Can Bruce cross it?

Ian Boyne, Contributor

The prominent headline was carried in a paper whose power brokers could never be accused of being hostile to the present Jamaica Labour Party (JLP) administration: 'FDI in Jamaica plunges to 14-year low'. (Business Observer, Wednesday, July 27). It reports that foreign direct investment flows to Jamaica crashed from US$541 million in 2009 to US$201 million last year. And this compared, stunningly, to the US$1.4 billion invested in 2007.

This is almost surreal: Cast your mind back to the pre-election campaign and the heavy weather which was made of the view that Jamaica, under the People's National Party (PNP) administration, was failing to attract adequate foreign direct investments and, in fact, was spurned by foreign investors because we were not investor-friendly. Remember the debate between then Opposition Spokesman on Finance, Audley Shaw, and then Finance Minister Omar Davies. Shaw knocked the PNP and Davies heavily for running an economy which was, allegedly, not attractive to foreign investors, vowing that if elected, a JLP administration would turn that around.

The PNP was the problem why foreign investors were not coming, Shaw charged. Change the PNP and the foreign investors would be flocking to Jamaica. As a globalist, I had written then that that was a naïve view; that the overwhelming proportion of FDIs were concentrated in only a few countries, mainly the developed Triad - North America, Europe and Japan - as well as the Asian Tigers and China and India. Besides, I kept stressing our structural production problems which remained under successive political administrations.

But the election heat wave was on, and that was hardly a time for cool, calculated, evidence-based discourse. The promise was jobs, jobs, jobs and the election proved large numbers had faith. The Observer story photo has newly installed Minister of Industry Chris Tufton and JAMPRO President Sancia Templer smiling broadly along with the new president of the Jamaica Manufacturers' Association, Brian Pengelley, as they leaf through the just-released World Investment Report 2011, put out by the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). The truth is, they have nothing to smile about in this hefty report.

The JLP apologists' reflexive response to that Observer headline and my comments might be: "What else can you people expect? We have barely come through the worst global depression in almost 70 years. Be real, and don't lie with statistics." But I have read the report: Global foreign direct investment flows actually increased last year, however moderately. It's still 15 per cent below the pre-crisis level, but here's something else that would surprise our JLP apologists: Developing countries last year actually achieved a record proportion of global FDI flows for the first time, absorbing more than 50 per cent of FDI flows.

Half-truth

Ah, but you say that's because the developed countries have declined so badly because of the recession. A half-truth. The World Investment Report 2011 says, "Strong economic growth, spurred by robust domestic and external demand, good macroeconomic fundamentals and higher commodity prices, drove FDI flows to Latin America and the Caribbean to US$159 billion."

But before the PNP apologists run too fast with this juicy information, they should note that 10 of the 15 members of CARICOM also achieved slower FDI growth last year (though Guyana achieved a 30 per cent growth. Cuba also saw increases in FDIs). The larger point - of little interest to propagandists in both the JLP and the PNP - is that our economy is handicapped by certain structural deficiencies; that it is experiencing increasing FDI diversion into markets like China, India, Malaysia, Thailand, Vietnam, Cambodia, etc; that we have yet to get on board the international production chain; and that our lack of diversification and dynamism - both in terms of products and markets - is a major constraint.

And all of this tells us that our glib politicians who like to promise the moon need to get back down to earth and acquaint themselves with certain realities. Which leads me to our current political situation. We are in election mode again, and it's the same promises being made, the same hopes being raised. The same trite arguments. The same people willing, indeed eager, to believe, to have faith, to express hope in a new Messiah (who needn't be male!)

Growing concerns about our status with the International Monetary Fund (IMF), more alarms being raised by 'Teacher' Ralston Hyman and 'Tutor' Lambert Brown about our economic direction, as well as uncertain sounds from our finance minister cause concerns about macroeconomic management, the traditional trump card of the JLP.

The JLP has never sought to match the PNP in terms of rhetoric about social justice, equity and advocacy on behalf of the poor. The JLP has largely conceded that rhetorical ground to the traditionally socialist PNP. What the JLP has maintained is that the PNP's redistributionist, 'populist' polices end up hurting the poor more and retarding their interests. The JLP believes that its advocacy of fiscal conservatism, fiscal responsibility, market-driven initiatives and incentives to the private sector represents the best strategy for 'pulling up the poor'.

