Don Robotham, Contributor

Don Robotham (left) and Shaw (right)

As expected, the debate between Dr. Omar Davies and Audley Shaw was of a very different character from the first one. In contrast to the staid character of round one, on Friday night, the engagement with the issues was much sharper.

Both presenters started hesitantly but surprisingly, it was Shaw who found his feet first. He sounded knowledgeable, authoritative and in command of the issues. Dr. Davies, on the other hand was low-key, self-consciously struggling to contain his natural exuberance and to negate his reputation for arrogance. Shaw hammered away at the long years of economic stagnation and painted a rosy prospect of the growth and employment prospects under the JLP. As expected, he hit the issue of corruption hard, and rightly so.

Dr. Davies used his intimate familiarity with the Jamaican economy to sow skepticism about Mr. Shaw's proposals. He poured scorn on the JLP manifesto and mocked its expansionary economic proposals as inflationary and "pie in the sky". But this was a defensive stance and did not seem so convincing to me. Dr. Davies did not find a way to explain to the layperson the necessity for the long years of deflating the Jamaican economy. As a result, Mr. Shaw's onslaught on the hardships which this policy brought had a convincing ring to it.

More assertive

Dr. Davies used data to make his points and got more assertive and convincing as the night wore on. But he did not address the fundamental differences in economic philosophy which were behind the entire policy debate. Shaw has a Seaga-style confidence in economic statism, going on ad nauseam about 'mega agencies.' If there was any doubt about it, this debate would have confirmed Shaw's populist inflationary tendencies and made it clear thathe is a reluctant adherent of macroeconomic stability. His answers on the financing of the JLP's spending plans were unpersuasive, to put it mildly.

Dr. Davies on the other hand places his trust in the magic of the marketplace and displayed a much more realistic grasp of global financial realities. Neither Shaw nor Dr. Davies made the slightest reference to the raging global financial meltdown which will have a more (negative) impact on the Jamaican economy than a thousand manifestos - a textbook example of Jamaican narrowness.

The questions from the panel were not up to the standard required and, in the end, Shaw's more homely style carried the day. The score is now one-all.