OBVIOUSLY it would suit the Government splendidly if it could persuade the people of the country that they were getting less poor. I wouldn't put it past the average politician to cook the books for the purpose.

There are, however, only three "official" people upon whose views on the subject we can place reliance. These three are Dr. Omar Davies, the Minister of Finance, Derick Latibeaudiere, and Dr. Wesley Hughes. These three are men of integrity, though this does not necessarily mean that I trust their opinions.

With the best of us the wish is often father to the thought and this can colour the opinions of even the most honest men. For instance, Mr. Latibeaudiere often gets a bit carried away by his enthusiasm, as he did earlier this year and got clobbered for it. Dr. Omar Davies is so enamoured with the reduction of inflation, that he gives the reduced rate of inflation as a measure of our becoming less poor. With due respect to my favourite Minister, this is nonsense.

Reducing inflation does not increase the income of anyone, although it makes life more comfortable and slows the rate of the increase of poverty. Dr. Hughes, of the Planning Institute of Jamaica, is a thoughtful and thorough man, and of the three I would say that his opinions would be the least likely to be affected by emotion.

Factors

In trying to access our wealth or poverty, many measurers and factors have to be considered. In my opinion, however, the three most important indicators would be to consider our degree of unemployment, figures concerning our consumption, and the degree of our gross domestic product.

Figuring out consumption can be a bit dicey. One remembers the survey in 1997 when we were told that our consumption had jumped by 30 per cent only to find that this was the product either of someone's imagination or just a misreading of the figures.

We know that unemployment has been increasing. We know that the growth of our gross domestic product has been negative for three years. The Minister of Finance assumed for the purpose of his latest budget that there would be a growth of GDP this year of between two per cent and three per cent. In view of our decreased earnings from bauxite and tourism and the stagnation of our manufacturing industry, it seems highly unlikely that this unexpected increase in our GDP will take place. Indeed, in my opinion it seems much more likely that 1999 will be another year of negative growth. But we shall have to await the findings of Dr. Hughes.

It seems, therefore, far too early to say whether we are getting any better off or poorer. I am well aware that it is dangerous to come to conclusions on the basis of gut feelings or anecdotal evidence, and our opinions should be based on statistics and on fact. Statistics, however, are not always reliable and my father, an old lawyer, used to say that the proper definition of a fact is a lie and a half. Finally, all I can really say is that if it turns out that we have got less poor, I shall be very pleasantly surprised.

Y2K AGAIN

I fail to see why such a big fuss is being made about what has come to be known as the Y2K crisis. I am proud to say that the problems arising from the inability of current computers to tell the difference between the year 2000 and the year 1900 was first mentioned in this column in Jamaica a year and a half ago. But the only computers that will be in trouble will be those dealing with matters that are not date sensitive. Most of the work done by computers is simply the churning out of figures that bear no relevance to the date.

Our modern technology world seems to have got itself into a fine pickle. It is not unusual for people to know where they are, but it is quite unusual to live in a new world in which people no longer know when they are.

I should add by the way that my personal computer problems have considerably lessened since The Gleaner very generously replaced the first computer that it lent me with another one with greatly improved mental health. It has, however, one nasty habit which I have learnt to avoid. It claims to correct one's spelling, but it corrects me into American spelling. One more reason for me to fight the baleful invasions of Uncle Sam.

AWFUL ARCHITECTURE

There are more ways than one of lousing up an environment. Because of my lameness I seldom go out these days, but a few mornings ago after attending a press conference at the Terra Nova, my secretary loaded me and my wheelchair into the car of a kind friend so that we could all get some lunch. We unanimously decided that Wendy's at Liguanea was the place to go. I have incidentally become addicted to Wendy's excellent hamburgers.

On the way to Wendy's, I came upon the new building which Courts has built near to the post office. This architectural horror nearly spoilt my appetite. I know that Courts is an admirable business, profitably run by the admirable Richard Coe, but why is it necessary to exhibit such bad taste? I know that businesses consider it necessary to call attention to their products, but if I were a purchaser of furniture. I would not be encouraged to buy anything in such an ugly building.

Comes to that, Wendy's building was no great improvement. The lower part of it is very pleasant, but it has awfully huge excrescences of advertising on its roof. Does one have to do ugly things to be successful?

BLOCKHEADEDNESS

It is typical of the blockheadedness of our authorities that Dr. Jephtah Ford and others are being given a run around concerning the very interesting exhibition of industrial hemp and ganja which they have been putting together. This exhibition demonstrates rope, cloth, cosmetics and other useful things, including medication which can be made from hemp.

Dr. Ford explains that ganja and industrial hemp may be Jamaica's economic salvation. The problem of the organisers has been that they and the staff of the exhibition may be exposed to a police raid and to arrest and prosecution. They have therefore been trying to get the police to view the exhibits and satisfy themselves that nothing irregular was about to take place. But as you can imagine, nobody co-operates and the organisers have been given a first class run around. I am not surprised at this in view of Police Commissioner Francis Forbes' recent foolishness concerning those who advocate the legalisation of ganja.

But the purposed exhibition goes much further than that, for it includes the use of non-psychedelic hemp for a number of different purposes. I gather that Dr. Ford has written to Commissioner Forbes and the Prime Minister, to an assortment of police superintendents and to the Director of Public Prosecutions, but has got absolutely nowhere. It is this kind of attitude that prevents anything really innovative from being done in this country.