By Phyllis Thomas, News Editor 
WHEN PRIME Minister P. J. Patterson and Opposition Leader Edward Seaga delivered their New Year's message a few days ago, they were poles apart in their interpretation and projections for what lies ahead for the country in 2004.
But only 11 days into the year and there seems to be a convergence of Government and Opposition estimation of what's in store for the country this year. Coming out of a marathon two-day Cabinet meeting last week, no euphemism could reduce the magnitude of the financial challenges which the country face. The Gleaner headline on Wednesday, reporting on those meetings said 'Tight days ahead' and The Observer said 'Cabinet hears the cold truth'.
Prime Minister P.J. Patterson told his comrades in Montego Bay just before Christmas that most of the turbulent economic times were now a thing of the past. "It is no secret that we have had to pass through a very tight fiscal year and are weathering the storm," he said.
But the cold truth out of the mouth of Finance Minister, Dr. Omar Davies, is that tough times are still ahead. Dr. Davies told journalists at Jamaica House that it cannot be business as usual in the public sector. He said that every ministry and government department will have to do more with less.
So when Beverley Manley and Anthony Abrahams cornered him on the Breakfast Club Friday morning, I, like all the other listeners I am sure, waited eagerly to hear the Minister tell us something about the map that the Government has created to lead us out of this valley of doom that seem to be our future course.
One thing I have to say for the Minister. He is one hell of a batsman.
The Manley/Abrahams bowling attack failed to make the needed breakthrough. They were good but the Minister covered up and protected his stumps, just playing some defensive shots. Then Mrs. Manley bowled a sharp rising bouncer. And I said "Yeess!" She asked him if he had any regrets about the events of the election year that led to certain actions and situations. This one I wanted to hear. But the batsman... er... Minister ducked and it flew straight over his head. I was disappointed, mostly by the fact that having listened to the em... aw... you know... mombojumbo, they did not press home the advantage.
I would love to have heard the Minister say "I made a mistake. Let us move on. This is where we are going. This is how we are going to get there. These are the results we hope to achieve, we meaning all of us."
The one thing that was clear out of the discussion was that yes, there are fiscal challenges but hey, the overall economy performed creditably. With the exception of manufacturing, others such as tourism performed well in 2003. It was also the best year for bauxite operations and a good year for sugar in terms of earnings, because of the movement of the euro. And even the construction industry advanced.
All of this is good. What I would like somebody to explain to me though is: With all of those forward movements in those key sectors, why is our debt increasing instead of reducing... even an extremely small fraction? Could it be that we are overstating the performances? Maybe the growth is not significant enough to give any alleviation our debt burden.
On the other hand, I think that any growth is better than none at all. We therefore want to hear how we are going to sustain whatever advancements we have made and how we are going to achieve further growth.
That the Government and the private sector and the Government and unions are in dialogue is a positive sign especially against the background of the goal to forge social partnerships.
What Jamaicans also want to hear is that the measures that will lift us out of the mess will see the Government taking some of the medicine it prescribes for the rest of us. For example, there are talks that the remedy will include the unpalatable but necessary job cuts and possible wage freeze to ensure job security. But this will not go down well with the rest of the country if the Government fails to be introspective in all this and fails to do the moral and economically sound thing it ought to do which is to reduce the size of the Cabinet. This has been suggested over and over again by several Jamaicans including think tanks which the Government commissioned to advise it on the way forward.
Most of us, I am sure, although we are angry about how the country has reached this stage, want to see the situation reversed and will do what is necessary to achieve that. But the Government needs to lead by example. It's about time.
Comments? You can e-mail me at phyllis.thomas@gleanerjm.com