Born-again capitalists

The PNP, the narrative goes, is lousy at managing the economy, is fiscally reckless, does not understand the market system, and is just a bunch of reluctant, born-again capitalists who are obsessed with spending, not earning and building a firm economic foundation. Remember that Portia Simpson Miller was not voted out of power because the people resented her, or did not trust her, or believed she was too corrupt to remain in power.

They were convinced that she could not manage, that the PNP was a spent force in terms of new ideas to grow the economy; that Omar 'Run Wid It' Davies was no match for Audley Shaw, and that the intellectual Bruce had the 'capacity' to deal with the 'complex challenges' that Jamaica would face.

The JLP was elected in this PNP country not because it was loved and admired. It was elected, reluctantly, because people wanted more jobs, better standards of living and felt that the PNP (not necessarily Portia) had become too corrupt because they had been in power for too long and was lining too many of their friends' pockets with the spoils of power. The Trafigura scandal cemented all of that, and the bruising Portia-Peter leadership battle, with choice quotes from parliamentary Comrades, did not help in assuaging lingering fears about Portia's ability to lead.

Now come to 2011. The 'jobs, jobs, jobs' have not materialised. (Argue it's the global economic crisis or Bruce's home-grown crisis, but admit the outcome: a disappointing job creation record.)

People are angry over increasing electricity bills, and despite what government agencies say about low inflation, people are not experiencing that in the supermarkets, and when they purchase goods, and especially services. In my view, the global economic crisis has to be factored in heavily, but there is no disputing the facts and people's experience: They don't feel better off today than they were in 2007 when the PNP was in power, and they have said so unmistakably in all three polls recently. They are saying Bruce 'canna cross it'!

Kevin O'Brien Chang feels the Government has done well in a number of areas but that it has been disastrous in public relations. But that's still an admission that people are not feeling these achievements. Now apart from people's subjective feelings, are the empirical facts such as declining FDI flows, our trade deficit (when foreign trade is growing), and the other indices to which Hyman, a sharp detractor of the JLP administration, has been pointing.(Some might say he is motivated by malice, but facts are neutral things.)

Here's the challenge for the JLP: How does it pitch a re-election campaign when some key macroeconomic indices are negative, when unemployment, the people's biggest concern (overtaking crime) is unacceptably high and job creation low; when the contractionary, fiscally repressive IMF policies don't allow the fiscal space for counter-cyclical policies which would build demand and feed the social sector? The JLP doesn't have any room for a 'run wid it' Budget. The Jamaica Development Infrastructure Programme (JDIP), which could give the JLP some valuable pork funds, is under increasing scrutiny, and the PNP will have much public support in keeping up the pressure in this regard - with Greg Christie only too eager to lend hands and heart to any decapitation.

Couple this with the fact that the PNP has made the issue of trust and credibility of the prime minister a major plank of its campaign. And, more alarmingly for the JLP, it has a media dominated by talk-show hosts, columnists and analysts who are not fond of the party; with another set to officially throw his hat in the ring for the PNP today. Don't let anybody fool you that the media don't play a critical role in framing issues, influencing the public agenda, and defining issues.

A perfect storm brews

G2K and the JLP's problem is not that the PNP has so many people who are talk-show hosts and so many sympathetic columnists and analysts. The PNP, historically, has attracted those most likely to be in the commentariat. It will always have a competitive advantage in that area, no matter how much Delano Seiveright squeals. What the JLP needs to do - and to do fast - is to develop a cadre of highly articulate, suave, emotionally competent, credible and intellectually aware people who can sell its programmes and ideas and who can cogently critique PNP positions.

Rather than merely complain about what Lambert Brown is doing on the 'Evening Edition', the JLP needs to have people who can commandingly engage him and present alternative ideas. It needs to have people who can take on - not "go after" - Ralston Hyman, Garnett Roper, Robert Buddan, Ronnie Thwaites, Dickie Crawford, Franklin Johnston and young Raymond Pryce.

In the US, the Republicans have their think tanks and media outlets. Our main capitalist party here has neglected intellectual work and is, therefore, suffering a deficit in the marketplace of ideas today. Whatever you think about Delano Seiveright, he is taking on the progressives in the media almost single-handedly.

The capitalist class and the bourgeoisie are no longer scared of the post-ideological PNP, and with Peter Phillips in ascendancy, it feels safe in abandoning the JLP. It's a perfect storm for the JLP.

Ian Boyne is a veteran journalist. Email feedback to columns@gleanerjm.com and ianboyne1@yahoo.com.