved by the German Parliament. The mentioned
AP report also noted: “The Government had to invoke an emergency clause to borrow and spend more on pandemic relief for businesses in 2020. Then it declared another emergency in 2021, and another one in 2022 after Russia’s invasion of Ukraine raised pressure for more defence spending and relief for utility customers. Yet another emergency exemption was used in 2023. However, in late 2023 the Federal Constitutional Court ruled the Government had gone too far in fudging the debt limit, forcing a frantic rewrite of the 2024 budget.”
Google has all this information and more.
So, clearly, the German constitutional debt brake is not an immoveable iron mask, firmly welded, then triple-locked, and the key flung in a giant sinkhole. Here is another important point which those who angrily oppose the local adoption of a constitutional debt brake should not lose sight of: Germany is able to borrow the sums mentioned and more because, unlike other countries in Europe and elsewhere, they did not bury themselves in mountains of debt during the global financial crisis of 2007-2009. Germany’s debt-to-gross domestic product (GDP) is about 63 per cent now; one of the lowest in Europe. It will get to about 80 per cent with the anticipated borrowings.
IMPORTANT LESSONS
We could learn a lot from how the Germans have leveraged their constitutional debt brake for their rainy days. Note I did not say ape. Anyway, Friedrich Merz, the leader of the centre-right Christian Democratic Union (CDU) party will be sworn-in as the new German Chancellor shortly.
Why was he given the nod in the recent elections in Germany? Public commentators say Merz’s laser-like focus on meaningful economic growth was the sweetener which endeared him to a majority. Let’s not fool ourselves, it’s always the economy. Remember, “It’s the economy, stupid,” a famous catchphrase at the time when Bill Clinton ran for president. It meant that the primary concern of Americans was the state of the economy and how it affected their lives. The slogan was coined by James Carville in 1992, as “The economy, stupid.” Meaningful economic growth is where it’s at. And that’s why and how I will examine the budget speeches next week.
Garfield Higgins is an educator, and journalist. Send comments to the Jamaica Observer or higgins160@yahoo.com.
